Claim Number 55-06c6-44x ACKNOWLEDGMENT OF EMAIL RECEIPT WITH CORRESPONDING MESSAGE WHEN TO EXPECT A REPLY TO IT- DISCUSSION IN RELATION TO BAD FAITH

JULY 30, 2020 GORDON LIU CLAIM SPECIALIST STATE FARM HOME INSURANCE RE: Claim Number 55-06c6-44x        Policy Number 77-C3-B499-7 DATE OF LOSS: April 26, 2020 ACKNOWLEDGMENT OF EMAIL RECEIPT  WITH CORRESPONDING MESSAGE WHEN TO EXPECT A REPLY TO IT- DISCUSSION IN RELATION TO BAD FAITH Dear Mr. Liu: YOU WROTE,  "Enclosed is a copy of our response letter dated July 17, 2020 which is in response to your July 14, 2020 E-Mail to us." THIS MEANS, You already had the copy of this letter dated July 17, 2020 in your possession since July 17, 2020, and therefore in order not to delay the negotiations by 12 long days, you should have attached your letter dated July 17, 2020 to an email which you have sent me that date.  You deliberately and intentionally wasted 12 days.This is bad faith. Pardon me please, but as I see it, again, you are intentionally and deliberately imposing delay in the proceedings. As I read your letter dated July 17, 2020 it is just one-page document being on the second page are your signature and personal circumstances only. Having that said, you, a claim specialist for 26 long years of experience writing a one-page letter in a matter of 4 long days from July 14, 15, 16 and 17, if not imposing questionable delay in the proceedings is tantamount to deliberate negligence on your part. It is worthwhile to remind you in your  5-PAGE denial letter dated May 6, 2020 you are so QUICK that you consume just a few minutes to send it to us. But this time you did not.  I am perplexed. This is not fair.  This is absolutely bad faith. YOU WROTE, PAR. 2  "As discussed, State Farm has considered all of the facts related to your claim as presented and no new information has been received in relation to your claim. Therefore, our position regarding the coverage of the claim as communicated in our original corresondence of May 6, 2020 and July 13, 2020 remain unchanged." THIS MEANS, Despite the fact that you saw VIDEO 6, showing the pipe break on the hot water line and the collaborative information from First American that Titouah is only authorized to access the pipe encased in the slab and repair pipe and not pipe leaking under the foundation among several other evidences proving fraud of your sourceTitouah, YOU ARE STILL COMMENTING THAT YOU HAVE NOT RECEIVED NEW INFORMATION and there you are still adapting TITOUAH'S fraudulent statements hook sinker and line three times.  This is deliberate and intentional distortion facts supported by clear and convincing evidences showing dishonesty and partiality in the conduct of the investigation and therefore, a violation of the covenant of good faith and fair dealing between us. THIS IS ABSOLUTELY BAD FAITH. YOU WROTE, PAR. 3 "In response to your request for our correspondences to be re-organized and re-written, we respectully respond that we will not. Please refer to the May 6, 2020 correspondence and specifically the one year suit against the company paragraph. The one year cited begins to run again as of the date of this letter." THIS MEANS, There is no intention on your part to clarify issues out so that our discussion may proceed to an organized manner to avoid confusion. But as you said in unequivocal terms that you will not re-organize and rewrite the third denial letter dated July 13, 2020 lead me to believe that you deliberately and intentionally sow confusion and vague information into it to avoid clarity purposely to delay the negotiations to our disadvantage. Like for example this time, YOU WROTE, "Please refer to the May 6, 2020 correspondence and specifically the one year suit against the company paragraph. The one year cited begins to run again as of the date of this letter." Which date are you referring to, is it May 6, 2020 or July 13, 2020? There is no doubt your effort to deceive and confuse us is intentional and deliberate. THIS IS ABSOLUTELY BAD FAITH. YOU WROTE, PAR. 3 "We are required by California Insurance Regulations, Section 2695.7(b)(3), to advise you that if you believe this claim, or any part of this claim, has been wrongfully denied or rejected, you may have the matter reviewed by the California Department of Insurance, Claim Service Bureau, 300 South Spring Street, Los Angeles, California 90013, telephone 800 927 4357." THIS MEANS, You are giving me information which you have relayed to me several times.  This is deliberate waste of time and effort. Time and effort which should have allocated to answering questions pertinent to my claim which you are deliberately and negligently ignoring to answer.  Like for example, among others, I am asking you to send me virtual presentation and statements by Titouah several times which you rely on as basis for the denial letter May 6, 2020 in particular but you ignore to send me one. Worse, you did not even told me reasons why you are refusing to send it to me. This is intentional and deliberate imposition of delay in the negotiation and unwillingness to cooperate and suppression of release of valuable factual information leading to the failure to have a smooth  and fair resolution of our claim.  THIS IS ABSOLUTELY BAD FAITH. PLEASE BEWARE THAT THERE EXIST AN IMPLIED COVENANT OF GOOD FAITH AND FAIR DEALING BETWEEN US. Yours faithfully, Antonio L. Buensuceso

755TH PERSUASIVE APPEAL_30JULY19_TO THE SCP JUSTICIDES_ PROFITEERS MODEL SHELL GETS JOB DONE THROUGH COVERT SLAVE WAGES

1 CERTIFICATE OF SEPARATION FROM LAST EMPLOYER COMPLAINT 2.  MY QUEST FOR SWINDLED  RETIREMENT PAY BY SHELL SWINDLING ITO, SYNDICATED ESTAFA HOT PURSUIT DUTY OF LAW ENFORCEMENT ENTITIES 900counts SEE BELOW FOR THE 900TH    TIME THE REITERATION OF DEMAND PAYMENT OF RETIREMENT PAY WHICH SHELL REFUSED TO HONOR IN THE PRESENCE AND DEEMED APPROVAL OF THE HONORABLE MAGISTRATES OF THE SUPREME COURT OF THE PHILIPPINES GEUS_15MAR16_66th FOLLOW UP_REITERATION OF DEMAND  PAYMENT OF RETIREMENT PAY Dishonest scales are an abomination to the Lord, but a just weight is His delight... Proverbs Chapter 11  v. 1 Retirement Pay Law circumvented by Shell subject to penal provision provided for by Article 288 of the Labor Code of the Philippines.