Your denials are worth more than
the time you're spending on them.

Ovryt reads the remittance you already download, ranks every denial by what it would actually recover against what it would cost to chase, puts the right deadline on each one, and drafts the appeal for someone on your team to approve.

See what your denials are worth → Create an account

The audit takes about a minute and needs no account. Your file is read in your browser — it never reaches us.

56denial reason codes, with X12's own wording
17payers with deadline rules read from their manuals
4problem types: denials, rejections, prior auth, takebacks
The actual problem

It isn't that denials are unwinnable. It's that nobody can tell which ones are.

A biller with forty open denials works the ones they happen to notice. The rest age out. Some of what they do work was never worth the hour it took, and some of what they skip was worth four thousand dollars. Nothing in the practice management system tells them which is which — and the appeal deadline is different for every payer on the list.

Large health systems solved this years ago with six-figure platforms. A six-doctor practice has a spreadsheet.

How it works

From remittance file to filed appeal

STEP 1 / BRING IT IN

The files you already have

Upload the 835 from your clearinghouse, paste a denial letter, or import the spreadsheet your biller already keeps — whatever its column headers are called. You don't have to change your ERA enrolment or your workflow.

STEP 2 / TRIAGE

Ranked by what it recovers

Dollars at risk, multiplied by the odds of winning that denial type, minus the staff time it would take — then amplified by how close the deadline is. The deadline comes from that payer's own manual, not a generic 180 days.

STEP 3 / DRAFT, APPROVE, FILE

A person always signs off

The letter is drafted with the reason code, the policy it turns on, and what to attach. Nothing sends itself. Anything asserting medical necessity needs a provider or manager. Then it goes by payer API, fax or certified mail, and the receipt lands back on the case.

What's different

Four things you won't find in the tools built for hospitals

It tells you which denials to drop

A $120 denial is not worth a $118 appeal. Roughly a third of what sits in a denial queue costs more in staff time than it will ever return, and Ovryt says so in plain words — with the arithmetic shown.

"Expected recovery (30% of $310) is less than the ~45 minutes of staff time it would take. Working a higher-value denial first recovers more."

Every other tool treats all denials as winnable, because that is what sells. Saying "skip this one" is what makes the ranking on the rest worth trusting.

The deadline is researched, not assumed

The clock starts in a different place for every payer. UnitedHealthcare runs from the EOB date. Aetna from the denial decision. Anthem from the EOP issue date. Medicare from receipt, with a five-day statutory presumption written into 42 CFR 405.942. Each rule was read from that payer's own current manual, carries the date it was verified, and is shown on the case so you can check it.

Where we don't have a verified rule, the app says so on screen rather than quietly guessing.

Rejections and takebacks, not just denials

A 277CA rejection never reached adjudication — there is nothing to appeal, and the timely-filing clock is still running. A PLB recoupment is money pulled back out of a later payment; it carries no denial code and never appears on a denial report. Both are handled here as their own kind of work, because both are where money leaves quietly.

You can pilot it without a compliance review

Accounts start in de-identified mode. No patient names, no member IDs, no dates of birth — the app actively blocks them on the way in, and letters come back with placeholders for your team to fill in from your own system. That means you can try it this week instead of after a procurement cycle.

Know the codes

What the reason code is really telling you

A sample of the 56 codes in the table, with the remark codes that change the answer entirely.

CodeWhat the payer saysWhat it actually means
CO-197Prior auth missing If the auth exists and was simply left off the claim, correct and resubmit — far faster than appealing.
CO-16Missing information Meaningless alone. The remark code tells you what. With MA130 there are no appeal rights at all.
PR-96Non-covered The group code decides. PR-96 means bill the patient. CO-96 means write it off. Same number, opposite action.
CO-29Filed too late For Medicare this is not appealable — it isn't an initial determination. It goes to reconsideration with proof of timely submission.
N704Remark code "You may not appeal, but can resubmit." Writing an appeal here wastes the filing window.
N938Remark code "Do not resubmit — this will be reprocessed automatically." The correct action is to do nothing.
Before you ask

What Ovryt does not do

  • It doesn't submit your claims. Your PM system files them. Ovryt picks up after the payer says no.
  • It doesn't log into payer portals for you. Availity's Organization Access Agreement prohibits automated access and names direct legal action as the remedy. Ovryt assembles a portal-ready packet and a person files it — while fax, certified mail and UnitedHealthcare's own appeals API are automated, because those channels are sanctioned.
  • It isn't built for hospitals. Different systems, different contracts, different procurement. This is for practices and the billing companies that serve them.
  • It won't claim a win rate it can't source. Published overturn rates don't exist at reason-code granularity, so most estimates are our own category-level figures and are labelled as such. Only a handful carry a real published number.

Start with your own numbers

Drop in last month's remittance and see what's recoverable, what closes this week, and what you should stop working. No account, and the file is read in your browser — it never reaches us.

Run the free audit →