    
|
920counts
SEE BELOW FOR THE 920TH 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
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.
|
 |
 
CLEARER READING BELOW OF THE EMAIL SCREENSHOT ABOVE
Dear Mr. Buensuceso,
I’m writing to acknowledge receipt of your email below.
I regret coverage is not available for this loss.
This claim file remains closed. Our position as communicated in our letters dated May 6, 2020, June 12, 2020, July 13, 2020, July 17, 2020 and July 31, 2020 are unchanged. We have done our best to answer your questions and provide a reasonable explanation for the basis of the denial of the claim based on the policy language. This claim has been denied as explained in our letters and responsive emails and the file remains closed. All conditions previously quoted still apply.
State Farm previously responded to your emails that contained allegations of misconduct by Claim Specialist Gordon Liu, State Farm and me. Your email contains allegations of misconduct by me. All such contentions are denied. We handle each claim on its own merits. State Farm, Claim Specialist Gordon Liu and I have complied with the implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing in the investigation and handling of this claim.
Your emails have become harassing and I respectfully request you cease.
In the future, State Farm will no longer respond to your emails which do not provide any new information for us to evaluate on this claim. 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 such rights in the past, present, and future. If you send in new information that warrants consideration, then we would provide you a substantive response.
If you believe this claim has been wrongfully denied, you may contact the California Department of Insurance for assistance.
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.
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.
Sincerely,
Louis
Louis E Gueniot III
Claim Team Manager State Farm General Insurance Company
|
AUGUST 28, 2020 LOUIS E. GUENIOT TEAM MANAGER CLAIM SPECIALIST
STATE FARM HOME INSURANCE
RE: Claim Number 55-06c6-44x
Policy Number 77-C3-B499-7
DATE OF LOSS: April 26, 2020
INAPPROPRIATE RESPONSES 9/10/11/12
REPEATED MISCONDUCTS
FROM
INAPPROPRIATE RESPONSES 1 TO 8
BEING NOT DISPUTED, OBJECTED AND HABITUALLY REPEATED WITH IMPUNITY. HENCE, PROVEN TO BE INTENTIONAL, DELIBERATE, MALICIOUS, WILLFUL, WANTON, OPPRESSIVE AND OUTRAGEOUS
Dear Messrs Gueniot and Liu: PLEASE SEE, As Mr. Gueniot responded to emails: 1. INAPPROPRIATE RESPONSE 9  
INAPPROPRIATE RESPONSE 9
REPEATED MISCONDUCT 3 TIMES
FROM
INAPPROPRIATE RESPONSE 1, 5
2. INAPPROPRIATE RESPONSE 10  
INAPPROPRIATE RESPONSE 10
REPEATED MISCONDUCT 3 TIMES
FROM
INAPPROPRIATE RESPONSES 2, 6
3. INAPPROPRIATE RESPONSE 11
 
INAPPROPRIATE RESPONSE 11
REPEATED MISCONDUCT 3 TIMES
FROM
INAPPROPRIATE RESPONSES 3, 7
4. INAPPROPRIATE RESPONSE 12
 
INAPPROPRIATE RESPONSE 12
REPEATED MISCONDUCT 3 TIMES
FROM
INAPPROPRIATE RESPONSES 4, 8
THESE MISCONDUCTS ON INAPPROPRIATE RESPONSES SEALED MY EVIDENCES AGAINST MR. GUENIOT BEING NOT DISPUTED, OBJECTED AND HABITUALLY REPEATED WITH IMPUNITY. HENCE, PROVEN TO BE INTENTIONAL, DELIBERATE, MALICIOUS, WILLFUL, WANTON, OPPRESSIVE AND OUTRAGEOUS PURPOSELY TO DERAIL THE NEGOTIATION PROCESS AND FARTHER DELAY PAYING MY LEGITIMATE INSURANCE CLAIM, A VIOLATION OF THE IMPLIED COVENANT OF GOOD FAITH AND FAIR DEALING BETWEEN US.
Please acknowledge receipt of this e-mail and kindly inform me when I should expect a reply to this email.
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. Thank you very much for your quick reply. Yours faithfully, Antonio L. Buensuceso |
MY QUEST FOR SWINDLED
RETIREMENT PAY BY SHELL
 
SWINDLING ITO, SYNDICATED ESTAFA
HOT PURSUIT
DUTY OF LAW ENFORCEMENT ENTITIES
SHELL SWINDLING OF RETIREMENT PAY 5TH YEAR
|
;
