Skip to content
DocumentationCARCNot billable to patient

CO-116 denial code

The advance indemnification notice did not comply with requirements

An advance beneficiary notice was defective, so the patient cannot be billed.

How to fix it

Review the notice against requirements. A defective notice generally cannot be cured after the fact.

How to prevent it

Use current forms, complete every field, obtain the signature before the service, and retain the original.

The CO prefix marks this a contractual obligation. The balance is absorbed by the provider under the payer agreement and cannot be transferred to the patient.

In practice

A practice issues an advance beneficiary notice for a service likely to be denied, the patient signs, the service is delivered and denied as expected. The practice bills the patient and the claim returns CO-116 — the notice did not meet requirements.

The consequence is severe and immediate: a defective notice cannot transfer liability, so the balance becomes a write-off rather than a patient responsibility. The service was delivered and nobody pays for it.

The defects are almost always mechanical. An outdated form, a blank reason field, a missing cost estimate, a signature obtained after the service, or a generic statement that the service might not be covered rather than a specific one about why.

What sits behind it

The reason field is where most notices fail. A valid notice states specifically why the payer is expected to deny — naming the coverage policy, the frequency limit or the necessity criterion — rather than gesturing at the possibility of non-coverage. Generic language is treated as no notice at all.

Timing is the second common defect and cannot be cured. The signature has to precede delivery of the service, and a notice signed afterwards, however complete, does not transfer liability. Obtaining signatures at check-out rather than check-in makes every notice defective.

Routine or blanket notices given to every patient are affirmatively disfavoured and can invalidate the practice's use of them generally. The instrument is meant for cases where denial is genuinely expected, and issuing it indiscriminately undermines both its validity and the patient's ability to make a real decision.

Related codes

Terms used here — Patient Responsibility · Medical Necessity · Denial

How we handle it — Patient Collections · Eligibility Verification · Denial Management

Primary sources

The rules behind CO-116, at the bodies that publish them.

Looking for a different code? Search all 190 CARC and RARC codes

Questions about CO-116

No. The notice exists to let the patient decide before the service, so a correction made afterwards cannot serve that purpose. Whatever was wrong at signature stands, and the balance becomes a write-off rather than a patient responsibility.

The current official form, a specific reason the payer is expected to deny rather than a general possibility, an estimated cost, the patient's option selection, and a signature obtained before the service is delivered. Missing any one of these can invalidate it.

No, and doing so is counterproductive. Blanket notices are disfavoured and can undermine the validity of the practice's notices generally, because the instrument is meant for cases where denial is genuinely expected and a real choice is being offered.

Find out what your denials are costing you

A free billing audit reviews your denial rate, AR aging and clean claim rate against industry benchmarks. Takes about two minutes to request. No sales pitch.

No setup fees · You pay when we collect · Pricing from 3% of net collections