Aspen Dental Lawsuit – Why Leonard Green Should Investigate Aspen Dental

A recent Aspen Dental lawsuit has surfaced claiming widespread discrimination in billing and marketing practices. The company, which is owned by private equity firm Leonard Green & Partners, has been accused of deceptive billing practices, upselling unnecessary medical services, and misleading advertisements. In this article, we’ll look at three specific reasons why Aspen Dental should be investigated for illegal practices. This article also examines the termination of Ms. Hofmann from the dental practice.

Aspen Dental lawsuit

If you were recently served a bill from Aspen Dental, you may be eligible for a class-action lawsuit. These dental practices can be found liable for consumer complaints when their advertising tactics mislead consumers and cause them to overpay for services. Other problems consumers may encounter include being overcharged for services or provided with unnecessary procedures or being short on cash. If you were a victim of such an experience, you may qualify for legal recourse.

The Aspen Dental lawsuit claims widespread abuses of dental care and discrimination. Aspen Dental, a company owned by private equity firm Leonard Green & Partners, operates over three hundred dental clinics in the United States. The company is accused of blatant discrimination in advertising, upselling unnecessary medical services, and deceptive billing practices. In addition to unfair billing practices, the company has been the subject of over 300 complaints from individuals over the last five years.

Aspen Dental’s practice of dentistry is illegal

While the legality of Aspen Dental’s practice of dentistry is contested, the company’s role in the dental industry has been under scrutiny for several years. According to the AG’s office, the practice of dentistry is illegal when it is controlled by a single entity. This type of structure is prohibited by the Corporate Practice Doctrine and New York’s antitrust laws. In the case of Aspen Dental, the corporation owned all the dental clinics in the chain. Thus, the company had total control over clinical care.

Despite this, the lawsuit charges that the company violated New York law by controlling the dental practices. It also accuses Aspen Dental of deceiving and overcharging patients. The Center for Public Integrity found that Aspen Dental acted unethically by pursuing patients who had not been to a dentist in years and giving them a highly expensive treatment plan. Some patients also complained that Aspen Dental’s practices led them into debt and gave them dental treatments that were not necessary.

Aspen Dental’s marketing practices are deceptive

Consumers have accused Aspen Dental of deceptive marketing practices. The company lured consumers into their practice with false promises of free services and then sent them to debt-collecting companies for unpaid bills for services they never received. Aspen Dental took advantage of consumers in need of emergency care by promising that their initial appointment would be free but then billing them for emergency examinations. The company pleaded guilty to misleading consumers about the cost of emergency treatments but has not stopped making such claims.

The Indiana Attorney General’s Office and Aspen Dental Management, Inc. have reached a settlement agreement. In return, the company will pay restitution to consumers and reform its advertising practices. The company has committed to reform its advertising practices following the findings of the lawsuit. While it may still be too early to make changes, this is a good start. Aspen Dental will pay affected consumers $15,000 and reform its marketing practices.

Aspen Dental’s termination of Ms. Hofmann

Aspen Dental terminated the employment of Ms. Hofmann based on her alleged violations of HIPAA and the privacy of patients’ health information. The company advised her to return any HIPAA-protected information she had in her possession. The company’s lack of investigation into the termination raises questions about whether the actions were legitimate or just a pretext to terminate the employee. In this article, we will examine the facts of the case.

According to the complaint, Ms. Hofmann began working as a dental assistant for Aspen Dental in Evansville, Indiana on March 6, 2008. She received daily schedules from the practice’s providers, which included employee work assignments and patient flow information. Ms. Hofmann wrote down all her work assignments, including her supervisors’ comments on her behavior. On August 10, 2009, Ms. Hofmann returned to work at Aspen Dental. On August 10, 2009, her supervisor, Ms. Brown, called Ms. Daly and instructed her to counsel Ms. Hofmann. Ms. Brown met with Dr. Woo and told her that “she was being negative” toward the practice. Ultimately, Dr. Woo told Ms. Hofmann that she had been having too many discussions about her lawsuit against Aspen Dental.

Aspen Dental’s settlement with the AG

Massachusetts Attorney General Maura Healey filed a lawsuit against Aspen Dental Management Inc. in 2014, claiming the practice violated the Consumer Protection Law by deceptively advertising free or discounted dentures and services. Aspen Dental also failed to live up to its promises and billed patients for emergency examinations and procedures that they should have been free for. Aspen Dental also failed to properly disclose the costs of its services and enticed consumers with false advertising.

Aspen Dental has admitted to misleading consumers by charging a higher price for services than necessary. Aspen Dental’s advertising strategy included promising free X-rays and exams for new patients. But its practices did not meet these standards and patients were stuck with temporary dentures for months. Despite the settlement, Aspen Dental did not “turn over a new leaf” after the allegations were filed against it. It has re-doubled down on this trademark marketing tactic.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *