CO-27 means the payer's records show the patient's insurance policy was no longer active on the date of service. This may be accurate — or it may be a payer data error, a retroactive termination, or a COB sequencing issue. The first step is always confirming the exact termination date before deciding whether to appeal, bill the patient, or write off.
CO-27 means the payer says the patient's coverage had already ended before the date of service. This may be accurate (the patient lost coverage and you weren't notified), or it may be a data error — specifically a retroactive termination where the payer backdated the end of coverage to a date before your service. Call the payer to confirm the exact termination date, compare it to your eligibility verification timestamp, and then decide whether to appeal (if the termination date is wrong), bill the patient (if coverage was genuinely lapsed), or check for secondary coverage.
The ERA often says only "coverage terminated." You need the exact date coverage ended. Call provider services and ask: "What is the exact coverage termination date for member [ID]?" If that date is after your DOS, the denial was issued in error and you have a strong appeal. If it's before your DOS, ask whether a retroactive termination was applied and when it was processed.
Your eligibility verification confirmed active coverage, but the payer issued CO-27 due to a processing delay, a system error, or a retroactive termination that was reversed or contested. The most recoverable scenario.
Fix: Appeal with eligibility proof and verification timestampCoverage was terminated retroactively to a date before your service — often because the patient lost employment, didn't pay premiums, or the employer processed separation late. Your eligibility check showed active coverage at the time of service, but the payer subsequently backdated the termination. Patient is generally responsible; advise the patient to appeal the retro-term with the payer or insurer.
Fix: Bill patient; advise patient to contest retro-termThe patient's coverage genuinely ended before the date of service — they did not renew, voluntarily canceled, or lost coverage — and you did not verify eligibility before the service. No grounds to appeal; the patient is responsible for the bill.
Fix: Bill patient; check for secondary coverage firstUse when you verified eligibility before the service and the payer subsequently applied a retroactive termination. Replace [bracketed fields] with your specifics.
VIA: Formal Claims Appeal Department
Date: [Date]
Payer: [Payer Name] | Claim Number: [Claim #]
Member ID: [Member ID] | Provider NPI: [NPI]
Date of Service: [DOS] | Denial Code: CO-27
RE: Appeal of CO-27 Denial — Coverage Was Verified Active on Date of Service
We are appealing the denial of the above claim under CO-27 (expenses incurred after coverage terminated). We respectfully submit that coverage was active on the date of service per our eligibility verification, and that the CO-27 denial resulted from a retroactive termination processed after the service was rendered.
On [eligibility verification date], we verified the patient's eligibility through [AVS system / payer portal / phone verification]. The response confirmed active coverage under member ID [member ID], Group [group number], effective through at least [coverage end date shown on eligibility response]. A copy of this eligibility confirmation is enclosed.
The service was rendered on [DOS] in good faith, relying on this eligibility confirmation. We subsequently learned that coverage was retroactively terminated effective [retro-term date per payer] — a date before our service — and that this termination was not processed until [date retro-term was processed], after our eligibility check and after the service was rendered.
We request that this claim be reconsidered and paid at the contracted rate, as the retroactive termination could not have been known at the time of service and the claim was submitted in full compliance with the member's coverage as it appeared on the date of service.
Enclosed: eligibility verification confirmation, claim detail, provider agreement reference (Section [X] — good faith eligibility reliance clause, if applicable).
Sincerely, [Practice Administrator], [Practice Name] | Contact: [Name, Phone]
Every CO-27 represents a patient whose coverage status was unknown at check-in. A free RCM audit maps where your eligibility workflow is missing coverage changes and what process change eliminates CO-27 before the service date.