excess of the contribution from Medicare and Blue Cross. See id. at 455. The majority finds that by forgiving all appellant’s reasonable medical costs in excess of the $12,167.40 payment from Medicare and Blue Cross, appellee made a $96,500.91 contribution to appellant. Appellee admits, however, that Medicare prohibits it from seeking “the remainder of the fair and reasonable cost of its services from Appellant or from any other source.” Id. at 2. Thus, appellee did not contribute anything to appellant that appellant had not already received from Medicare. This means that appellee itself has made no payment to the injured party in excess of Medicare’s contribution. Accordingly, appellee is not entitled to a setoff. Cf. Kashner v. Geisinger Clinic, 432 Pa.Super. 361, 638 A.2d 980 (1994) (<HOLDING>). For the foregoing reasons, I respectfully
holding that debtor under  558 was entitled to exercise state law right of setoff holding that a clinic was entitled to a setoff where it voluntarily forgave medical expenses pursuant to a charity program holding that necessary expenses such as living expenses are not considered a squandering or secreting of marital property such that reimbursement or a setoff should be ordered holding that an award for medical expenses is proper when the expenses have been incurred but not paid holding that medical expenses must be proven to be both reasonable and necessary