Complaints

This profile includes complaints for U.C. Davis Medical Center's headquarters and its corporate-owned locations. To view all corporate locations, see Find Local Branches.

close

Find a Location

U.C. Davis Medical Center has 5 locations, listed below.

*This company may be headquartered in or have additional locations in another country. Please click on the country abbreviation in the search box below to change to a different country location.

BBB accredited

Near

Country

USUnited States

Please enter a valid location.

Filter

• 

  U.C. Davis Medical Center

  2315 Stockton Blvd Sacramento, CA 95817-2201

• 

  U.C. Davis Medical Center

  4900 Broadway Ste 2600 Sacramento, CA 95820-1535

• 

  U.C. Davis Medical Center

  6701 4th Ave Fl 2 Sacramento, CA 95817-2611

• 

  U.C. Davis Medical Center

  6815 Five Star Blvd Ste 100 Rocklin, CA 95677-2691

• 

  U.C. Davis Medical Center

  4860 Y Street Suite 1600 Sacramento, CA 95817

The complaint text that is displayed might not represent all complaints filed with BBB. Some consumers may elect to not publish the details of their complaints, some complaints may not meet BBB's standards for publication, or BBB may display a portion of complaints when a high volume is received for a particular business.

• Initial Complaint

  Date:05/27/2025

  Type:Service or Repair Issues
  Status:

  UnresolvedMore info

  Complaint statuses

  Resolved:

  The complainant verified the issue was resolved to their satisfaction.

  Unresolved:

  The business responded to the dispute but failed to make a good faith effort to resolve it.

  Answered:

  The business addressed the issues within the complaint, but the consumer either a) did not accept the response, OR b) did not notify BBB as to their satisfaction.

  Unanswered:

  The business failed to respond to the dispute.

  Unpursuable:

  BBB is unable to locate the business.

  On 10/02/2024 I took my 13 yr-old daughter ******** (bd: 01/01/2011) to her PCP at UC Davis in ****** because she had been sick for six weeks. We brought in a photo of a Covid 19 test that was taken that morning and was NEGATIVE. The nurse informed us that in order to see a doctor and receive any antibiotics that she had to take their COVID 19/FLU test. I refused the test as we already had current negative results to show to her. But the nurse claimed the doctor would not help us if we did not take their specific test. I insisted that no one has COVID 19 or the Flu for 6 weeks! We were forced to take the test or the other alternative was to just put my daughter's LIFE at risk with a serious bacterial infection. A few weeks later I receive a bill that the COVID/FLU test was $270, which insurance doesn't cover. Instead it's a lab test that applies to the deductible. I went back and forth between UCDavis and **************** for months, but UCDavis kept claiming that insurance companies don't pay 100% for COVID 19 tests anymore. They knew! They are charging this extortionate price for a COVID test, FORCING it on their customers, knowing that it's such an outrageous price that insurance companies won't pay. And they are forcing the test even when the symptoms and illness don't even begin to qualify as COVID 19. I'm a single mother, raising my girls entirely alone, and this whole tactic is pretty much a scam. UCDavis gives no information of the cost and forces patients to take a test even when they do not qualify. The billing department said they're seeing this a lot. It's so sick and so very wrong. Also my daughter never saw the Doctor, only the nurse. And they billed it as a 30 minute appointment with an MD when it was booked as a 15 min appointment, and we were in and out in 10 minutes. My insurance did pay for a 30 min appointment with an MD, but in reality it is FRAUD. And this isn't the first time I've experienced that at the Folsom UCDavis Medical Center.

  Business Response

  Date: 06/23/2025

  Thank you for sharing this feedback with us. We appreciate every opportunity to improve our patient's experiences.

  In this particular case, there was very reasonable suspicion of COVID as the patient's best friends' mother had tested positive and the patient's symptoms included cough and the loss of taste and smell. The patient did not just see a nurse, the provider was a nurse practitioner. While the patient's time in the room may not have been 30 minutes, it is standard practice across the industry to allow some time for preparation, charting, and any possible orders resulting from the visit. An interest free payment plan and a financial assistance application were also offered in this case. 

  The prices for services at UC Davis Health do tend to land on the higher end of the spectrum in our area. As the region's only level 1 trauma center, and as a public, non-profit, academic, research institution, our prices reflect the level of care that we provide and support the many benefits that this institution brings to the region. Our prices are publicly published, as required by law, online and can be found at the following site: **********************************************************************************;

  Thank you for allowing us the opportunity to review this incident. We take all patient concerns seriously and will do everything possible to make improvements for the future.

  Customer Answer

  Date: 06/23/2025

  I am rejecting this response because:

   

  We did not know of anyone who had COVID at the time of this illness, this is a lie!  And of course common sense is that COVID does not last over 6 weeks! We showed the nurse ********** negative COVID test taken that morning and we were very clear that COVID does not last that long. My daughter's best friend's mother had pneumonia and had consistently tested Negative for COVID. We were not exposed to COVID-19 in any way, and we clearly explained that. This is why I refused to have my daughter take another COVID ******************* the office. But we were told that without the test that any necessary treatment would be denied. It was a forced test without any common sense applied, and this is why I'm fighting it so hard. If any of what is said here is true then I'd leave it alone, but none of what UCDavis has responded is true. This is extremely bad practice, especially for professionals, and it's not the way that I operate in my professional career. 

  
  

• Initial Complaint

  Date:07/27/2023

  Type:Product Issues
  Status:

  AnsweredMore info

  Complaint statuses

  Resolved:

  The complainant verified the issue was resolved to their satisfaction.

  Unresolved:

  The business responded to the dispute but failed to make a good faith effort to resolve it.

  Answered:

  The business addressed the issues within the complaint, but the consumer either a) did not accept the response, OR b) did not notify BBB as to their satisfaction.

  Unanswered:

  The business failed to respond to the dispute.

  Unpursuable:

  BBB is unable to locate the business.

  Im scheduled at *** for several services. Prior to having the services performed I was advised by my doctor to get an estimate for the services and labs. I received an estimate for 3 MRI's with a total billed to the insurance of over $22k (which included a $20k hospital facility charge), a *** draw estimate of nearly $10k (which included a $9k hospital surcharge), and a refusal to provide lab estimates in writing.I immediately canceled the MRI's as I received pricing at another lab of approximately $2k billed to insurance and $500 copay.I spoke with the estimates department regarding the *** fees. They informed me even though the procedure was being done in an outpatient office since it is affiliated with the hospital they get to charge a hospital facility fee. This is highly dishonest because if this procedure was taking place in a hospital it would include an interventional radiologist, an anesthesiologist, and available life support equipment. But this procedure is actually happening on a table in the doctors office where none of the other services are available. I also question what specific line items were going to be charged and they had line items which were not ordered by the Dr which amounted to nearly $5k in excess charges. The rep is adjusting the estimate now.With regards to the labs, I was told I could only receive verbal estimates (no paper trail), and for one of the labs they could not give me a price. I would just have to do it and then see what the bill was because *** has no way of knowing what the send out lab will charge. In essence, I am being requested to write a blank check.I contacted the outside lab and they told me this was patently false and the *** could call at any time to obtain their contractual pricing. I left a message for the *** rep about this but there has been no return call.I find all these practices highly deceptive. It should not be this difficult to confirm pricing before becoming financially liable for procedures.

  Business Response

  Date: 08/02/2023

  This patient was provided with an estimate for an MRI brain with/without contrast. The patient was quite upset over the $20,228 hospital portion of the estimate. The estimate analyst advised the patient that the procedure would be done in an outpatient hospital setting and that is the reason for the higher charge. The patient also requested an estimate for a spinal puncture procedure. The patient was not happy with the $8,758 hospital portion of the estimate. The patient felt the charges were simply too high. Again, we explained the location of the service was in an outpatient hospital setting and that was the reason for the higher charge.  Unfortunately, lab services do not include the specific CPT code, and benefits must be manually obtained and calculated. It is for these reasons that the estimate team is unable to provide lab estimates.  Instead, patients are provided with *************************** contact information for the lab.  The lab is able to provide an estimate to the patient.  Every effort has been made to provide the patient with as detailed of an estimate as possible.  The patient insisted on having us remove certain CPT codes from his estimate and wanted to debate the overall cost of the services at UCDH. We have tried to explain the difference between billing as an outpatient facility vs an ambulatory surgery center.  Overhead is quite different, as is the number of staff, as is the level of staff. Unfortunately, the patient was not satisfied with our explanations. 

  Customer Answer

  Date: 08/02/2023

  I am rejecting this response because:

  With regards to the ***'s, *** is involved in an unethical practice of attaching hospital facility fees to procedures which are not being done in a hospital setting simply because the facilities are "affiliated with the hospital" as a mechanism for substantially up-charging the services. The difference in the total amount billed to the insurance company is approx $22k with the hospital fee, vs $2k with a non-hospital facility fee. The out of pocket after insurance changes from nearly $2k to just over $500.

  Similarly, with the estimate for the lumbar puncture, the procedure was to be conducted in a doctors office on an exam table with a paper sheet, not in a hospital, and without the benefit of an interventional radiologist, nurses, life support equipment, etc. While *** may want to say that there is overhead which must be billed differently in a hospital, it doesn't change the fact that none of this overhead is being utilized or even available in the setting under which this procedure was to be conducted not to mention the facility is across town from the hospital. This is another unethical up-charge. Furthermore, the way in which *** constructs estimates is to pull all the *** codes associated with every time the *** code for the procedure has been used. This means that for a procedure such as a lumbar puncture, which can be ordered for a multitude of reasons (diagnostic, therapeutic, suspected Meningitis/Encephalitis, etc.) many codes which have nothing to do with the procedure being conducted, as ordered by the doctor, are swept into the estimate. In this particular example, where a lumbar puncture for send-out labs was ordered, the estimate was including codes for meningitis and encephalitis panels. These specific codes nearly doubled the estimate from *** for the procedure (reduced the facility fee from approx $9k to $5k) and were not going to be performed. The estimates team worked to try to remove them, but were unable to get a quote to properly populate as a limitation of ***'s software. I was told that this was simply an estimate and what was actually billed could be higher or lower, it was in no way binding, and this was a number that management was comfortable with. This is, however, no comfort to me as a patient, who is signing up for financial liability with a known and admitted faulty estimate and very shaky ground upon which to dispute billing issues should it become necessary at a later date.

  As far as labs are concerned, I was given an estimate for all the lab work except for a single test which I was told couldn't be estimated until after it was performed. I would just have to wait and see. I called the lab that conducts the test directly and was told that this was patently false. They were able to pull the contracted rate with *** and relayed to me that *** need only call them to get the price. I received a follow up phone call from the lab estimators and they did provide that price. However, I discovered during the course of this conversation that *** is involved in yet another unethical billing practice. I was informed that rather than bill the labs as "laboratory/diagnostic fees" with the insurance, *** would instead be sweeping them into the hospital facility fee. This means that rather than getting charged a $40 copay by the insurance, I would instead be responsible for 20% of the bill. This results in a difference of approx $500 of cost to me.

  I was also told that *** could only tell me what they would bill the insurance for the tests and that they could tell me what was allowed by the insurance. This seems to be a violation of the Hospital Price Transparency Rule, which went live in 2020 and required all hospitals to publish their rates for every service they provide: what theyve negotiated with insurers, and their cash rates. In checking this with BlueShield, I was told that *** knows what their contracted rates are and that they would be the ones that must disclose it to patients. I also spoke with my insurance company (at the case manager level) regarding the charges and was told by the representative that they view them as unethical billing practices. Furthermore, these particular practices (over utilization of hospital facility fees to artificially inflate costs) is currently the subject of legislation in at least 13 states. Furthermore, A federal bill introduced in 2022 would require off-campus hospital outpatient departments to bill as physician providers, eliminating the possibility of charging facility fees. Apparently, I am not the only one that sees this practice as unethical.

  To see if these practices were common among all hospitals, I requested quotes at a local hospital for the same procedures. I had the ***'s quoted by an outpatient *** facility affiliated with the local hospital, and the lumbar puncture and labs quoted as being performed at the hospital with an interventional radiologist (a higher standard of care than what *** offered).

  The local *** quote came back as being billed at approx $2k as opposed to the *** quote of over $22k, and the lumbar puncture hospital facility fee came back at $2.6k vs the *** quote of approx $10k. The copays for these services total approx $1100. The lab work was quoted as having a $40 copay. In total the local quote would cost me $1150 vs *** at over $3300. The *** facility also offered a cash price for patients without insurance of $670 for each ***...bear in mind this is a machine with the same field strength offered by ***. Id like to know how *** can justify over $7k for an *** when the cash price on an equivalent machine with the imaging being performed in a similar setting (outpatient) is $670.

  Aside from one friendly estimator who I very much appreciated (********), I was met with utter indifference by everyone I spoke to regarding having a firm understanding of the costs of the procedures my physician ordered. The paradigm with regards to my requests seemed to fall into two categories: 1) its not information Im entitled to or that *** can produce with any accuracy and 2) I should just wait to receive the bill and then dispute it after the fact or sign up for financial assistance with ***. Consequently, *** has a form they would like you to fill in which you disclose all financial assests including all sources of income, the balance of all bank and savings accounts, the value of all stocks/bonds/etc, tax returns, the value of every vehicle and non-liquid asset owned, as well as a detailed breakdown of all monthly expenses. It seems to be a system designed to extract the maximum possible amount of dollars from patients by first producing a large surprise bill, claiming that estimates are just guesses and not binding, then shifting the burden of payment off of the insurance company and onto the patient by rolling everything into a facility fee. Once this is accomplished, the patient is forced to enter into negotiations over the bill, but not until *** has had a peak at all the cards by data mining the financial disclosure form to ensure that the odds are stacked in their favor and that you aren't charged what is fair, but rather than maximal amount they determine they can extract.

  It seems the *** has adopted the worst industry practices with respect to medical billing. They are inflating charges by sweeping all services (regardless of where they are performed) into hospital facility fees, the are refusing to provide ACCURATE and binding estimates as required by the Hospital Price Transparency Rule, and they are advocating that instead of obtaining a priori estimates, that they instead wait until they have already been billed (and after they have become financially obligated) to negotiate bills down or enter into financing arrangements with *** after *** has been able to determine what they are worth and how much *** thinks they can afford rather than what the services actually cost.

  It also seems that the medical providers which practice at *** need to receive feedback from patients that they should not be scheduling any procedures at *** facilities if they can be avoided because of these billing practices and the substantial increase in financial burden it places on patients. I, for one, will be providing this feedback to my providers, and ensuring that any procedures I have done happen outside the *** sphere of influence until these unethical practices are remedied.

  
  

  Business Response

  Date: 08/15/2023

  The Patient ******************* did their very best to provide the patient with an accurate estimate, ensuring the codes that are estimated for vs what is actually billed matches. This is always a challenge as there can be changes at the time of service. It is true that UCDH relies on historical case information to create an estimate, as we do not currently use the Contracts Module in Epic. This means there are times when the estimate will pull in charges that won't be billed out on that patient's case; unfortunately, this is a restriction of the build currently in place. Adding contracts is a current project in process and we are hopeful that we will have access to contracts by ****, but until that time, the Patient ******************** does not have the ability to test our estimates against the insurance contract. Again, Patient Estimates did their very best to take their time and explain our process to this patient.

  The Lab Estimates supervisor spoke with this patient directly and provided him with all the lab estimates he requested, including the Arup and Mayo send out test.  This patient's concern was that his insurance coverage has a higher co-pay if billed under the facility (UB)/hospital tax ID number.  The supervisor explained to this patient that if the specimen is sent to the hospital lab for processing from the *** clinics or hospital-based clinics, the specimen will be billed under the facility (UB).  The draw fee done in the *** clinic will be billed on the **** **** and the lab test performed at the hospital will be billed on a UB.

  Customer Answer

  Date: 08/15/2023

  I am rejecting this response because:

  I find it absolutely inexcusable that ***, an organization which teaches medical billing and coding to students, is incapable of creating estimates for patients with even a hint of accuracy. We aren't talking about extra codes which may be billed because something changes during a procedure. We are talking about the inability to distinguish between something so drastic as a lumbar puncture done for send out labs, vs one done for a sick patient with suspected meningitis (has anyone with meningitis scheduled a lumbar puncture 3 months in advance?). Including an extra $5000 fee for something that wasnt even remotely possible of being performed and then having me hope/trust that *** would first provide enough transparency for me to catch it and second not actually charge me for it is dubious.

  Furthermore, while I acknowledge that the *** lab estimators did in fact explain that they would bill the labs under the hospital facility fee, *** has done nothing to address the ethical and financial implications of this billing practice. If *** does in fact have a duty to their patients, part of that duty in ensuring that the patient is receiving a fair bill. Instead, *** is shifting as many services as possible into the hospital facility fee because this maximizes their revenue. A consequence of this is that rather than being billed with lab copays ($40 is typical at an outpatient blood draw lab), the patient is responsible for 25% of the total. In my particular example, this makes the difference of paying out-of-pocket an additional $500. If *** cant evaluate labs at a price competitive with labs such as Westpac, Quest, or LabCorp, they should get out of the lab business or at least direct patients to have the lab draws done outside the *** system. Anything else is dishonest.

  As far as the fees charged for the MRI's and the Lumbar puncture procedure, the estimates from *** were $22,000 and $10,000 with approximately $3000 and $1000 out of pocket respectively as well as an additional approx. $500 out of pocket for the labs. I am having the MRI's done at a local outpatient radiology lab in an MRI machine with the same field strength as ***'s for $406 out of pocket. I am having the lumbar puncture done at the same facility with an out-of-pocket of $75. The labs will have a $40 copay. Furthermore, the facility provided a letter stating the prices I would be charged and that they had checked with the insurance company to confirm the prices. How can *** justify the prices for these procedures at orders or magnitude more than competing facilities. Again, if *** isnt efficient enough to provide the procedures at a competitive price, they should direct patients elsewhere.

  The really dishonest part of all of this is that had I not undertaken to figure out, on my own, what *** was going to charge for these procedures, I would have been stuck with a huge surprise bill. At no point did anyone from *** reach out to me about the costs. At the local hospitals, there is an insurance verifier which reaches out to patients to verify the costs prior to procedures. At the outpatient lab the prices are posted. At *** not only are they not posted, and not only does no one reach out, but when patients request pricing they dont get a straight answer. The get obfuscation about only being able to provide basic estimates which are by **** own admission, full of errors. I cant base financial decisions on faulty data with legal waffling about estimates being only guesses. But I think *** knows this. This is a tactic to maximize the take...and to my understanding is likely illegal. According to federal law, prices for procedures must be posted and available in machine readable format. *** has the information available to them, and all the machinations and verbal contortions are a mechanism to get you to pay for something you shouldn't be.

  As far as wanting to say they are justified in charging hospital facility fees because they have to support hospital infrastructure, this is also dishonest. I would tend to agree if the procedures were actually occurring in the hospital. However, adding these fees to procedures done in outside facilities, across town, and not in a hospital setting isn't justified. It is yet another loophole they have created to subsidize their operation by shifting the cost of the hospital onto outpatients. But it isn't our duty to subsidize your hospital. If the revenue you generate at the hospital isn't enough to run it you can either adjust the rates charged to the insurance companies for inpatients, find a way to become more efficient, or cut administrative/managerial overhead. What you don't do is create what is essentially a tax on everyone else having procedures done outside the hospital by bypassing the rates you agreed to with the insurance carriers and instead billing everything as a hospital fee. As I mentioned before, my insurance company (Blue Shield) told me they see this as unethical billing practice and is currently illegal in several states and the subject of a federal bill to make it illegal nationally.

  
  

• Initial Complaint

  Date:06/26/2023

  Type:Service or Repair Issues
  Status:

  AnsweredMore info

  Complaint statuses

  Resolved:

  The complainant verified the issue was resolved to their satisfaction.

  Unresolved:

  The business responded to the dispute but failed to make a good faith effort to resolve it.

  Answered:

  The business addressed the issues within the complaint, but the consumer either a) did not accept the response, OR b) did not notify BBB as to their satisfaction.

  Unanswered:

  The business failed to respond to the dispute.

  Unpursuable:

  BBB is unable to locate the business.

  Couple weeks ago, I drove to Cancer Center Clinic (Surgical Oncology) to get my medical record from a visit on June 7th, 2023. Receptionist explained to me that all records are at the other location which I/we are not allowed to know, e-mail or phone calls ONLY: **************, which I called and e-mailed same day. As for today, June 26, that *********** still refuses to give it to me, even though I already jumped through their endless hoops: my ID # *********, my address, phone, and even attached DL (a current one, with the very same home address and my photo!!) i isn't good enough for UC Davis!One more time: they have NO right to refuse to mail/e-mail ME MY medical record! My DL is totally good for everybody/everything else in *** - I live and work here for over 3 decades!

  Business Response

  Date: 06/30/2023

  Hello,

  
  Thank you for the opportunity to review the concerns submitted by patient, ***********************, regarding her medical records request. The patients concerns were forwarded to the ** Davis Health Medical ****************** leadership for appropriate review and follow-up. The request was processed and records were mailed to the patient on 6/27/2023. The Medical Records Supervisor notified the patient. 

   

  Sincerely,

  ************** (She/Her/Hers)
  Patient Relations Analyst
  
  UC Davis Medical Center
  *******************************
  ************** 95817
  
  ************ tel
  ************ fax
  ***********************************************************
  
  

• Initial Complaint

  Date:04/27/2023

  Type:Product Issues
  Status:

  AnsweredMore info

  Complaint statuses

  Resolved:

  The complainant verified the issue was resolved to their satisfaction.

  Unresolved:

  The business responded to the dispute but failed to make a good faith effort to resolve it.

  Answered:

  The business addressed the issues within the complaint, but the consumer either a) did not accept the response, OR b) did not notify BBB as to their satisfaction.

  Unanswered:

  The business failed to respond to the dispute.

  Unpursuable:

  BBB is unable to locate the business.

  I paid ***** $940 and they sent the payment to UC DAVIS. I got a message from **************** , from Aetna id ********, saying that this $940 was RECEIVED by UC DAVIS on April 14 but UC DAVIS says they did not get the money. Aetna and UC DAVIS need to talk to each other

  Business Response

  Date: 05/08/2023

  Payment was received and posted to patient's account. ********************'s insurance was contacted to confirm receipt of payment.

  Customer Answer

  Date: 05/08/2023

  I am rejecting this response because: UCDAVIS Harassed me about the payment and i had to file BBB complaints with the insurance, UCDAVIS adn the credit card company ... THIS IS NOT NORMAL 
  

  Business Response

  Date: 05/11/2023

  Only one paper statement regarding this balance was generated for the patient, and patient was sent one electronic notification. 

  Customer Answer

  Date: 05/11/2023

  I am rejecting this response because: SEVERAL threatening messages about collections and how long they will wait to be paid ... i had to report AETNA to bbb .. .dispute this with my credit card 
  

• Initial Complaint

  Date:04/08/2023

  Type:Service or Repair Issues
  Status:

  AnsweredMore info

  Complaint statuses

  Resolved:

  The complainant verified the issue was resolved to their satisfaction.

  Unresolved:

  The business responded to the dispute but failed to make a good faith effort to resolve it.

  Answered:

  The business addressed the issues within the complaint, but the consumer either a) did not accept the response, OR b) did not notify BBB as to their satisfaction.

  Unanswered:

  The business failed to respond to the dispute.

  Unpursuable:

  BBB is unable to locate the business.

  The nurse is here we're so impatient that they hooked up a IV line which was about 3 ft long and hanging from the opposite side of the arm it was in and then drugged me with a bunch of medication to where the IV got ripped out during my sleep. The fluids from the IV broke my $900 phone and I lost all my wedding photos due to their negligence.

  Business Response

  Date: 04/10/2023

  Response to Complaint from ***********************:

  
  After thoroughly reviewing the patients chart, we were unable to find any complaints regarding an IV needing to be replaced or a cell phone that was damaged. This patient was last seen in our ******************** on 4/3/23 and after 12 hours left the hospital/eloped and was discharged. Patient returned approximately 2 hours later and was readmitted on 4/4/23. Patient was seen in our ******************* until discharge on 4/5/23 at approximately 9:15 am. There were no patient complaints at discharged and no issues with a cell phone were reported.

  
  Should you have further questions, please contact us at ************.

  Sincerely,

  *********************************, Analyst

  Patient Relations Department

  UC Davis Health