> [log in to unmask],Net wrote at 18:41 on 10/02/98
> about "links-again!":
> -----------------------------
> >Rotherham HAs have unilaterally (ie no consultation) withdrawn 100%
> >reimbursement for registration and IOS links
>
> >1. Have the SFAs changed?
> No
Interesting, still waiting for the HA copy;-)
> >2. Who is no longer getting 100% reimbursement?
> Not Devon at any rate.
>
> >3. Suggestions for action?
> Hey, no problem.
> If Rotherham don't want you to buy Links software and operate it on
> their
> behalf, fine.
> Make a commercial decision, is there a business case fro your practice
> to do it
> from its own resources (IE your take home pay)?
> Right, well now that is settled, you just need to sort out the
> mechanics of the
> day on which your licence expires, and whether you should switch off on
> a week,
> month, or quarter end.
>
It has been pointed out that the HAs don't have the staff to process
manual claims, so if we pull the plug on links we won't get paid.
Someone else pointed out the red book says we must be paid each
quarter for work done/claimed previously.
We could get into a real mess here. LMC don't want to get solicitors
involved in another GMS argument!
Dr David J Plews
------------------------
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
|