Claim Number 55-06c6-44x BREAKING SILENCE WHEN HAVING A VALID ARGUMENT DATED 14NOV20

NOVEMBER 14, 2020 LOUIS E. GUENIOT TEAM MANAGER 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 SILENCE IS CONSENT STATE FARM EVIDENCE OF BREAKING SILENCE WHEN HAVING A VALID ARGUMENT DATED 13NOV20 4:00PM MR. GUENIOT, YOU  HAVE FALLEN TO A TRAP. YOU DO NOT KEEP SILENT IF YOU HAVE A VALID ARGUMENT. AND CONVERSELY, YOU KEEP SILENT WHEN YOU DO NOT HAVE ANY. Dear Messrs Gueniot and Liu: PLEASE SEE, As Mr. Gueniot responded to email as shown next: Claim Number 55-06c6-44x INAPPROPRIATE RESPONSE 53 DATED 13NOV20 3:43PM  IT IS TWO YEARS, MR. GUENIOT, NOT ONE YEAR. DESPITE HAVING BEEN DISCOVERED AND INFORMED YOU, YOU KEPT ON CONTINUING YOUR ACTS OF MISREPRESENTATION. THIS IS DELIBERATE, INTENTIONAL, BLAMEWORTHY, SHAMEFUL ACT OF MISREPRESENTATION, A GRAVE DISPLAY OF BAD FAITH. I would want to express my profound gratitude for your quick response in a matter of just seventeen (17) minutes. Thank you Mr. Gueniot. HOWEVER, I AM SORRY MR. GUENIOT TO INFORM YOU, THAT YOU HAVE FALLEN TO A TRAP, THIS EVENT PROFOUNDLY SHOW  THAT YOU DO NOT HAVE VALID ARGUMENTS  TO SUPPORT YOUR DENIALS AND ASSERTIONS AS THEY REMAINED UNSUBSTANTIATED FOR  LAST SIX (6) MONTHS, UNLIKE ON THE "ONE YEAR SUIT AGAINST US". MEANING, BECAUSE IF YOU HAVE, YOU WOULD HAVE WRITTEN IT WITHIN A FEW MINUTES. YOU DO NOT KEEP  SILENT IF YOU HAVE A VALID ARGUMENT. AND CONVERSELY, YOU KEEP SILENT WHEN YOU DO NOT HAVE ANY, EFFECTIVELY SHOWING YOUR IMPLIED SUBTLE ADMISSION THAT WHEN YOU DO NOT RESPOND YOU HAVE NOTHING SENSIBLE TO SAY.  FROM NOW ON,  YOUR SILENCE MEANS CONSENT BECAUSE YOU DO NOT HAVE ANY SOUND ARGUMENT TO RESPOND OTHERWISE. Please acknowledge receipt of this e-mail.  PLEASE RESTRICT ISSUES WITHIN THE CONTEXT OF THE SUBJECT MATTER TO AVOID INAPPROPRIATENESS AND CONFUSION. Please be reminded that your DENIAL LETTER DATED MAY 6, 2020 was prepared, relayed to us, sent and read by us in just a few minutes though eventually proven to be maliciously defective. Thank you very much. Yours faithfully, Antonio L. Buensuceso

STATE FARM EVIDENCE OF BREAKING SILENCE WHEN HAVING A VALID ARGUMENT DATED 13NOV20 4:00PM

EVIDENCE OF BREAKING SILENCE  WHEN IN POSSESSION OF A VALID ARGUMENT RESPONSE TO EMAIL: Claim Number 55-06c6-44x INAPPROPRIATE RESPONSE 53 DATED 13NOV20 3:43PM  IT IS TWO YEARS, MR. GUENIOT, NOT ONE YEAR. DESPITE HAVING BEEN DISCOVERED AND INFORMED YOU, YOU KEPT ON CONTINUING YOUR ACTS OF MISREPRESENTATION. THIS IS DELIBERATE, INTENTIONAL, BLAMEWORTHY, SHAMEFUL ACT OF MISREPRESENTATION, A GRAVE DISPLAY OF BAD FAITH. CLEARER READING BELOW OF THE EMAIL SCREENSHOT ABOVE: Dear Mr. Buensuceso,   I’m writing to acknowledge receipt of the email below.   There was no state of emergency, as defined in subdivision (b) of Section 8558 of the Government Code, that caused the water leak related to this claim.  Therefore, endorsement FE-1386 does not apply to this loss.  The time period stated in the Condominium Unitowners Policy, Form FP-7956-CA that was included in our May 6, 2020 letter applies.   This claim file remains closed.  Our position as communicated in our letters and responsive emails are unchanged.  All conditions previously quoted still apply.    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, Claims Service Bureau, 300 South Spring Street, Los Angeles, California 90013, telephone 800 927 4357.   The one year “Suit Against Us” time period referred to in the May 6, 2020 letter includes the time period from the date of loss (April 26, 2020) to the date the claim was reported to State Farm (April 29, 2020).  The one year time period was tolled during our investigation of this claim (April 29, 2020) to the date the claim was initially denied (May 6, 2020).  The one year time period was tolled upon receipt of Antonio Buensuceso Jr.’s email dated May 29, 2020 for additional investigation until the date the denial of the claim was confirm in our June 12, 2020 letter.  That one year time period continues to run as of the date of our June 12, 2020 letter.     Your email contains allegations of misconduct. All such contentions are denied. You should not interpret our silence as any agreement with you, or any waiver of our rights under the policy or law.  We reserve all rights under the policy and the law.    Sincerely,   Louis       Louis E Gueniot III Claim Team Manager State Farm General Insurance Company MR. GUENIOT  WROTE IN A VERY QUICK RESPONSE, SPECIFICALLY: "There was no state of emergency, as defined in subdivision (b) of Section 8558 of the Government Code, that caused the water leak related to this claim.  Therefore, endorsement FE-1386 does not apply to this loss.  The time period stated in the Condominium Unitowners Policy, Form FP-7956-CA that was included in our May 6, 2020 letter applies." PROBABLY AS A VALID ARGUMENT TO RETAIN  THIS NOTICE: The one year “Suit Against Us” time period referred to in the May 6, 2020 letter includes the time period from the date of loss (April 26, 2020) to the date the claim was reported to State Farm (April 29, 2020).  The one year time period was tolled during our investigation of this claim (April 29, 2020) to the date the claim was initially denied (May 6, 2020).  The one year time period was tolled upon receipt of Antonio Buensuceso Jr.’s email dated May 29, 2020 for additional investigation until the date the denial of the claim was confirm in our June 12, 2020 letter.  That one year time period continues to run as of the date of our June 12, 2020 letter.   HOWEVER,  I AM SORRY MR. GUENIOT TO INFORM  YOU, THAT YOU MIGHT HAVE FALLEN TO A TRAP,     THIS EVENT PROFOUNDLY SHOW  THAT YOU DO  NOT HAVE VALID ARGUMENTS  TO SUPPORT YOUR  DENIALS AND ASSERTIONS AS THEY REMAINED  UNSUBSTANTIATED FOR  LAST SIX (6) MONTHS,  UNLIKE ON THE "ONE YEAR SUIT AGAINST US". MEANING, YOU DO NOT KEEP  SILENT IF YOU HAVE A VALID ARGUMENT. AND CONVERSELY, YOU KEEP  SILENT WHEN YOU DO NOT HAVE ANY, EFFECTIVELY  MAKING YOUR LAST PARAGRAPH INVALID AS YOU  HAVE  NOT SHOWN ANY CONVINCING ARGUMENT TO  SUPPORT IT. THEREFORE, FROM NOW ON,  YOUR  SILENCE IS CONSENT AND YOU DO NOT HAVE ANY  SOUND ARGUMENT TO RESPOND OTHERWISE.