[inetknght]

Why doesn't the insurance company trust Dr. Nick?

If there's reason to not trust Dr. Nick, then surely the insurance company must disclose it. If there's reason to not trust Dr. Nick, then surely Dr. Nick would have trouble maintaining a medical license. If there's reason to not trust Dr. Nick then surely Dr. Nick's own malpractice insurance would become too onerous for him to keep.

No, this smells exactly like what @Someone1234 stated:

> Out-of-network was always just a sketchy way for insurance to avoid paying what they should have paid.

[jrs235]

Sometimes the trust issue is more about fraudulent claims than one's ability to practice medicine...

[jakelazaroff]

Then why is he still in business? If he's committing insurance fraud, then the insurance company should work with regulators to stop and potentially prosecute him. The onus to prevent fraud should not be on me as a patient.

[inetknght]

> If there's reason to not trust Dr. Nick, then surely the insurance company must disclose it.

That should include "we think Dr. Nick makes fraudulent claims"