Paper checks, lockboxes, and virtual credit cards from payers

Despite decades of electronic payment standards, a portion of payer money still arrives as paper checks or as virtual credit cards (VCCs), card numbers faxed or emailed to you to key into a terminal. VCCs in particular cost you 2–3% of the payment in interchange, and that cost is avoidable.

​

Why paper persists

• Small and regional payers without EFT infrastructure
• Non-health payers — workers’ compensation carriers, auto/PIP insurers, and attorney settlements — are heavily paper
• EFT enrollment never completed for a given payer, so it defaults to check
• Patient payments by check, particularly from older demographics
• Deliberate payer choice, see VCCs below

​

Virtual credit cards

A VCC is a single-use card number a payer sends you in place of an EFT. You key it into your card terminal to “collect” the payment. What it costs you: the card’s interchange and processing fees, typically 2–3% of the payment amount. On $50,000 of monthly remittances, that is$1,000–$1,500 a month, permanently, for a payment method that should have been free. Why payers do it: in card transactions, interchange flows to the issuing side. The payer or its payment vendor can earn a rebate on the volume. Your 2–3% is their revenue. VCCs are not a convenience. They are a fee transfer. Every VCC you accept converts what should be a free ACH credit into a card transaction you pay for. Convert every VCC-paying payer to EFT, and treat any new VCC arrival as an action item rather than a payment.

​

Your right to EFT

You do not have to accept VCCs. Under HIPAA’s administrative simplification rules, the health care EFT standard for provider payments is the ACH CCD+ entry with the addenda record carrying the reassociation trace number, and operating rules adopted under the ACA require health plans to comply with the EFT and ERA standards and operating rules.¹ Practically, providers can generally require that a plan pay by ACH EFT rather than by card. If a payer’s default is a VCC:

1. Complete their EFT enrollment. Many VCC arrangements exist simply because EFT enrollment was never done.
2. Ask explicitly to opt out of the card program, in writing.
3. Escalate to provider relations if the request is ignored.
4. Track the cost so you can quantify it in the conversation. “This costs us $14,000 a year” is a more effective ask than “we prefer ACH.”

​

If you must key one

Key it promptly — VCCs expire, and an expired card means chasing a reissue. Record it as a payer payment net of the processing fee, not as gross revenue. And reconcile it to the corresponding 835 like any other payment.

​

Handling paper checks

Three approaches, with different economics: Endorsement. Checks payable to the PC must be endorsed by the PC and deposited into the PC’s account. A check payable to “Meridian Dermatology, P.C.” cannot be deposited into the MSO’s account — that is both a bank problem and a commingling problem. In a multi-entity group, this means per-entity endorsement handling. Lockbox in a multi-PC group. Each PC generally needs its own lockbox arrangement depositing to its own account, because the payee entity determines the destination account. Lockboxes also matter to lenders: facilities secured by healthcare receivables are commonly structured around controlled lockbox and account arrangements, shaped by the constraint that payments must land in a provider-controlled account. See Working capital and AR lending.

​

Deposits can bounce, days later

An underappreciated risk. A deposited check can be returned after you have already treated the funds as available. Common return reasons: The return arrives days after deposit, reverses the credit, and usually carries a fee. If you posted the payment on deposit, your ledger is now wrong.

​

Reassociation with paper

The reconciliation problem is worse with paper than with EFT. An EFT carries the TRN reassociation trace number in its ACH addenda record, letting you match it to its 835 mechanically. A paper check does not. You match on check number, amount, and payer, which is manual, and error-prone when a single check covers many claims. Practical approach:

1. Log every check on receipt: payer, check number, amount, date
2. Match to the 835 by check number where the remittance references it
3. Where no 835 exists, request one, or push the payer to ERA
4. Never post a paper payment without knowing which claims it covers

​

Designing deposit operations for a paper-heavy practice

Some verticals cannot escape paper. If paper is structural for you:

• Use a lockbox rather than office handling — it removes a physical-security and internal-control problem
• Photograph and log every check on receipt, before deposit
• Build joint-payee handling into the workflow if you take PI or settlement revenue
• Reconcile daily, so returns surface fast
• Keep pushing payers to EFT — every conversion is permanent

​

Sources

1. HIPAA administrative simplification adopted the ACH CCD+ with addenda as the health care EFT standard; ACA § 1104 directed adoption of operating rules for EFT and ERA. See CMS, Administrative Simplification: Operating Rules and Electronic Funds Transfer standard. Confirm current enforcement guidance with CMS before relying on it in a payer dispute.