Subject: Today's talk with UNUM's attorney

Nov. 24, 1998: Well, I called and left a few messages on Pat Peard's
answering machines telling her that failure to comply with the Court Rules
to avoid unnecessary costs would be viewed as Bad Faith.  When I called
back again to tell her that I HAD recieved the waivers from some
defendants, she answered the phone and said she wanted to tell me why she
wasn't returning the Waiver of Service forms but wouldn't do it with the
tape recorder running.

So I called her back again and had Jack listening.  Here's what she said:
First she said none of our phone conversation would be admissable in court

(Well what's to prevent them from threatening me or trying to intimidate me
over the phone if that were true?)

She tried to claim that our phone conversations have nothing to do with the
case. (I'd like to argue that EVERYTHING that transpires here IS relevant).

She claimed that she had just mailed me a letter telling me that she was
not going to try to drive up my costs by making me re-serve the lawsuits (I
not recieved such a letter yet).

She said she had gotten permission from the Court Clerk to submit a letter
to the clerk admitting which parties they are accepting service for.  She said
this would be done before Thanksgiving.

She claimed she is "not required" to return the Waiver of Service forms in
the stamped self-addressed return envelopes I had sent with the lawsuits.

She claims they have no intention of forcing me to re-serve on people on
"whom process has been properly effected."

Then I asked her again why she couldn't just say that with the tape
recorder running. She started claiming that she was going to deal with me
"in good faith"  apparently in an attempt to get me to trust her.

She said she didn't plan to record me either.
When I told her I'd been followed by investigators who had recorded me, she
goes on the defensive, like, well "they might have done that but I didn't
do that to you"  She said she's read my case and understands my position
(but doesn't seen to understand why I'm not going to trust her just because
she tells me she's going to deal with me in good faith and why I want tape

She claims that if I "followed proper procedure" than the names will appear on
list she is having filed with the court.

After this I called and spoke with the Court Clerk she had mentioned.  It
is his understanding that their attorney will be filing some kind of a
paper accepting service of the lawsuit for certain defendants but only the
judge can decide if this is adequate acceptance in lieu of returning the
signed waivers.

At any rate, there are still several days left before the deadline.
But it will be nice not to have to bear the expense and aggravation of
serving lawsuits on all the Portland defendants, even if I still have to
worry about the rest.

It really bothers me that she expects me to trust her after having read
that lawsuit and knowing that her job is to defend them.  I wonder what she
would do in my shoes. Refusing to allow me to tape record her is certainly
NOT the way to gain my trust.

Have a Happy Thanksgiving everybody. 

Top of Page

Judydoc's Home Page

Insurance Page

Uncivilization and its Discontents

Home Page

Email Judy Morris
at: judydoc AT the-spa DOT com

Email me, Bill Hammel
at: bhammel AT graham DOT main DOT nc DOT us

The URL for this document is:
Created: November 25, 1998
Last Updated: May 28, 2000