Re: Mold Injured Workers Go To San Diego District Attorney
Posted by Deborah on 8/28/10
"Mold jihadists", really? Really? How long did it take for you to
come up with that gem?
Personally, I am pretty tired of the Nazi naysayers who pervert hard
science for the sake of limiting liability at the expense of real,
clinical medical training and awareness to limit more serious health
consequences for those that have been exposed to mold, especially
those already suffering from weakened immune systems from a myriad of
causes, not to mention the conflicts of interest that pervade the
issue in nearly every profession associated with this issue.
Also for forcing landlords to properly maintain their properties and
enforcement of existing laws and statutes against those that fail to
disclose unremediated defects in the structures. Ditto for ensuring
insurance companies act in good faith and stop endlessly denying
claims thereby potentially worsening the festering conditions caused
by leaks and other water damage.
But no matter, there is still a "blame the victim" mentality about it
that simply requires a certain callousness about the well-being of
nameless, faceless, countless numbers of people who have and will
suffer from exposure, failure to accurately diagnose and thus treat
Caveat emptor and you don't always get what you pay for and justice
isn't free or cheap. You probably think corexit is safe, too.
On 8/27/10, Deborah wrote:
> What should happen when an insurance company is guilty of fraud or
> bad-faith business practices?
> On 8/25/10, Worker Comp Insu Adjuster wrote:
>> On 8/25/10, Rem Dude wrote:
>>> This is exactly why the mold jihadists have become such
>>> laughing-stock; all hyped up on hysteria and not an ounce of
>>> Never a dull moment.
>> Workers Comp Insurance is no fault Insurance and filing a
>> complaint won't help at all. Calif does not have the rights to
>> tell an insurance company in any case anything; The workers
>> must prove the exposure and if no exposure exists or if ther is
>> no proof to injury they and the judges do not have to find for
>> the complainer. This type of activity is exactly what make this
>> group look bad . They do not use the common sense required to
>> evaluate an exposure. You CAN Complain AND Spend the rest of
>> your life pitching a B but the insurance company still has the
>> right to deny a claim if it is proved that the claim is
>> fradulent on any level and that includes proving that the
>> exposure never took place and as they say jUDGES ARE gOD and
>> that is why they set up on a bench and wear robes. No proof no
>> liability and judges just go9 with waht evidence is provided by
>> the persons and attys in their courtroom. all you all are doing
>> is spinning your wheels and in the end the Freedom to evaluate
>> and pay a claimis still the insurance company's choice In
>> addition most employee's fail to understand that the funds a wc
>> pays out are based on their pay at the time of Injury , WC is
>> not a way to get rrich and people who get hurt need to understnd
>> the care is in relationship to the levelof pay they were getting
>> at the time of Injury.
>>> On 8/24/10, Mike B. wrote:
>>>> On 8/24/10, Sharon Kramer wrote:
>>>>> Dear All,
>>>>> I am filing a criminal complaint with the San Diego DA's
>>>>> office tomorrow against Bruce Kelman and his attorney,
>>>>> Keith Scheuer, for criminal perjury and suborning of
>>>>> criminal perjury when strategically litigating and
>>>>> attempting to silence me of an interstate insurance fraud
>>>>> Am also filing a complaint for judicial bias against 10
>>>>> Diego judges and justices for failure to stop criminal
>>>>> activity in a litigation, aiding and abetting the
>>>>> fraud to continue. And then I am going to talk about it in
>>>>> a press conference.
>>>> That's hilarious.
Posts on this thread, including this one