April 17, 2009

735 West Diversey Parkway

Chicago, Illinois 60614

Mr. O’Brien:

On April 15, 2009 I met with a team of Lakeview Nursing and Rehabilitation Centre, Inc. (Lakeview) “professionals” who profess to be involved with the services being rendered to my uncle Eddie Nance (Eddie) at Lakeview. I asked for this meeting because I was left out of Eddie’s Quarterly Care Plan process, which I had asked to be in attendance.

I asked these individuals to identify who they are and the service or department they represent at Lakeview. These individuals are: Mavis (Restorative), Carlos (Activities), Ruth (Dietary), Lois (Nursing), David (Social Services), Ann (Social Services), Angel (Minimum Data Set (M.D.S.)) and Sylvia (M.D.S.). I am writing this letter because I left a voice mail for you on April 17, 2009 and did not get a return phone call about my issues and complaint about this “Care Plan” process on April 17, 2009. I am also writing this letter because of the humiliation I suffered due to Carlos’ harassing and intimidating statements to me. Here is a brief account/summary of my experience.

Someone from this group ask me why I requested this meeting. I informed them I wanted to be part of Eddie’s Quarterly Care Plan process. I informed them that I attended Eddie’s Care Plan early in the year (January 2009), and that I should have been invited to the Care Plan meeting in March 2009. I informed them I requested in January 2009 to be part of this process. I informed them that I have been working in social services for nearly 15 years, and that I wanted to be part of this process because I did not want Eddie to suffer any negligence during his stay at Lakeview.

Someone from this group ask me if there were any issues I wanted to discuss. I informed them I wanted to talk about Eddie’s hygiene, diet and clothing. I informed them of Eddie’s most recent visit to his dentist office. I informed them that Eddie was dressed in dirty clothing that was not part of the clothing I bought for him to wear. The clothing Eddie had on did not belong to him. I informed them that the dentist told me that Eddie’s mouth was not healing because he was not taking his dentures out of his mouth when sleeping, and that I should tell the nursing home to assure Eddie takes his dentures out at night, which I did the very first day Eddie received his dentures. I informed them that during my visit today that Eddie’s room was dirty and that saliva was all over the floor, where I had to engage some personnel to clean it up. I began telling them how this type of service was not going to be tolerated, and that Eddie had family who were concerned about him. I informed them that from my social service experience people are not necessarily neglected by employees on purpose. I informed them that many patients/clients are not exposed to neglect when staff know family or friends are actively involved in the patient/client’s human and social experience.

As this staff and I discussed my issues and I would not let this staff blame the dentist for Eddie’s dentistry issues, staff person Carlos told me I did not have to get defensive. I resented this statement and began informing this staff of their responsibility to provide comprehensive and optimal service to Eddie. Staff person Lois wanted to know why Eddie was getting dentistry service outside of Lakeview’s dentist program. I informed her that I pursued dentistry for Eddie from his beginning presence in Lakeview, which was May of 2008 through December 2008. I informed staff person Lois that I asked Lakeview Social Service person David in May of 2008 to schedule an appointment for Eddie with a dentist. The reason I asked David to schedule a dentist appointment for Eddie is because David informed me that Lakeview has a dentist program for its patients. After waiting over 6 months for a dentist appointment for Eddie, I decided to locate and schedule Eddie a dentist appointment. Eddie now has dentures. Staff person Lois looked at staff person David who was responsible for this service. Staff person David gave no response.

Staff person Carlos began asking Eddie if he wanted me present during his Care Plan meetings. Eddie nodded his head yes because Eddie cannot speak English fluently due to his stroke. As I continued arguing my issues of neglect by Lakeview staff, staff person Carlos periodically and intentionally continued asking Eddie if he wanted me present during his Care Plan process. Eddie nodded his head yes. I informed staff person Carlos that I was going to be part of Eddie’s Care Plan process whether Eddie wanted me or not because Eddie had no idea of what was going on with his services at Lakeview and Eddie did not know what kind of service to expect from Lakeview. Staff person Carlos again told me I should not get so defensive.

Eddie’s stroke affected his speech and left arm. Due to my limited medical experience, I do not know or understand other effects the stroke may have on Eddie. Eddie cannot speak words that are understandable. I thought that if Eddie had teeth in his mouth, it might assist in the re-development of speech. Eddie was receiving speech therapy at Lakeview. Eddie’s speech therapy was stopped. I was told by some “professionals” at Lakeview during Eddie’s January quarterly care plan that the speech therapy was to assist Eddie in swallowing his food. I was told that once Eddie was able to swallow his food without choking, his speech therapy would be stopped because his insurance would only pay for a particular period of time for the development of speech for a stroke victim. I was also provided another explanation. I was told that Eddie’s speech therapy would not help him speak again because if he was going to be able to speak after a stroke he would have started speaking by now. Empirical and statistical data does not support this prognosis.

This is what I have done for Eddie since I have been engaged in his services due to his stroke:

I had to engage and obtain Eddie’s Medicaid status with the State of Illinois’ Department of Human Services. As of August 27, 2008 Eddie’s Medical Assistance was approved. This approval was supplemented with medical eligibility back-dating to February of 2008, which covered his Warren Barr Pavilion experience/cost also. This should have been navigated and facilitated by Lakeview nursing home or his initial nursing home (Warren Barr Pavilion on Oak Street, Chicago Illinois) and/or the Veterans Administration (VA) on Taylor Street in Chicago, Illinois when they knew they would not be paying for Eddie’s medical bills due to his stroke. Eddie was in a real war. Eddie was in World War II. Eddie’s brother Otha reports the VA told him that Eddie had to go to a nursing home because his illness was not serious enough to acquire a bed.

I have bought clothing, labeled it and documented it in Eddie’s Lakeview file. I bought enough clothing for Eddie where he did not have to clothe in other people’s clothing. Eddie has had many appointments with the dentist. I have met Eddie at every one his dentist appointments. This is where I have seen Eddie with other people’s clothing on. Not only did Eddie have other people’s clothing on, the clothing was dirty and smelled. When I met Eddie for his dentist appointment on April 9, 2009 I reported to you by phone message and through a return call you initiated to me that Eddie’s right shoe had dried food on it, and that Eddie was wearing other people’s clothing that was dirty and smelled.

I decided to write this letter and post it on my blogs because of how I felt humiliated and embarrassed by the harassing remarks of Carlos, your Activities employee. He gave my service in the field, my credentials and professionalism no respect. Discussing this on April 15, 2009 with your team of “professionals” was too much for Carlos. All he could think to say is I am being “defensive” for addressing these issues. Carlos was not going to let the staff of Lakeview take any responsibility for their acts of negligence. It appears that Carlos was attempting to deny me access to Eddie’s Care Plan process, thus shutting down any possible future analysis of service at Lakeview. At one point, I had to explain to your staff that I have been involved with personal litigation as I ask them to stop asking Eddie leading questions to get answers that would invalidate my issues and their neglect. I ask your “professionals” to ask Eddie questions that would elicit Eddie’s answer, not the answers they desire. I informed them that we were seeking the truth, not protection for Lakeview. I informed them that we are humans and we make mistakes. I informed them that making mistakes is common. I informed them that I requested this meeting to stop the mistakes, not to blame someone for error.

Lois and Sylvia were the most responsible staff you had at the table on April 15, 2009. The others seemed irritated with my discussion of their responsibility to the residents of Lakeview and their families. There was talk by this team of “professionals” and yourself of the re-organization of Lakeview. This supports my report. If it were not broken, you would not be fixing it.

Sir, your staff never talked about what was discussed and agreed upon when they held Eddie’s quarterly care plan where I was excluded. This is why I requested the meeting. What does this tell you about your staff? This meeting was not supposed to be about the issues I present here. It was supposed to be about the ongoing “professional” care of Eddie, and how is that being demonstrated, facilitated and generated in his care plan for this quarter. WE never reached this objective. Your staff resented my presence and request. This was demonstrated by their behaviors.

Respectfully submitted,

Fred Nance Jr., ABD, MA, CADC, NCRS

http://clickforjusticeandequality.blogspot.com/

http://clickforjusticeandequality.wordpress.com/

http://click.townhall.com/

http://www.frednance.newsvine.com/

Re:         Eddie Nance – Patient

Mr. Elks:

On December 17, 2008 LPN nurse Ms. Marie called informing me my uncle Eddie Nance (Uncle) was scheduled to see dentist Dr. Horace Broy on December 23, 2008 at 8:30 am. Ms. Marie requested I accompany my uncle due to lack of personnel for transportation trips from Lakeview Nursing and Rehabilitation Centre, Inc. (Lakeview).  At approximately 8:15 am, I arrived at Dr. Broy’s dentistry office.

At approximately 8:20 am, I received a call from Ms. Marie stating my uncle would not be coming to his dentist appointment because there was no transportation for him. No one from Lakeview called Dr. Broy’s office informing them that my uncle was not going to be present for his dentist appointment. I informed Dr. Broy’s assistant that my uncle was not coming in for his dentist appointment.

 Ms. Marie informed me that Lakeview had engaged the transportation services of Lakeshore Medicar (Lakeshore), located at 2640 West Touhy Ave., Chicago, Illinois 60645. Ms. Marie informed me Lakeshore stated that taking my uncle to Dr. Broy’s office was “too far to go”. Mapquest reports this trip would be 11.24 miles and approximately 22 minutes travel time.

I called Lakeshore. I spoke to a person who informed me he was one of the owners. His name is Jimmy Syfu. Mr. Syfu informed me he received a fax from Lakeview reporting the pick-up for my uncle was 7:30 pm on December 23, 2008. Mr. Syfu states he immediately called Lakeview upon receiving this fax to inform them that Lakeshore closed at 6:00 pm, and that they could not fulfill the duties of picking my uncle up at this time. Mr. Syfu faxed me the document Lakeview sent to him. The document faxed to me from Ms. Syfu has the date December 22, 2008, 3:17P, Lakeview Nursin next to a schedule of names. My uncle’s name is on this schedule for pick-up on December 23, 2008 at 07:30 PM. The pick-up time should have been 7:30 am. Either Lakeview or Lakeshore should have been thinking “outside of the box” on this matter. It was not rocket science. It is a matter of discernment. It appears that no one cared.

I talked to Mr. Syfu who reports calling Lakeview on December 22, 2008 at approximately 2:26 pm asking for Lily Gonzalez. Ms. Gonzalez works for Lakeview.  Mr. Syfu informed me he was told that Ms. Gonzalez was gone for the day. Mr. Syfu states he talked to the afternoon office manager informing them that picking up my uncle at 7:30 pm was too late because their business is closed at that time. No one called Mr. Syfu informing him that the pick-up time on the fax he received from Lakeview had the wrong time on it. I asked Mr. Syfu if he could pick-up my uncle since he knows what is needed. Mr. Syfu informed me that due to scheduling he had no drivers for the pick-up on December 23, 2008.

I talked to Ms. Gonzalez on December 23, 2008 at approximately 8:35 am. She reports calling Lakeshore on December 23, 2008 asking them why they did not call her this morning. Ms. Gonzalez informed me it was “just a mistake.” I talked to Ms. Marie at approximately 8:40 am. Ms. Marie informed me she does not do transportation. Ms. Marie states one of her duties is that she schedules appointments for patient transportation and passes it on to the transportation department of Lakeview. On December 3, 2008 I met the manager for the transportation department. Her name is Maricel. I talked to Ms. Maricel on December 3, 2008 informing her my uncle needed transportation to his dentist appointment. I gave her the address to the dentist. Ms. Maricel informed me there would be no problem. Ms. Maricel stated that she only needed to know the appointment date and location. I have been told by Lakeview staff that Ms. Maricel is presently on vacation.

At approximately 8:50 am, I called Ms. Kathy Koenig, Lakeview’s Director of Nursing. I left a message on her answering machine requesting she call me about this issue. As of December 23, 2008 at 11:25 am, I have not received a call from her. I guess this issue is not important to her.

At approximately 9:00 am I received a call from Ms. Marie. She stated that Lakeshore had agreed to come and pick-up my uncle and take him to the dentist. I requested Ms. Marie to call the dentist to see if my uncle can still come for his dentistry needs. Ms. Marie called me back informing me my uncle would have to reschedule his appointment. Ms. Marie reports she rescheduled my uncle’s dentist appointment for December 30, 2008 at 10:00 am.

My uncle is 85-years-old. My uncle was transferred from Warren Barr Pavilion (Warren Barr), located at 66 West Oak Street, Chicago, Illinois 60610, on or about May 21, 2008 to Lakeview. Since May of 2008 I have been requesting dentistry needs for my uncle. Lakeview personnel have told me numerous times that he would be scheduled for his dentistry work. My uncle was never scheduled for dentistry work by Lakeview.

On December 3, 2008 at my uncle’s quarterly care plan meeting I informed Angela Vetrovic, David Barecki and Ann O’Donnell that I would schedule a dentistry appointment for my uncle with a dentist I know, which was Dr. Broy. Dr. Broy’s office called Lakeview. Lakeview, in turn, called Dr. Broy and scheduled December 23, 2008 at 8:30 am.

I want to suggest my uncle’s dentistry needs were not taken care of in May of 2008 because his financial base and nursing home payment had not been established. When my uncle was transferred from the VA hospital to Warren Barr then to Lakeview he did not have his Medicaid application filed or confirmed. The VA, Warren Barr and Lakeview knew my uncle received VA benefits totaling $680.00 and a form of Social Security with the acronym RSDI totaling $251.00. Since none of these entities took time to establish the relationship needed with Medicaid for payment of services for my uncle, I took the initiative upon my uncle entering Lakeview to establish a relationship with the State of Illinois, Department of Human Services (DHS). Even with my 14 years of social service work, this was a tedious task. On August 27, 2008 I received notice in the mail that my uncle had been approved for medical assistance.

In or about January of 2008 when my uncle was admitted to the VA hospital located at 2122 West Taylor Street, Chicago, Illinois 60612 due to complications from a stroke that has affected the right side of his body, the VA did not file an application for medical services with DHS. Warren Barr did not file an application for medical services with DHS when my uncle was transferred to their facility. For reasons unknown to me, the VA hospital put my uncle out and sent him to Warren Barr. Today, my uncle does not have movement of his right hand or right arm and he cannot speak, but Lakeview has stopped his speech therapy reporting there is no more they can do for him. I asked for documentation reporting this prognosis. Lakeview has suggested I call my uncle’s doctor to get this report. This is absurd.

If my uncle’s speech therapy has stopped because there is nothing more that can be done, it should be noted in his medical file. There is much more to tell, but I will not do it here. It may cloud the present issue of dentistry work and “real” speech therapy. I was told the speech therapy my uncle has received from Lakeview was concentrated on clearing his throat so he could reach his potential for “swallowing” food and liquids. This is ludicrous. On December 3, 2008 I requested speech therapy for developing speech patterns. I suggested at this meeting that my uncle’s dental issue may be a contributing factor to speech improvement.

Therefore, I am requesting Lakeview respond to the needs of my uncle in a timely and orderly fashion. I request appropriate action plans for assuring my uncle will not miss his scheduled appointments. I request my uncle’s doctor contact me about my uncle’s speech therapy and overall prognosis. Since I have not had appropriate attention to my uncle’s needs and communication from management regarding my issues, I am posting this writing on my blogs at http://clickforjusticeandequality2.blogspot.com/, http://clickforjusticeandequality.wordpress.com/, http://click.townhall.com/, and http://www.frednance.newsvine.com/.  I will fax this correspondence to the Director of Nursing, Ms. Kathy Koenig; to Administrator Mr. Michael Elks; and to Lakeshore’s Mr. Jimmy Syfu.

I hope my uncle is not retaliated against by any entity listed here. If there are retaliatory acts of character and behavior from any entity, I will address them in the appropriate venue.

Respectfully submitted,

Fred Nance Jr., ABD, MA, CADC, NCRS

Re:       Nance v Westcare Foundation, Inc., Control No. 090714051

            Nance v State of Illinois Department of Corrections, Control No. 090714051

Mr. Roeser:

On July 17, 2008 I received correspondence from the Illinois Department of Human Rights stating “The United States Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) and the Illinois Department of Human Rights (Department) are parties to a cooperative agreement. Under this agreement, when you filed your charge of discrimination with the EEOC it was automatically filed with the Department. The Department is keeping a copy of your EEOC charge on file to preserve jurisdiction under Illinois law. This letter is to inform you that you may proceed with your charge at the Department. This does not affect the processing of your charge at EEOC. If you wish to proceed with the Department, you must notify the Department in writing of your decision, either by mail or in person, within 35 days of receipt of this letter. Please include the Control Number indicated above on the letter you send to the Department regarding this charge…As stated above, this letter does not affect the processing of your charge at the EEOC, and does not apply to any settlement of this charge the parties have made with the EEOC.”

On or about July 21, 2008 I will submit this letter/correspondence requesting to proceed with my charge at the Department, as long as it does not negate the processing or jurisdiction of EEOC to prosecute and/or litigate my charges against Westcare Foundation, Inc. and the Illinois Department of Corrections. This request embraces the cooperative agreement with the Department and EEOC, preserving jurisdiction for both the Department and EEOC.

Respectfully submitted,

Fred L Nance Jr., ABD, MA, CADC, NCRS

cc:

Re:       Nefarious Character and Behavior of a Sam’ Club Manager

Mr. Hassna:

I, Fred Nance Jr., entered Sam’s Club #6489 on November 15, 2008 at approximately 5:15 pm (CST) with my wife to purchase items from this store. We wanted to buy steaks, but needed assistance from a butcher. There was no butcher present. An employee informed me the butchers were gone for the day. I sought a supervisor or manager to ask why there was no butcher present to assist customers needing service in their meat department. This started as a simple question, which had a simple, respectful answer. The Sam’s Club manager I encountered had a different agenda. It appears her agenda is to harass, intimidate and threaten consumers/customers.

Seeking an answer to this “complicated” question of “where are the butchers”, I went to the front of the store requesting to speak to a supervisor or manager. A supervisor began to answer my question when she spotted a manager, Cynthia. This supervisor directed my question and inquiry to Cynthia.

I approached Cynthia giving her my business card asking her was she a manager. Rather than answering my question, Cynthia asked me what I needed as she ignored my handing her my business card leaving my hand dangling with the card in it. I informed her there was no butcher present to assist customers in the meat department. I asked this question requesting to understand why there was no butcher present to assist customers and how could I acquire the purchase I wanted.

Cynthia began rudely and nefariously addressing my question and request. I informed Cynthia that she was not going to talk to me in a demeaning way and addressing me in a disrespectful and arrogant manner. I requested to speak to her supervisor. Cynthia told me she was the “boss”. I asked Cynthia for the store manager’s name. Cynthia told me Phil. I asked Cynthia what is Phil last name. Cynthia refused to give me Phil’s last name.

I started writing the dialogue and statements she was making to me on one of my business cards that she refused to accept. Cynthia did not care or want to know who she was talking too. I think anyone having dialogue with someone should know who they are talking too and their audience. If you do not know your audience, you may make grave errors that may cost something.

As I ran out of room on the one business card, I started writing on another one of my business cards. I asked Cynthia to give me the information I requested on the store and its manager on a piece of her paper. Cynthia told me I can write on what I was using. As I was writing, I asked Cynthia for the store manager’s last name again. Cynthia blurted out Phil Hassna, several times in an egregious voice. I asked Cynthia to spell her store manager’s last name. Cynthia refused to spell it for me.

I informed Cynthia that I was going to write a letter to the President & CEO of Sam’s Club/WalMart about her unprofessional character and behavior and post it on my websites. Cynthia told me that if I did not stop talking she would take my Sam’s Club membership and have me escorted from the store. I challenged this statement telling her to do it. Cynthia looked at me and walked away. I acquired the Sam’s Club store manager’s information from a business card that another respectful and concerned employee of Sam’s Club directed me too in the entrance lobby of the store.

As I recalled more information from my encounter with Cynthia, I began writing it on an envelope my wife had in her purse. As my wife and I continued shopping, I asked other Sam’s Club employees if there was another manager in the store. As I explained my dilemma to these employees of Sam’s Club and why I wanted to know was there other managers besides Cynthia in the store, these Sam’s Club employees began telling me about other customer complaints against Cynthia. If this is true, then the management of Sam’s Club #6489 has a total disregard for consumer/customer complaints against Cynthia. Consumers: Is there where you want to shop and spend your hard earned money?

My wife and I spent $185.63 at this Sam’s Club store (Transaction #2197; Store #6489; Register #008 at 5:57 pm). When we got home and I began to take the Sam’s Club groceries from the car, I told my wife I was taking these groceries back to Sam’s Club. I informed my wife that we cannot allow a retail or wholesale store to treat customers as I was treated. I informed my wife we have to make a statement. I returned the groceries to this Sam’s Club at approximately 7:23 pm (CST) and was refunded $154.38 (Transaction #1343; Store #6489; Register #1802). The other groceries my wife had already opened.

Consumers/customers should not shop where they are not respected, especially if management is the one who disrespects you. If management disrespects you, it informs you of what they think about you spending your hard earned money in their store. If it is necessary to shop at a Sam’s Club or WalMart store, find one that has a high or moderate level of integrity, honesty and respect for its consumers/customers.

Store #6489 located in Calumet City does not have a high or moderate level of integrity, honesty and respect for its consumers/customers if they continue to allow people like Cynthia to manage and direct services there.

The Sam’s Club located in Calumet City may not pay attention to this letter. This Sam’s Club may not do anything about consumer/customer complaints. One thing is for sure and can be vested with a degree of certainty (truth); we do not have to spend our money in this store. When a customer finds issues of integrity, honesty and respect lacking in retail and wholesale stores we should alert the public. Public awareness creates and drives consumer/customer power. As consumers/customers we have monetary power. We are not powerless to mega stores like Sam’s Club and WalMart. Consumers/customers can make a difference. Stand up for what you believe. If you do not stand for something, you will fall for anything. I know everyone believes in a degree of honesty, integrity and respect in the workplace and in the retail/wholesale market.

Make no mistake. If Cynthia talks to the consumer/customer as I was talked too, she talks to her subordinates likewise. I will hand deliver a copy of this letter to Mr. Phil Hassna, manager of Sam’s Club store #6489. I will provide a copy to Mr. Hassna by U.S. mail. I will email a copy of this letter to Mr. Hassna. I will provide a copy of this letter to Mr. Walton and Mr. Scott by U.S. mail. Finally, I will post this letter on the blogs below.

Respectfully submitted,

Fred Nance Jr., ABD, MA, CADC, NCRS

cc:

November 2, 2008

Re:       Account Ending In – xxxxx

In September of 2008 I called RIDDEX to order their RIDDEX Plus product. The order process took place by phone, talking to an automated voice. During the order process, the call was cut off before I finalized my order. The cut-off was abrupt leading me to believe something was wrong. I called the RIDDEX number back, hoping to talk to a live person. I got automation again. Therefore, I immediately called AMEX to stop payment because I had entered my card number over the phone to an automated voice. I was informed by an AMEX representative that I had to wait until the charge was posted on my account before I could challenge it.

On or about October 3, 2008 I received the product for which I wanted AMEX to cancel payment. Upon receipt of this product by mail, I called RIDDEX Plus talking to a supervisor named Margaret. Margaret told me to take it to my local post office and send it back to them. I immediately took it back to the South Holland Post Office, giving it to one of the postal representative, instructing them to send it back to the sender. I made a photo copy of the shipping receipt before I took the package back to the post office. I did not get a receipt for returning it because I did not get a receipt to receive it. I left the package, the post office and went home.

On or about October 3, 2008 I talked to Amy, an AMEX representative, about this issue stating I was disconnected before the transaction was completed with RIDDEX. Amy opened case number HU40661. I informed Amy I received the product through the mail on or about October 3, 2008 and returned it to the Post Office without opening it.

On or about October 14, 2008 I talked to Andrea, another RIDDEX Plus representative. Andrea asked me did I have a receipt with a tracking number for their package that I took back to the post office. I informed Andrea that I do not have a receipt or a tracking number because I took their package and returned it to the post office telling the postal representative to send it back to the sender. After talking to Andrea, I did some research on RIDDEX Plus. I found out the corporate name for RIDDEX Plus is The Dynamic Response Group, Inc. Melissa K. Rice is the CEO, and that Kevin Sepe is the President. The Dynamic Response Group, Inc. is located at 4770 Biscayne Blvd., Suite 780, Miami Florida 33137. I called 212-614-4203 and talked Julicia Brooks about this issue. I was directed to a supervisor named Ivan who informed me he would submit a research request to Marcella a supervisor. I was told to fax the shipping receipt I had to them. I faxed a copy of the shipping receipt and the notes I took to Ivan at 972-407-3750 (fax number given to me by Ivan).

On or about October 14, 2008 I called the corporate office of The Dynamic Response Group, Inc. at 305-576-6889 seeking to talk to Ms. Melissa Rice, CEO and/or Mr. Kevin Sepe, President. I talked to Ms. Luz who requested I fax my shipping receipt to her. I fax my shipping receipt to Ms Luz at 305-576-6997. Ms. Luz assured me she would track the receipt of the package I sent back to them (shipping receipt, notes attached).

I received correspondence from AMEX dated October 4, 2008 with dispute reference number HU40661 from H. Figueroa Customer Service Supervisor stating in part, “…Thank you for contacting us regarding a charge(s) on your account. We have referred your inquiry regarding RIDDEX to one of our Customer Care Professionals for review. In the meantime, we have suspended the amount of $115.50 on your account which can be seen on an upcoming statement….” I received correspondence from AMEX dated October 8, 2008 with dispute reference number HU40661 from H. Figueroa, Customer Service Supervisor stating in part, “…We are writing regarding your inquiry about the charge(s) from Riddex. We have determined that we need some additional information from you to continue our investigation. What we need to proceed, in order for us to proceed on your behalf, we need you to provide us with: a copy of the Return/Postal Receipt relating to this inquiry….” I did not answer this correspondence.

I received correspondence on October 27, 2008 from AMEX dated October 24, 2008 from H. Figueroa Customer Service Supervisor stating in part, “…As you know, we have been investigating your claim with RIDDEX. During this time we suspended the disputed amount of $115.50. Our investigation is now complete and we have received credit for $67.65….” I immediately called AMEX requesting the full credit. I was told by an AMEX representative that an additional $29.95 was credited to my account. I asked the representative, where is the rest of the credit? The AMEX representative informed me they would continue investigating.

On November 1, 2008 I received correspondence from H. Figueroa Customer Service Supervisor dated October 28, 2008 stating in part, “…We are writing regarding your inquiry about the charge(s) from RIDDEX. We have determined that we need some additional information from you to continue our investigation. What we need to proceed, in order for us to proceed on your behalf, we need you to provide us with a signed, detailed letter describing the events surrounding your claim, including the exact amount of credit you are requesting. Steps we have taken, we have temporarily suspended the amount of $17.90 from the balance during the period of our investigation, which will reflect on your upcoming statement….” The correspondence dated October 28, 2008 has a different dispute reference number on it, which is HY64016.

This is the detailed letter requested by AMEX. First, why is the dispute reference number different? Second, I request the full credit amount to my account of $115.50, which $97.60 has been credited to my account according to correspondence dated October 22, 2008 for $67.65, and a statement from an AMEX representative on October 27, 2008 stating my account was credited for $29.95. I expect the balance of $17.90 be credited to my account. In addition, I request a correspondence from AMEX stating the full amount of $115.50 was credited to my account.

Respectfully submitted,

Fred Nance Jr.

cc:

Better Business Bureau

Diana Mendez
Assistant Manager-Home/Transportation Services

Complaint ID#: 94208140
Business Name: Energy Savers Vinyl Windows

Ms. Mendez:

I will address the response of Energy Saver’s paragraph according to how it is marked from the paperwork I received from the Better Business Bureau:

1. Energy Savers’ Response to my complaint: Fred Nance is satisfied with the work that Energy Savers did. Nance Response: The issue is not about whether I am satisfied with the work that was done by Energy Savers. Talking about that: I have screw tips that installers installed that have exposed tips, which could injure someone. These tips should have been “budded” to prevent injury to people. I want the ends of these screws budded.

2. Energy Savers’ Response to my complaint: If John Pro Tree Service damage something and are will to pay for damage what’s the problem. I don’t think John’s Pro Tree Service works for free. Nance Response: John Pro Tree Service stated they would pay for the downspout when it receives a billing statement from me, which I should get from Energy Savers when they make the repairs. I informed Energy Savers’ representative Joe Lipuma that John’s Pro Tree Service would pay for the downspout replacement. Energy Savers and Joe Lipuma decided they were going to ignore my request to fix the downspout, and in fact, deny claims such as downspout and screws that are explicit in their contract for services. See Energy Savers’ service contract stating “…Customer Satisfaction: We at Energy Savers Vinyl Windows value your business. If at any time you are unsatisfied with our service, we would like the opportunity to remedy any issues that you may have. Our main objective is customer satisfaction….” See attached Energy Savers’ contract received for services to my home.

3. Energy Savers’ Response to my complaint: A downspout is very simple…to come out an do assessment it’s just a down spout – if there is a hole in it we do not repair hole we replace the downspout because that’s the correct way to fix it. Nance Response: If the downspout is so simple, why didn’t Energy Savers’ come out and fix it. An assessment is an evaluation, a judgment about something based on an understanding of the situation. An assessment is what any logical business person would do before any repairs or installation of a product. An assessment allows a business to know what is needed for the work. Before Energy Savers did the work on my home Mr. Lipuma did an assessment/evaluation of the property. I never asked Energy Savers to fix the hole in the downspout. I asked them to replace the downspout. I informed Mr. Lipuma that I had a piece of downspout vinyl his installers left that fit the section of drain spout needed. This statement suggests a down spout replacement, not a “hole” fix. See original letter from me, paragraph #4.

4. Energy Savers’ Response to my complaint: We do not piece together down spouts not the correct way to fix it. Nance Response: The downspout mentioned here in paragraph 3 is a full piece of downspout. There is nothing to piece together. It is a perfect fit, with extra length. It is their product.

5. Energy Savers’ Response to my complaint: Our fax machine here is used for ordering and receiving orders only. Nance Response: I have no response.

6. Energy Savers’ Response to my complaint: The cost to replace not repair downspout is 199 labor & material if Mr. Nance think 199 is to much have John’s Pro Tree Service replace it. Nance Response: John’s Pro Tree Service will incur the cost for repair. I hope the cost of this replacement is universal with the pricing of other entities providing similar services.

7. Energy Savers’ Response to my complaint: I would like to have the BBB consider removing this complaint because we have a customer that got damage done by another company may be the complaint should have been to John’s Pro Tree Service if Mr. Nance is looking for a estimate for repair we can send him one. Nance Response: I am not sure what Energy Savers is saying here, but I will attempt to respond. The Better Business Bureau should not remove the complaint from their files because the damage was done by another company. The complaint is on Energy Savers. The complaint is about Energy Savers’ policy on Customer Satisfaction. Energy Savers refused to live up to its policies. John’s Pro Tree Service has always acted with integrity and honesty. John’s Pro Tree Service specializes in tree trims, bush removal, tree cutting, stump removal, etc.

Energy Savers gives a post script to its response. Energy Savers states “isn’t it terrible to have a hit on you’re BBB report over something so Stupid.” Energy Savers also states “My salesman even offered to come out to Mr. Nance’s home and fix it himself but Mr. Nance said he put a bad rap on us in his blog and now the BBB Mr. Nance is on his own don’t call us for anything.” Nance Response: I guess Energy Savers is Stupid. What company would allow their integrity and honesty challenged over an event that they could have so easily rectified? This story tells us that Energy Savers has no integrity and honesty. Energy Savers surely does not honor its “Customer Satisfaction” policy. This is exactly why I posted my complaint on the Internet and with the Better Business Bureau. This statement violates Energy Savers “Customer Satisfaction” policy. Energy Savers should be held to the standards of their company policy. To say, “…don’t call us for anything” violates Energy Savers’ policy.

Posting truth on the Internet is in agreement with the 1^st Amendment clause of the United States Constitution, Freedom Speech. Second, if Energy Savers’ salesman offered to come out to “evaluate” and fix the problem, why didn’t he come? Just because I exercised my right to “free speech” does not give Energy Savers the right to violate its company policy. Energy Savers should be prosecuted to full extent of the law. I will post this response on my blogs. I will post this response to the Better Business Bureau on their website in its response section. I will mail this response to Ms. Diana Mendez by Certified Mail to assure its receipt and to assure the Better Business Bureau has a copy of Energy Savers' "Customer Satisfaction" policy.

Respectfully submitted,

Fred Nance Jr.

October 31, 2008

Re:       Future home improvement investors should beware of those businesses promoting customer satisfaction and care that neither provide customer satisfaction nor care after they get your money.

Mr. Shaheen:

On or about July 2, 2007 Energy Savers installed windows, soffits, gutters, drains and downspouts on my home. I paid $10,000.00 for this purchase and labor. Energy Savers’ has a clause in their contract stating, “Customer Satisfaction: If at any time you are unsatisfied with our service, we would like the opportunity to remedy any issues that you may have. Our main objective is customer satisfaction….” This is not true. Customer Satisfaction is not the goal of Energy Savers.

On October 24, 2008 Pro Tree Service removed a tree in the backyard of my home. The tree removal employees punched a hole in the downspout of the drain on the North-front side of my home. Pro Tree Service owner John Baio informed me he would pay for the cost of repair.

On October 24, 2008 I called Energy Savers requesting a home visit to assess the repair. I talked to Lucy, who may be the administrative assistant of Energy Savers, informing her of the issue. Lucy called me back on or about October 27, 2008 with a quote from the owner Bill Shaheen, which seemed ridiculous to me without an assessment of damage. Instead of providing home service to assess the repair, Lucy gave me some ridiculous price to fix this hole.

On October 24, 2008 I called Joseph Lipuma, the salesperson of my purchase. I informed him of what I needed. Mr. Lipuma told me to have the tree removal people repair the downspout. I informed Mr. Lipuma this suggestion was inappropriate. I informed Mr. Lipuma his suggestion was absurd. I informed Mr. Lipuma I have a piece of downspout vinyl left by the original installers that would fit the damaged area. I requested he visit my home and assess the damage for repair. Mr. Lipuma made several appointments, but has failed to come to my home to assess the damage.

On October 31, 2008 I called Energy Savers talking to Lucy about this issue again. I asked for the name of the owner of Energy Savers so that I could address this letter appropriately. Lucy told me she could not give me that information.

Energy Savers is located in the township of Orland Park, Illinois. I called the township of Orland Park’s Business and Development to get the business information for Energy Savers since I was being denied access to it by Energy Savers. The Orland Park Business and Development entity states they do not have a fax number on file for this company. This is strange.

What does Energy Savers have to hide? Why would a company deny its customers their owner’s name? I asked Lucy for the fax number to Energy Savers so that I could send this letter to them by fax. Lucy informed me that Energy Savers does not have a fax number. Why would a company hide the fax number information from their customers?

Viewers of my blogs: How many companies do you know that deny you access to their fax numbers? There is something wrong with the business ethics of Energy Savers.

Therefore, I respectfully request a home visit to reasonably assess the damage of my downspout so repairs can be made, paid for, the cost passed on to Pro Tree Removal for payment.

I will drive to the Energy Savers location in Orland Park and hand-deliver this letter.

Respectfully submitted,

Fred Nance Jr.

cc:

Pro Tree Service

October 27, 2008

Mr. Conlon:

Harlem Furniture contracts with Stainsafe for repair service with its furniture needs. I was informed by your representative that you company, Conlon & Sons, provide services for Stainsafe. Stainsafe has 196 complaints against its organization on www.ripoffreport.com/.

On Friday, October 24, 2008, I was scheduled for a repair appointment for furniture I bought from Harlem Furniture. When I purchased my furniture from Harlem Furniture I bought a warranty with Stainsafe, which utilizes your company to provide repair services. My appointment time frame was 8:00 am to 12:00 pm.

At approximately 10:30 am, I received a call from your representative stating my repair person’s car had broken down and he was at the repair shop to get it fixed. I was told when he got his car fixed he would be coming to my house. I received a call late Friday afternoon, October 24, 2008, from your representative stating my repair person would not be coming out. I waited for your repair person for over 7 hours before I got a call stating he was not coming. I was told I had to re-schedule. I re-scheduled for Monday, October 27, 2008, between the hours of 7:00 am to 10:00 am.

On Monday, October 27, 2008, at approximately 8:15 am I had to make a run out of the neighborhood. I left because your repair person had not showed up and thinking about the wait I had Friday, October 24, 2008, I believed I would get a courtesy call to alert me to when this repair person would come to my house.

At approximately 8:35 am I received a call from your representative stating your repair person was sitting outside my home. I informed your representative I was not at home. Your representative asked me how long will it take for me to get home. I informed your representative I would be home in 30 minutes. I got home at approximately 9:00 am. I called your office and your representative told me I had to re-schedule for another day. Sir, I have a problem with the service I am receiving with your company.

On Friday, October 24, 2008, I waited for 6 hours, all day at home for your service. No one showed up. I did not get upset. I re-scheduled. On Monday, October 27, 2008, your representative told me I did not ask for a call to alert me your repair person was on there way. Sir, I should not have to ask for this call. This is a courtesy call, which I should have received anyway because of Friday, October 24, 2008. I deserved a courtesy call.

On Monday, October 27, 2008, your representative informed me your repair person was stuck in traffic for 2 hours coming to my house. I am not sure where your repair person is traveling from to come to my house, but coming to my house is driving against the traffic, not with the traffic. What I mean there is no traffic coming to my house. All the traffic is going toward downtown Chicago. I live in the opposite direction. Nevertheless, if your repair person was stuck in traffic, I should have received a courtesy call stating so, because I waited as I did on Friday, October 24, 2008, I should have received a courtesy call.

Your representative informs me now I have to make another appointment, and they were very adamant and unconcerned about my service. This is totally unprofessional. On Monday, October 27, 2008, I have spoken to Suelette and Antoinette from your office. I informed Suelette and Antoinette that I would write this letter, sending a copy to Harlem Furniture, posting it on my blogs and posting it on www.ripoffreport.com/.

From viewing www.ripoffreport.com/, it appears it is 196 complaints against Stainsafe. Stainsafe employs your company to repair the items it contracts for with various furniture stores. Sir, how does your company fair with www.ripoffreport.com/?

Sir, I want service today, Monday, October 27, 2008. I have asked to speak to a supervisor. I have been told your supervisor is Linda. I have been repeatedly told that Linda is not available. The last response I received from your representative about speaking to Linda is that she is in a meeting. I would like to receive a call about my issue. Please respond.

Respectfully submitted,

Fred Nance Jr.

cc:

July 30, 2008

CERTIFIED MAIL

Mr. Walker:

The Illinois Department of Corrections has not offered a rational basis for locking out Fred Nance Jr., which was an adverse employment action on or about May 14, 2008.

On May 1, 2006 I began working at Sheridan Correctional Center (Sheridan) as a counselor III for Gateway Foundation, Inc. (Gateway) On or about November 1, 2006, Gateway relinquished their counseling contract with the State of Illinois at Sheridan. On or about November 1, 2006, WestCare Foundation, Inc. (WestCare) began providing counseling services at Sheridan.

On Mother’s Day, May 12, 2008, Mr. Stanley Brooks, WestCare Director, called me while I was having dinner with my mother stating Warden Michael Rothwell had locked me out of Sheridan. I asked Mr. Brooks if Warden Rothwell gave a reason for the lockout. Mr. Brooks informed me he was not given a reason for the lockout.

On or about May 15, 2008 I received a letter from WestCare dated May 14, 2008 stating, in part, “…Please let this letter serve as a notification that your employment with WestCare is being terminated, effective May 14, 2008, due to the determination of the Illinois Department of Corrections to issue an Administrative Lockout of your security clearance at Sheridan Correctional Facility. As you are aware, it is a requirement of employment that you maintain an active security clearance to enter the facility….” (WestCare letter attached)

Sir, please provide a basis and cause, along with supporting documentation, for the Administrative Lockout of the security clearance for Fred Nance Jr.

Respectfully submitted,

Fred L Nance Jr.

cc:

Re:       Bank of America 4673671189116

Joseph & Stephens Associates:

Please be advised: During the first week of October 2008, Mr. Steve Larrimore called me threatening and intimidating me and my family with litigation regarding this account. Mr. Larrimore informed me he had reason to believe I owed a debt for this account. I informed Mr. Larrimore I did not have nor have I ever had an account with the Bank of America. I asked Mr. Larrimore to give me some details about this debt, and why he believed I owed this debt. Mr. Larrimore refused to elaborate on the account, stating since I did not want to take ownership of the debt he would start litigation against me. I informed Mr. Larrimore since he was not going to discuss this alleged debt with me, that he should call me anymore. Mr. Larrimore informed me I would be receiving litigation paperwork in the mail at the end of October 2008.

On or about October 14, 2008 I received a letter of settlement on this account suggesting I owed a current amount of $4,838.38. The letter states a settlement offer of $3,139.04 with a settlement date of October 24, 2008. On or about October 16, 2008 my daughter received the same letter at her address. I do not live with my daughter. On October 20, 2008 I called and left a message for Mr. Larrimore. Mr. Larrimore returned my call and refused to give me any information on this account, which he is charging me with being delinquent. Mr. Larrimore informed me that since I did not take ownership the litigation proceedings have gone forward against me.

Wherefore the foregoing, if I receive any litigation papers in the mail or by any other means of delivery I will proceed with a counterclaim stating threats, intimidation and defamation of character to start. I will be seeking damages for legal fees, court costs and any and all other remedies the court of jurisdiction deems necessary and appropriate for the willful, nefarious and deliberate acts complained.

Respectfully submitted,

Fred Nance Jr.

cc:

Court of Jurisdiction

September 7, 2008

Illinois General Assembly

My name is Fred Nance Jr. I am writing and sending this correspondence advocating for the Human/Social Service agencies and our clients. The correspondence accompanying this cover letter responds to the Illinois Budget Cuts effecting substance abuse and alcohol treatment. The Budget Cuts handed down by Governor Blagojevich and this Assembly has dismantled needed services to this population. Along with my colleagues and peers, I cannot obtain funding for my company or employment because of Governor Blagojevich’s Budget Cuts.

I am President and CEO of C.L.I.C.K. Services, NFP. C.L.I.C.K. is a not-for-profit social service agency. My website is http://www.clickservices.org. Prior to the development of C.L.I.C.K., I was a victim of substance abuse and alcoholism for 27 years.

I am 59-years-old. For 27 years I was involved in criminal thinking and behaving due to substance abuse and alcoholism, leading to incarceration on January 16, 1992 at the age of 42 for drug related crimes. Upon entry into the Cook County jail at the age of 42 I did not have a G.E.D. I achieved my G.E.D. in the Cook County jail. When I entered the Illinois Department of Corrections (IDOC) in July of 1992 I started taking courses at Lakeland and Kaskaskia Colleges before taking college courses with Roosevelt University. When I was released from IDOC on December 20, 1994, I continued at Roosevelt University’s Chicago Downtown Campus. I achieved my Bachelor and Master Degree from Roosevelt University in Social Science and Community Counseling, respectively. I will complete my PhD in Human Services focusing on Social Policy Analysis and Planning in the Fall/Winter session of 2008 with Walden University.

I attended a NBC Channel 5 press conference promoted by the Honorable Congressman Danny Davis on Saturday, September 6, 2008, regarding the recent budget cuts impacting social services. Press conference speakers included Congressman Danny Davis, Raphael Rivera of Healthcare Alternative Systems, Skip Land of Safe Haven, Melody Heaps of T.A.S.C. and Anthony Cole of Haymarket Center.

This correspondence and its attachments are being sent to all Illinois General Assembly members, that is, House of Representatives and Senators. The attachments have been posted on my blogs at http://clickforjusticeandequality.blogspot.com/, http://click.townhall.com/, http://clickforjusticeandequality.wordpress.com/ and http://www.frednance.newsvine.com/.

During our roundtable discussions, before the press conference on Saturday, September 6, 2008, I requested the social service agency in attendance to ask their clients/customers/consumers and laid-off employees to develop blogs on the Internet to tell their story of how the budget cuts of Governor Blagojevich and the Illinois General Assembly are affecting their substance abuse and alcohol treatment. I asked them to assist them in developing these blogs if they are unable to do it for themselves.

FY 09 budget cuts issued through The Illinois Division of Alcoholism and Substance Abuse (DASA) will decimate the statewide substance abuse treatment and case management system that serves courts and probation. A total of $110 million ($55 in State funds plus an additional $55 in Federal matching dollars) will be eliminated from a $250 million budget, reducing funding to 43% less than last year’s funding levels.

Budget Cuts Result in Thousands Being Denied Critical Services:

An estimated 42,000 people will lose access to treatment services in the next year across the State of Illinois.

Budget Cuts Clog the Criminal Justice System:

The Illinois criminal justice system makes more referrals to publicly funded substance abuse treatment than any other entity, totaling 35% of all referrals to treatment.

The Illinois State’s funding cuts will drastically reduce treatment as a sentencing option.

The justice system will be left with no resources but to release addicted offenders back to the community, hold them indefinitely in already overcrowded jails or send even more nonviolent offenders to prison.

Action Is Needed Now—Delays Increase Costs:

The longer the funding cuts remain in effect the damage caused will cost more and take longer to repair. As clinical staff is laid off across the State of Illinois, and as people in need are turned away from services, it will take far longer to rebuild the system currently being dismantled by Governor Blagojevich and Illinois State Legislature.

Increased County Jail Costs:

With severely diminished or eliminated treatment, an estimated 4,540 offenders this year could wait even longer in jail for disposition (2,880 in Cook County Illinois and 1,660 outside of Cook County Illinois).

For every additional 30 days 4,540 individuals spend in jail (at an estimated $125/day in Cook County Illinois and $70/day outside of Cook County Illinois), it will cost Illinois counties an estimated additional $14.3 million.

Increased State Prison Cost:

Treatment and case management cost an average of $4,425 per person (services are usually delivered over a year to a year and a half). By contrast, 1.5 years in prison (a typical sentence for nonviolent, drug-involved offenders) costs an average of approximately $32,400.

With severely diminished or eliminated treatment, if judges send 4,540 defendants to prison instead of supervised community-based treatment, the State of Illinois could pay an additional estimated $127 million in prison costs.

THE ILLINOIS STATE’S LEADERSHIP MUST WORK TOGETHER TO IDENTIFY A REVENUE SOURCE AND RESTORE FUNDING TO COMMUNITY-BASED TREATMENT SERVICES IMMEDIATELY.

THE ILLINOIS LEGISLATURE AND GOVERNOR BLAGOJEVICH SHOULD NOT HOLD THE STATE OF ILLINOIS CITIZENS HOSTAGE TO VIOLENCE AND SUBSTANCE ABUSE BECAUSE THEY WANT TO MAKE A POINT TO EACH OTHER.

THE BUDGET CUTS BY GOVERNOR BLAGOJEVICH AND THE ILLINOIS LEGISLATURE COULD HAVE TAKEN A 5% CUT ACROSS THE BOARD TO MEET BUDGET DEMANDS.

GOVERNOR BLAGOJEVICH AND THE ILLINOIS LEGISLATURE DID NOT CUT THE SHERIDAN PROJECT, WHICH PROVIDES SUBSTANCE ABUSE TREATMENT TO INMATES AT SHERIDAN CORRECTIONAL CENTER.

WHAT SENSE DOES IT MAKE TO PROVIDE SUBSTANCE ABUSE TREATMENT TO CRIMINAL INCARCERATED IF THERE IS NO VIABLE, SUPPORTIVE, COMPREHENSIVE AND OPTIMAL AFTERCARE TREATMENT?

THE CITIZENS OF ILLINOIS WILL SUFFER TORMENT, INJUSTICE AND INCREASED CRIMINAL ACTIVITIES IN THEIR NEIGHBORHOODS, THEIR HOMES AND IN THE VERY LIVES.

WHO WILL BE RESPONSIBLE ENOUGH TO RESTORE THE BUDGET FOR COMMUNITY-BASED SUBSTANCE ABUSE TREATMENT? WHO WILL BE THE FIRST TO STAND FOR “REAL” JUSTICE?