Free tools that give you your appeal deadline as a real date, the rulebook that governs your plan, and a first letter to send. Built on the plans’ own published criteria and the federal appeal rules.
Source: KFF, Claims Denials and Appeals in ACA Marketplace Plans, 2023 data year, published 2025.
Both begin with the same free tool. Neither one asks for a card to tell you what your letter says.
Wegovy, Zepbound, and the rest. Different rules, different criteria, and a Medicare program most people have never heard of.
Surgeries, imaging, specialists, medications, hospital stays. The original playbook, covering every kind of denial.
Not sure which? If the denial is about a GLP-1 medication, take the first one. The rules genuinely are different, and the general course does not cover the Medicare GLP-1 program or the renewal criteria.
Most first appeals are a letter explaining how much the treatment matters. That letter cannot be answered, so it gets denied.
What moves a file is mechanical. Your plan has a written criteria document listing numbered requirements. Your denial named one of them. The appeal that works quotes that criterion back, attaches the document that satisfies it, and does the reviewer’s job for them in ninety seconds.
Almost everyone stops at the first no. There are four more places to take it, and one of them is decided by people who do not work for your insurer.
It is not another conversation with your insurer. It is a review by an organization that does not work for them, and the plan has to do what it says.
Every rung has one, they are counted differently, and the letter rarely gives you the date. Both free tools work it out for you and tell you the days left.
Marketplace, self-funded employer, Medicare and Medicaid are four separate systems with four sets of rules. Reading the wrong one wastes your deadline.
An insurance denial arrives written to sound final. It uses language that explains nothing, buries the one date that matters, and gives you no idea whether you have a case or are wasting your time. Most people read it, feel bad, and pay or go without.
That reaction is exactly what the numbers reflect. Roughly one in five in-network marketplace claims is denied, and fewer than one in a hundred of those denials is ever appealed. The system is not built to hide an appeals process. It is built so that appealing feels like something other people do.
Let’s Appeal exists to close that specific gap. Not to promise you a win, and not to file anything on your behalf, but to hand you the plan’s own rulebook, the deadline as a real date, the letter already drafted, and an honest read on whether your case is worth the effort.
Course sales, and nothing else. We have no financial relationship with any pharmaceutical manufacturer, pharmacy, telehealth provider, prescriber network, or insurance company, and we take no affiliate commission on anything we mention. When we point you at a competitor’s free tool, which we do, there is nothing in it for us.
A win rate. We do not have audited outcome data, and any number we printed would be marketing rather than evidence.
When we have real customer results and their permission, we will publish them unedited, and we will say plainly that individual results vary. Until then the space stays empty, which is the honest thing for it to be.
Paste or upload your denial letter and you get the complete read: what your plan decided, which of the four systems governs you, your deadline as a real date with days remaining, an honest assessment of whether the case is winnable, and the most useful thing to do next.
No account, no card. The document is read and discarded.
Ten questions, about three minutes. Your appeal deadline as an actual date, which rulebook governs your plan, a draft letter built around the reason you were given, and what to attach in what order.
You never upload the letter. You read it and answer questions about it, and what you say about the claim stays in your browser. It asks for a first name and email at the end so it can put your name on the letter and send you a copy.
Getting the plan’s own criteria document, building the evidence file, making the ask your prescriber will say yes to, writing the letter, filing it with proof, and escalating when the first answer is still no.
Plus the Letter Builder, which drafts your appeal from your inputs and the correct template, and which will not invent a clinical fact.
Nobody can sell you that. Anyone who does is lying to you, and you should treat it as the tell that it is.
Our letter tool refuses, by design. It is insurance fraud, and it is also the fastest way to lose a case you could have won.
Some of them are genuinely good. Both courses name them and say when you should use one instead of buying ours.
When your plan excludes something outright, the tool says so in the first sentence and points you at what actually works instead.
The decoders and the first module of each course are free and always will be. Beyond that there is a hardship page: full free access, no documentation, no income proof, and no explanation required. We approve by default.
Somebody fighting to afford a medication should not have to fight to afford the thing that helps them get it covered.