Wednesday, June 02, 2010

CVS Makes An Honest Mistake. And By Honest Mistake I Mean Rips Off Its Customers. Probably To The Tune Of At Least A Million Dollars.

You know how it's illegal, if you run a store, to advertise one price for a product and then charge another, higher price for that product when a customer comes in to buy it? That's why we have rain checks and stuff. Because it's totally illegal to get someone's business by promising to sell something at one price and then charging another.

Unless, evidently, you're CVS. From that bastion of the liberal media, The Wall Street Journal:


Many customers of CVS Caremark Corp.'s SilverScript Medicare prescription-drug programs have been paying higher prices than they were promised when they signed up for the plans in late 2009.
CVS blames the problem on a computer error, which it says caused prices for brand-name drugs to be listed about 4% lower than they should have been. It says the error appeared in data CVS supplied to the Medicare website that allows senior citizens to do comparison shopping between rival prescription insurance plans.
CVS says it has been charging consumers the higher prices since the beginning of 2010.
Many senior citizens use the price-comparison tools in November and December to shop for their Medicare Part D drug coverage for the following year. The tools allow Medicare recipients to plug in the drugs they take, and provide comparative costs for various plans. The inaccurate information, which appeared from Oct. 8, 2009, to Jan. 8, 2010, made the CVS plans seem more attractive than they should have been.

Holy Nader's Raiders Batman!! Surely the guardians of the consumer that toil away in the halls of Washington's bureaucracy will ensure there will be hell to pay for this. Especially with that socialist Obama in charge now, there's just no way a corporation can get away with overcharging its customers. Get ready for the wrath of righteousness CVS!!!!

CVS notified the federal regulator, the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services, about the problem in January. A Medicare spokesman said regulators worked with CVS to craft a response plan, under which CVS would offer a refund for the price difference, but only to consumers who specifically requested that. The Medicare spokesman said CVS also agreed to help unhappy customers switch to another plan.

That'll show 'em.

CVS sent letters of apology to affected customers starting in late March. A letter reviewed by The Wall Street Journal didn't mention the possibility of a refund, but directed a recipient with questions to call a toll-free number to discuss "your options."
"Did I pay too much for medication?" the letter said in question-and-answer format. The answer: "No." The letter said the drugs were "priced correctly at the pharmacy, but may have been higher than what the price-comparison tools estimated."
An affected consumer who recently called CVS's toll-free number said he was told he could file a "grievance" to seek a refund for brand-name drugs bought up to that date, but only if he had a printout of the original inaccurate pricing information from the Internet.
A CVS spokeswoman said that consumer's experience wasn't consistent with the company's policy, which is to provide a refund if asked.

So.....I'm gonna do a little back-of-the-envelope math here. Let's say every CVS store has 15 customers in one of these SilverScript plans, and each of these customers has two $120 brand-name prescriptions filled.

Let me know if you think these assumptions unreasonable. I don't think they are.

So, 15 customers x 240 dollars x 4% "mistake" in the advertised price = 144 extra dollars per CVS store. Ho-hum.

Until, that is, we multiply that by the 7,000 retail pharmacies that CVS operates. Do that and now we'll see that "mistake" netted CVS an extra one million dollars of pure friggin' profit. The equivalent of filling an extra 667,000 prescriptions at the standard $1.50 insurance dispensing fee. It's a lot easier to hit a few "wrong" buttons at corporate headquarters while inputting data than it is to fill 667,000 prescriptions. Especially since CVS didn't have to hire the one extra pharmacist and two technicians they would budget to fill 667,000 prescriptions.

And they're gonna get to keep most of that money. Because how many people are going to 1) Notice 2) Be pissed off enough to argue over $10 and 3) Successfully get past the help desk flunkie who's feeding them bullshit about how to get their money back?

Not many. They're totally gonna get away with it.

And just in case you still think this whole episode might really have just been a mistake, ask yourself what would have happened if some schlep would have sent the wrong data to Medicare with a result being that it cost CVS a million dollars by making them undercharge their customers.

That fictional sonuvabitch would have been fired the next day and you know it. And would most likely be working now for Rite-Aid, earning stellar performance reviews.

I'm not saying CVS deliberately ripped people off. But, yeah, it sure is a lot easier to make a "mistake" than it is to actually do more work. Or renegotiate your contract with Medco.

I report. You decide.

Thanks to JayPee, whose blog first tipped me off to this.

9 comments:

Leigh This Way said...

CVS rapes all of their customers, not matter if they are on the silverscript plan or not. I work for a warehouse pharmacy and we recently have a few CVS customers transfer their scripts to us. We saved one lady, whose in her donut hole, over $400 bucks a month! Another customer doesn't have ins and she's saving $300 a month. They sell generic ambien for $50 for 30 tabs, ours is $5-7 depending on what's in stock. So since they're basically the most expensive pharmacy out there, it doesn't surprise me that they have no problem ripping off old people on fixed incomes...and getting away with it!

Anonymous said...

Firstly, I hate when people use the term "fixed income". EVERYONE'S income is "fixed". It is "fixed" according to how much you make per hour. Some folks have a higher "fixed" income, other's lower, but it is all "fixed" in the literal sense. Secondly, this just adds to the shit-pile heaped onto pharmacists. Everyone already seems to think the pharmacist is ripping them off, as if we benefit one iota regardless of the co-pay, but now this will verify it to some folks. People will not actually read that it was the "corporation" that was cheating those unfortunate individuals. Instead the backlash will be directed at pharmacists. I wonder how many smart-ass comments I'm going to have to listen to from some ignorant shit-kicker, "You ain"t gonna rip me off like them druggists from VCS or CVS or whatever"!

Warren Buffett said...

CVS:

We Make Money The Old Fashioned Way.

We Steal It.

Anonymous said...

Leigh, let's not use the term 'rape' among comrades, shall we? I think this things bigger than 'us', in pharmacy. As pharmacy staffers, we've always been more about doing our jobs correctly, providing the drug information, and keeping our noses clean. When someone reports on a story this well-hidden, and pervasive, it says that ripping off patients euphemistically under the guise of Medicare coverage is a WAY of LIFE for this country and decades past the proper time for government health insurance. Leigh, you may be still wet behind the ears to show righteous indignation, but the existence of 'warehouse' pharmacies are not doing the profession any favors either by providing cheap drugs from alternate sources without some of the niceties of pharmacist intervention. However, my bets are hedging that 'warehouse' pharmacies are the wave of the future mainly because the US cannot keep funding exorbitant prices set by domestic drug companies with all the private insurance plans under Medicare umbrella without resorting to massive warehousing. Just a sign of the times that big chains want to rip off their paying customers--and it's usually the staff pharmacist that is the last to know about this mess so we're left holding the bag, unless we stick together as professionals and do our duty to inform and advocate for patients such as JP and DM.

Hopelessly Red said...

Let us not forget the love shared between CVS and it's employees. Currently brewing in New York is a class action lawsuit focusing on employee security searches along with (surprise, surprise) unpaid overtime, working lunch breaks, etc.
Apparently some employees are a little miffed about being held hostage for up to a half hour after they punch out and wait for a store manager to check their bags. Talk about anti-shrink culture on steroids!

At least we can all rest assured that all those boxes of tampons and tubes of BenGay are not surreptitiously slipping out the door in the hands of evil pharmacists!

Unknown said...

Quick correction to your back of the envelope math - Silverscript is accepted by more places than just CVS - I know my chain takes it to this day. So there should be some more zero's in the total line...

DKLA said...

I actually helped a few of these Medicare Part D patients after November 15. I always gave them an overview on how much they should pay each month and how much they should pay for which drug. I also gave a printout and send them an e-mail for their records just in case something happens. Now they have something, and I hope someone rips a Caremark rep. a new one.

Cap'n Cakez said...

Fixed income means that there are no step increases, no promotions possible, no COLA increases - Its fixed, in the long term.

If I made the same exact amount 10 years from
now, as an RPh, Id be doing something wrong. Retired folks. like my mom and dad, have gotten exactly the same paycheck, as it were, for 8 1/2 years. THAT'S fixed income.

Good article, DM... except I'd add that $1,000,000 to CVS is like someone buying you a Subway sammich on one ofYorubar Friday nights. Nice, bit hardly noticeable in the long run.

Tonina said...

Unbelievable. I'm rather surprised none of the attorneys general in the states where this was an issue have jumped on board as well. After all, this is a blatant issue of false advertisement, and that sort of thing is handled by each state's office of the AG.