Complaints

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:04/17/2024

  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.

  I have been a patient at *************************** D.D.S. Smile America (D/B/A L.E.S. ************* since August 4, 2023. After routine cleanings and visits I was told that I had very serious gum disease that would eventually lead to bone loss and severe medical complications. I was told that I required a full mouth (every tooth) deep cleaning, a full mouth (every tooth) needed antibiotics injected into them, and gum scaling. My insurance covered the deep clean and the gum scaling but not the expensive antibiotics. I scheduled the procedures and planned to speak to the dentist about the antibiotics at my next appointment. I was setup and prepped for my deep clean procedure when I was told that if I didn't inject the antibiotics during the deep clean the deep clean would be ineffective and my insurance would not cover another one for two years (at which time my condition would have progressed beyond repair) so I had to inject them that day. I was coerced into paying $1,200 out of pocket on March 28, 2024 for antibiotics by the staff. I was presented my periodontal chart that showed all of my teeth required intense treatment and multiple staff came in to point to the periodontal chart showing I needed the work done. After paying and leaving I went to another dentist who informed I didn't need ANY of the work done previously mentioned. I didn't need the full mouth deep cleaning (just a few small isolated areas) and worst I did not need the antibiotics at all that I had paid for out of pocket. I paid $1,300.07 on March 28, 2024. $1,200 for the unnecessary antibiotic injections and $107.20 for copayment for the procedures I did not need. I am attaching the signed letter from my new dentist showing I didn't need the procedures/medicine as well as her periodontal chart that indicates my teeth all have a 1,2, or 3 rating and the fraudulent dentist's periodontal chart showing my teeth as 4,5,6 . Thank you for reading.

  Business Response

  Date: 04/24/2024

  Dear BBB,
  

  We are writing in response to the complaint filed by *********************** regarding his recent visit to our dental office on March 28, 2024. We appreciate the opportunity to provide our perspective and address the inaccurate assertions made by **************.
  

  First and foremost, it is imperative to clarify that the deep cleaning procedure recommended to ************** was not arbitrary. His insurance provider pre-approved the treatment based on the severity of his periodontal condition,as documented in his records. Any suggestion that the deep cleaning was unnecessary is both unfounded and contradicted by the approval from a third-party insurance entity.
  

  Furthermore, the recommendation for adjunctive treatment with ******* was made in accordance with the gold standard of care for periodontal therapy at our office. Our dental hygienist, trained and experienced in periodontal management, evaluated ****************** clinical presentation, including x-rays and probing depths. Based on these findings, it was determined that ******* placement was integral to addressing his severe bone loss and periodontal disease.
  

  Contrary to ****************** claims of coercion, we adamantly deny any such practice. At no point during his visit was ************** coerced, threatened, or pressured into accepting treatment. Our hygienist provided comprehensive information regarding the recommended procedures, allowing ************** to make an informed decision about his oral health care.
  

  Moreover, ****************** assertion that his pocket depths ranged from 1-5mm after seeking treatment elsewhere does not invalidate the necessity or efficacy of the ******* treatment. The reduction in pocket depths observed post-treatment is consistent with the intended mechanism of action of *******,which maintains a high-level of antibiotic directly at the gum disease site over a period of 14 days. This outcome reinforces the effectiveness of the treatment and underscores our commitment to providing optimal care.
  

  It is regrettable that ************** has chosen to misrepresent the facts of his treatment experience and escalate his concerns to the BBB. Nevertheless, we stand by the integrity of our treatment recommendations and the professionalism of our staff. We have a legal obligation to collect copayments dictated by patients' insurance plans, and ************** was fully aware of these obligations when he signed consent forms acknowledging the treatment and associated costs.
  

  In conclusion, we refute the allegations made by ************** and assert that the care provided was in accordance with the highest standards of dental practice. We respectfully request that this response be considered in conjunction with ****************** complaint.
  

  Should you require any further documentation or information, please do not hesitate to contact us.
  

  Sincerely,
  ***********************
  Office Administrator

  Customer Answer

  Date: 04/30/2024

  Better Business Bureau:
  
  I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID# ********, and have determined that my complaint has NOT been resolved because:

  [Your Answer Here]

  Thank you for taking the time to review this matter. I am putting *** ******* responses here along with my counterpoint. 
  

  ******************** Point: First and foremost, it is imperative to clarify that the deep cleaning procedure recommended to ************** was not arbitrary. His insurance provider pre-approved the treatment based on the severity of his periodontal condition, as documented in his records. Any suggestion that the deep cleaning was unnecessary is both unfounded and contradicted by the approval from a third-party insurance entity.
  

  *********************** Counterpoint: ******************* office provided all the information they recorded or edited to insurance this point should not be valid. Also, the dentist I received a second opinion from informed me that the deep cleaning I was told that I needed at *** ******* practice was not at all necessary. They said I needed minimal deep cleaning in CERTAIN areas not a FULL MOUTH like *** ******* practice said I absolutely needed, or I would have serious health side effects. Also, its important to note that I had half of my mouth deep cleaned at *** ******* practice before I realized I didnt need it. The second opinion dentist
  could not tell me which half had been deep cleaned already because they had left so much build up. Although they are telling people who dont need services, they do need them they are also not actually completing the service once the person gives in and allows them to do it.
  

  ******************** second point: Furthermore, the recommendation for adjunctive treatment with ******* was made in accordance with the gold standard of care for periodontal therapy at our office. Our dental hygienist, trained and experienced in periodontal management, evaluated ****************** clinical presentation, including x-rays and probing depths. Based on these findings, it was determined that ******* placement was integral to addressing his severe bone loss and periodontal disease.

  *********************** Second counterpoint: I would like the BBB to please note that insurance does not cover ******* so most honest practices do not use it. It is an extremely expensive antibiotic that is not at all the only available option. To say it is in accordance with a gold standard of treatment but its not covered by any insurance doesnt make sense here. Particularly since *** ******* office points to insurance in paragraph one as being an indicator of truthfulness and whats right and needed. If it was in accordance with gold standard of care, I absolutely needed it, and I have excellent insurance, wouldnt I have been able to get it covered or get an exception to get it covered? There are other antibiotics that arent categorically denied by insurance and extremely expensive why were NONE of those offered if this is the gold standard?
  

  ******************** third point: Contrary to ****************** claims of coercion, we adamantly deny any such practice. At no point during his visit was ************** coerced, threatened, or pressured into accepting treatment. Our hygienist provided comprehensive information regarding the recommended procedures, allowing ************** to make an informed decision about his oral health care.

  *********************** third counterpoint: This is categorically untrue. Multiple people came in and pointed to charts, graphs, data, etc.(created by *** ******* practice) and pressured me into agreeing after I expressed at least 10 times I did not have the money. At least 2 people coerced me saying my health would absolutely 100% suffer and went as far as to say my teeth would eventually fall out as a result if I did not comply.
  

  **************** fourth point: Moreover, ****************** assertion that his pocket depths ranged from 1-5mm after seeking treatment elsewhere does not invalidate the necessity or efficacy of the ******* treatment. The reduction in pocket depths observed post-treatment is consistent with the intended mechanism of action of *******, which maintains a high-level of antibiotic directly at the gum disease site over a period of 14 days. This outcome reinforces the effectiveness of the treatment and underscores our commitment to providing optimal care.

  ********************* Fourth Counterpoint: The purpose of getting a second periodontal chart done was to show that *** **************** chart was not a little different  from the second opinion it was done to show that they are two completely different charts. The second opinion periodontal chart is almost entirely different. Two of the exact same medical professionals .3 miles apart came to two completely different conclusions while creating my periodontal chart. And the one *** ******* office made said my mouth was in terrible condition was the one used to talk me into getting ******* injections and the overall procedure. **************** is saying in his response that I did not invalidate the need for the ******* by pointing to the discrepancy in my charts/paperwork however I would say that the collection of charts and paperwork that *** ******* office put together is why I agreed to allow the ******* to be injected and take on the massive cost.
  

  Thank you very much for your time and consideration.
  

  In order for the BBB to appropriately process your response, you MUST answer the question above.

  
  Sincerely,
  
  ***********************
  
  
  
  
   
  

  Customer Answer

  Date: 05/22/2024

  Better Business Bureau:
  
  I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID# ********, and have determined that my complaint has NOT been resolved because:

  [Your Answer Here]

   

  I look forward to discussing this matter further with my legal representation as well as ******************** to continue the conversation. I am not a con-man and deeply resent the insinuation.  

   

   

  In order for the BBB to appropriately process your response, you MUST answer the question above.

  
  Sincerely,
  
  ***********************
  
  
  
  
   
  

  Business Response

  Date: 06/03/2024

  Services were rendered and no refund will be given.