Connecticut Attorney General Tong Reaches Settlement with Dentists in False Claims Case

Connecticut dental practices Dent Plus Family Dentistry and L&M Family Dentistry, along with their owners Ivan Makar and Oleg Losin, have agreed to pay $714,446 to settle allegations they violated state and federal False Claims Act statutes, Attorney General William Tong announced Monday.

The settlement resolves claims that the now-dissolved practices, formerly located in Stamford and New Haven respectively, paid prohibited recruitment fees for Medicaid patients referred to their offices.

According to investigators, from January 2019 through September 2020, the dental practices paid a third-party patient recruiting company $135 for each Connecticut Medicaid patient referred to them who received services beyond routine preventative care. This arrangement violated the federal anti-kickback statute as well as Connecticut Medicaid program provider agreements.

“Paying kickbacks for patient recruitment is illegal. Dentists participating in Connecticut’s public healthcare programs are responsible for knowing the law,” Attorney General Tong said in a statement. “This is the sixth settlement arising from ongoing joint investigations, and we will continue to work closely with our state and federal partners to aggressively protect the integrity of our public healthcare programs.”

The case represents the latest in a series of enforcement actions stemming from joint civil investigations conducted by the Connecticut Attorney General’s Office, the U.S. Attorney’s Office, the federal Department of Health and Human Services Office of Inspector General, and the Federal Bureau of Investigation. These coordinated efforts have targeted alleged kickback arrangements involving healthcare providers and patient recruiting companies that refer Connecticut Medicaid beneficiaries.

Patient recruitment kickbacks have become an increasing concern for healthcare fraud investigators nationwide. Such arrangements can compromise patient care by creating financial incentives to refer patients based on profit potential rather than medical necessity. They may also artificially inflate healthcare costs by generating unnecessary services and undermining fair competition among providers.

Connecticut’s Medicaid program, administered through the Connecticut Medical Assistance Program (CMAP), serves approximately 900,000 low-income residents, including children, pregnant women, parents, older adults, and individuals with disabilities. The program represents a significant portion of the state’s annual budget, making program integrity a priority for regulators.

Healthcare fraud enforcement has intensified in recent years, with federal and state authorities dedicating more resources to investigate suspected abuses of public healthcare programs. In Connecticut, the Attorney General’s Government Fraud Section works in coordination with the state’s Medicaid Fraud Control Unit to pursue civil and criminal cases involving provider fraud.

The $714,446 settlement amount likely represents a combination of damages and penalties based on the prohibited payments made during the approximately 20-month period under investigation. While the dental practices have since dissolved, their owners remain liable for the settlement amount.

Officials encourage anyone with knowledge of suspected fraud or abuse in public healthcare programs to contact the Attorney General’s Government Fraud Section, the Connecticut Medicaid Fraud Control Unit, or the Department of Social Services fraud reporting hotline.

Assistant Attorney General Joshua L. Jackson, Legal Investigator Timothy Edwards, and Deputy Associate Attorney General Gregory O’Connell, Chief of the Government Fraud Section, handled the case for the state.

The settlement underscores Connecticut’s commitment to combating healthcare fraud and protecting taxpayer dollars allocated to essential healthcare services for vulnerable populations. It also serves as a reminder to healthcare providers about the serious consequences of violating anti-kickback provisions, even for arrangements that may seem like standard marketing or business development practices in other industries.