Update: December 29, 2006

On December 27, 2006 and December 28, 2006 I called Oak Forest Hospital requesting to speak to Mr. Tony Maverick, Director of Oak Forest Hospital's Emergency Room. After writing the letter of December 2, 2006, Mr. Maverick called me on or about December 11, 2006. We discussed my issues. Mr. Maverick suggested I call Robbins Clinic, Cottage Grove or Woody Winston Health Center for aftercare services in order to get my medication. Mr. Maverick informed me that if I called one of these aftercare facilities and was put in the system computer that I had an appointment, I could come back to Oak Forest Hospital and get medication until I had my appointment. I called each one.

Robbins Clinic and Woody Winston Health Center were not taking any patients. I talked to Cottage Grove speaking to the administrator Ms. Donald who informed me I could get on a "written" waiting list, which did not put me in the system computer, but allowed me to get an appointment in July of 2007.

I have attempted to call Mr. Maverick on the dates above to inform him of this "written" waiting list, which would not show up in their system computer because it is not put in the computer. The receptionist who answers the phone at 708-633-4270 states she put my telephone message in Mr. Maverick's hand on December 28, 2006. Mr. Maverick did not call me back. I left another message with her on December 28, 2006. Mr. Maverick has not and did not call me back. I informed the receptionist I had 3-days worth of medication left when I called on December 27, 2006.

On or about December 15, 2006 I received a "Limit of Liability" statement from the Cook County Bureau Health Services. It states I have qualified for the Cook County Bureau of Health Services Limit of Liability Program, which will take care of my health care bills for the next year. I called Mr. Maverick to see if this letter is sufficient to acquire services for receiving my medication. I am awaiting his call.

Update: December 2, 2006

December 2, 2006

Cook County Bureau of Health Services
Oak Forest Hospital
Dr. Conture, Emergency Room Director
15900 South Cicero Avenue
Oak Forest, Illinois 60452

Re: Emergency Room Visit on November 16, 2006

Dr. Conture:

On November 16, 2006 I visited the emergency room at Oak Forest Hospital. After the doctor examined me for my high blood pressure, which I informed them of, he prescribed the following medication for me: Hydrochlorothiazide and Toprol-XL. After looking at the prescription, I noticed there was no refill on it. My attending physician was Dr. Koctin Go. I informed the doctor, along with informing other nurses in charge of taking my vitals, I had refills given to me before on my prescriptions from this emergency room. The doctor informed me the emergency room does not give refills with their prescriptions. I informed the doctor his statement is not true. The doctor did not give me a refill.

I visited the emergency room on or about August 17, 2006 for the same issues of high blood pressure. I was given the same medication and the prescription had 3 refills attached to it. My attending physician was Dr. Cory Cunningham in the emergency room, on this date. Why is there a difference, between your staff, in the operation of this emergency room?

After my visit on August 17, 2006, the nurse who gave me my prescription, who had me sign my discharge papers, informed me the hospital will call me for my follow up visit for intake. I never received the call. After calling repeatedly leaving messages and getting a return phone call and after my prescriptions ran out, I was forced to visit your emergency room again on November 16, 2006. I called and talked to an individual before my visit of November 16, 2006 who informed me I would have to visit your emergency room again because I did not follow up with getting an appointment in your clinic. After informing this person of what I had been going through, she informed me this is the way the hospital makes their money if people do not follow up with services suggesting I visit the emergency room on a Wednesday or Thursday and it might not be crowded. November 16, 2006 was a Thursday. There was only one other person before me. I was able to get out of your emergency room in “3 hours.”

Sir, please explain what is going on? Are your doctors authorized to give refills with their prescriptions? Why is there a disparity with your physicians? Why are the employees giving messages like a received stating the hospital is making money on people by making them revisit the emergency room? An emergency room visit payment is much higher than a regular medical office visit. There is something shady going on.
Please review and comment. I will post this letter on my website at http://click.townhall.com/, along with posting with the letters I have written about this hospital on my other website at http://clickforjusticeandequality.blogspot.com/. I hope to get comments from you and get a prescription for refills on my medication, without having to pay another emergency room bill for services I should have received as aftercare.

Respectfully submitted,

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

cc: Ms. Bobbie Steele/Mr. Todd Stroger, Cook County Board President
http://clickforjusticeandequality.blogspot.com/

August 17, 2006

Cook County Bureau of Health Services
Oak Forest Hospital of Cook County
Mr. Martin Grant, Director of Pharmacy
15900 South Cicero Avenue
Oak Forest, Illinois 60452-4006

Re: Emergency Room Visit and Prescription/Medication pick-up

Mr. Grant:

I, Fred Nance Jr., visited the emergency room on August 17, 2006 at 8:00 am. My visit concerned high blood pressure prescription medication. After being triaged and visiting with the Physician Assistant, I was given a prescription for medication.

Upon arrival at the pharmacy department, the young lady informed me I would have to wait 1 ½ hours for my medication to be filled. This young lady informed me my prescription was the only one present at this time. It was approximately 9:35 am. The young lady also informed me I should be glad I only have to wait 1 ½ hours because the waiting time is usually 3 to 5 hours. This is ludicrous.

Please explain why it takes so long to get a prescription filled. While I was waiting, 6 other patients, seeking prescriptions filled, were told they would have to wait an hour for their prescription medication.

The concern for me is of low value. My greatest concern is the elderly and those individuals who may be really sick. It should not take hours to get a prescription filled, especially if it is not crowded. Please respond. The public would like to know also.

As I was leaving the hospital, the young lady who waited on me apparently was going on break. I suggest she was going on break because she asked another employee if they were ready to go on break. I would bet the employees of Oak Forest Hospital do not miss going on their breaks on time. Do you think the waiting time for prescriptions to be filled is because someone is slacking in their responsibilities of care? Time should be utilized working to provide optimal care to patients. This is a ridiculous situation.

Respectfully submitted,

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

cc: Ms. Sylvia Edwards, COO; Mr. John Stroger, Commissioner (fax copies only)
http://clickforjusticeandequality.blogspot.com/ or C.L.I.C.K. for Justice and Equality

Our tax money goes toward this type service. This appears to be the normal operating procedure of Oak Forest Hospital's emergency room. Take a peak inside when you have time.

October 11, 2005

Cook County Bureau of Health Services
Oak Forest Hospital
Dr. Conture, Emergency Room Director
15900 South Cicero Avenue
Oak Forest, Illinois 60452

Re: Emergency Room Visit October 10, 2005

Dr. Conture:

On October 10, 2005, I, Fred L Nance Jr. (Fred), and my brother, Ray A. Nance (Ray), visited the Emergency Room of Oak Forest Hospital. Ray has prostrate cancer, which has developed into a bone cancer with severe pain to the left side of his body. We visited Oak Forest Hospital’s emergency room for Ray’s pain and to enlist his enrollment into Oak Forest’ Oncology outpatient clinic. When Ray called Oak Forest Hospital about his pain, along with his attempt to enroll in Oak Forest Hospital’s outpatient Oncology clinic, he was told he had to go to the emergency room to get a referral to the Oncology clinic.

We arrived at Oak Forest Hospital’s emergency room at 11:31 pm. Ray informed the triage nurse, Sophie, of his extreme pain giving history of his diagnosis of prostrate cancer, along with supporting documentation. Ray informed Sophie he was just released from Rush Presbyterian St. Luke’s hospital on or about October 7, 2005. Ray informed Sophie the pain was not under control.

At 3:15 am Fred approached the officer on duty requesting to use the phone in the emergency room to call a supervisor about the poor/no service for Ray. The officer gave his permission to use the phone. I called the operator requesting to speak to a supervisor for the emergency room. Ms. Vance called me back. She said she was the supervisor on duty for the emergency room. I gave Ms. Vance all the pertinent information about Ray so she could make an informed decision as to urgency of his need. Ms. Vance informed me she had talked to someone who would come and talk with us.

I approached the triage nurse and she said she would check Ray’s vitals. I refused this and stated we wanted to see a doctor as requested of her supervisor. Sophie informed us she called the charge nurse and told him we wanted to speak to him. No one came to talk to us. I called for the supervising nurse again at 3:35 am. The operator did not answer the phone. I continued to call the operator of Oak Forest Hospital until 4:10 am without getting an answer. I informed emergency room duty officer Causey at 4:10 am stating I could not get an answer from the operator on the phone. Officer Causey informed me he had no way of contacting the operator of the facility. Officer Causey got on his radio, started talking to someone. At approximately 4:15 am, another client requested to use the phone. She called looking for the supervisor of the emergency room because she had been waiting to see a doctor for 5 hours. The operator answered the phone.

At approximately 4:20 am, Charge Nurse Tanwa Dawodu called Ray and 4 others. I informed Nurse Dawodu I would write his supervisor about the poor service of Oak Forest Emergency Room. Nurse Dawodu stated, “You can write whoever you want it don’t mean nothing to me.”

A physician did not see Ray until approximately 5:10 am. Ray was given a referral to the outpatient Oncology clinic. Ray sat in his personal wheel chair for almost 6-hours waiting to see a doctor. He was in pain described by him to Nurse Sophie and Ward as being an “8”. We left Oak Forest Hospital at 5:45 am.

During all of this it should be noted, Nurse Joelle Ward was very professional and caring about Ray and the services needed for his care. She was very cordial and polite at a time when Ray was in pain.

Therefore, I would hope an investigation into the matters of comprehensive and optimal services needed in the emergency room of Oak Forest Hospital be expedited immediately. People who enter the emergency room should be treated according to priority and with dignity. People with severe traumas and pain must be seen in a timely fashion. Charge Nurse Dawodu informed me he had a 7-hour window to see a patient. This ludicrous and absurd. Charge Nurse Dawodu was very unprofessional. When Ray and I did get to the back where patient’s were being seen, I heard a lot of laughter and talking from staff. It appeared to be more of a playground than a professional area on concern for patients visiting an emergency room.

I think I know how an emergency room may operate. I worked as an emergency room psychiatric therapist for the mentally ill at St. Bernard Hospital in Chicago.

Since talking to colleagues about my experiences with Oak Forest Hospital’s emergency room, I have heard there have been many complaints about services. I am an outsider. If I can get this type of information from the outside, I know the insiders have the same information. Someone is not acting.

I will post this issue on my website for public viewing. I would hope Mr. John Stroger’s office and you will act in a responsible and professional manner about this issue.

cc: Mr. John Stroger
http://clickforjusticeandequality.blogspot.com/

I spoke to Scott Thomas of WYLL Radio 1160 AM this afternoon after work. He reported Mr. Jackson was a delusional and angry man who possibly needed mental health services. I informed Mr. Thomas I was a mental health professional. I asked Mr. Thomas how he assessed Mr. Jackson as delusional. Mr. Thomas stated the Chicago Police investigated the case and found that there was no claim filed in Mr. Jackson's name for a patent. I informed Mr. Thomas this does make Mr. Jackson delusional. I informed Mr. Thomas this information supports Mr. Jackson's statement that Mr. McKenna did not do the job Mr. Jackson hired him to do.

 

After my statement, Mr. Thomas informed me he had to go. Mr. Thomas claims his radio talk show is dialogue, not monologue. I guess if you agree with him, it will be dialogue. If you disagree with him, as I did, it becomes monologue. I informed Mr. Thomas I did not support Mr. Jackson's actions. I informed Mr. Thomas I supported Mr. Jackson's claim that his lawyer did nothing for him after he paid him to perform a duty. 

September 16, 2006

A.T. Sterling Properties & Development Group, Inc.
345 North LaSalle Street
Chicago, Illinois 60610

Condo Association President:

Please be advised: I, Fred L Nance Jr., am advocating for Mr. Christopher Bouyer-Coutee. Advocacy agreement papers are on file and accompany this document. Christopher is 19-years-old.

On or about March 1, 2006 Christopher Bouyer-Coutee (Christopher), Percy Gibson (Gibson), Clifford Castillo (Castillo) and Lavell Sykes (Sykes) entered into a sub-lease agreement with Mr. Samusi B. Adelekan, who reports to an agent for A.T. Sterling Properties & Development Group, Inc. (“The Group”), renting apartment 4002. Christopher has a letter dated September 11, 2006 from Mr. Adelekan stating Christopher et al. have faithfully paid their rent for apartment 4002.

On or about September 8, 2006 the Cook County Sheriff’s Department evicted the occupants of apartment 4002, located at 345 North LaSalle Street, Chicago, Illinois. Christopher reports there were three (3) to four (4) Sheriff’s cars and a regular car evicting them. One of the Sheriffs’ car’s license plate number is S161166 and Squad car number 8421. Christopher reports they had not received “legal” notice of an eviction from owner of the condo nor from “The Group”.

Christopher Bouyer-Coutee was evicted from apartment 4002. Christopher reports the Cook County Sheriff’s department personnel evicted him from his apartment. Christopher reports “The Group” prevented him from obtaining his personnel belongings on September 8, 2006 stating he had to get it from the “new” owner of the condo. Christopher reports talking to the “new” owners on September 8, 2006, an old black couple, who stated they did not have anything to do with it. This old black couple was talking to the Sheriff who was evicting Christopher.

Christopher gave me information on the real estate agent who possibly is involved in this fiasco. Her name is Sandra Halliburton of Halli Enterprise. Christopher reports faxing a letter dated September 13, 2006 and proof of residency to Ms. Halliburton at 708-782-4147 (fax number). I called her at 773-368-0164. She refused to talk to me stating I should call number 773-723-2890. I called this number leaving a message because no one answered. I called this number on September 16, 2006 at approximately 6:15 pm, 6:30 pm, 7:00 pm and 7:15 pm.

My wife, Darlene Bouyer-Nance, called 773-723-2890. My wife states Ms. Halliburton answered the phone informing my wife she would contact “The Group” making arrangements for Christopher, Sykes, Gibson and Castillo to retrieve the rest of their personal property.

Christopher reports Sykes had $25,000.00 in the pocket of his snowsuit, hanging in the closet, which was ear-marked for loan pay back accrued for merchandise located at “Self Conscience Lifestyle Footwear & Apparel: By VDOT, 1021 West Lake Street, Chicago, Illinois, phone number 312-633-4000.

Christopher reports Castillo had $1800.00 in a shoe box, in the closet, which he was not able to retrieve because “The Group” agent would not permit him to re-enter the building. Christopher reports he was not able to retrieve 25 pairs of shoes, clothes, accessories and college supplies and books. Christopher reports Castillo, Sykes, and he have also lost their IPODS. Christopher also reports there were many other items not accounted for because of this non-notice, illegal eviction. No papers were served upon Christopher et al.

It appears there was no “legal” notice given the sub-lessees’ mentioned above. It appears “The Group” may have violated the sub-lessees’ housing rights, discriminating against them. It appears the agent, Sandra Halliburton, for the “new” owners violated the lessees’ housing rights, discriminating against them.

Also, why did “The Group” prevent the occupants from retrieving their personal property, especially their money? If the condo was owned by Mr. Adelekan, who is a representative of “The Group”, why didn’t he give the sub-lessees’ a “legal” notice of eviction? It is believed Mr. Adelekan owned the condo because his nephew collected the rent on the apartment. Why didn’t Mr. Adelekan inform the lessees’ of the threat of eviction?

According to Christopher, this apartment was in foreclosure on November 16, 2005, case number 05 CH 13576. The judgment of foreclosure was issued on January 3, 2006 against Tom Brendaro. Christopher and company never paid rent to Mr. Brendaro. Christopher and company paid rent to Mr. Adelekan’s nephew, which was cash. Who is Mr. Brendaro?

Therefore, I will mail this letter to “The Group” and fax it to the Illinois Department of Financial and Professional Regulation to see if there were any violations of the Act in this matter. I will file a complaint with this office. I expect a response from “The Group” and Halli Enterprises.

Respectfully submitted,

Fred L Nance Jr., ABD, MA, CADC, NCRS
Social Policy Analyst

cc: Illinois Department of Financial and Professional Regulations
http://clickforjusticeandequality.blogspot.com/

Update: December 15, 2006

I received a response from the Mr. Dart's office. The response states, in part, "...The matter has been classified as Exonerated in that the incident occurred but that it was lawful and proper." They protect their own. This is Chicago.

December 2, 2006

This entity rarely acts on any issue presented to them. Their automy should be questioned. The Illinois Supreme Court governs and elects its members. Every reply letter I have received from them informs me they will not investigate or charge the judges listed in my complaint. Ms. Kathy Twine signs each letter I have received in the last 5 years refusing to investigate the allegations made in my letters.


June 13, 2005

Judicial Inquiry Board
Kathy D. Twine, Esq., Executive Director & General Counsel
100 W. Randolph St., Suite 14-500
Chicago, Illinois 60601

Re: Judge Kathleen M. McGury #1670

Ms. Twine:

I, Fred Nance Jr., am a pro se litigant in case number 00 P 1267, room 1806, Daley Center respectfully requesting an investigation into the character, behavior and ethical concerns and issues of courtroom #1806, which Judge McGury is presently the sitting judge. I believe the following Codes of Judicial Misconduct are being violated:

1. RULE 61 - CANON 1: A Judge Should Uphold the Integrity and Independence of the Judiciary
2. RULE 62 - CANON 2: A Judge Should Avoid Impropriety and the Appearance of Impropriety in All of the Judge's Activities
3. RULE 63 - CANON 3: A Judge Should Perform the Duties of Judicial Office Impartially and Diligently. The judicial duties of a judge take precedence over all the judge's other activities. The judge's judicial duties include all the duties of the judge's office prescribed by law. In the performance of these duties, the following standards apply:

A. Adjudicative Responsibilities.

(1) A judge should be unswayed by partisan interests, public clamor, or fear of criticism.
(2) A judge should maintain order and decorum in proceedings before the judge.
(3) A judge should be patient, dignified, and courteous to litigants, jurors, witnesses, lawyers, and others with whom the judge deals in an official capacity, and should require similar conduct of lawyers, and of staff, court officials, and others subject to the judge's direction and control.
(4) A judge shall accord to every person who has a legal interest in a proceeding, or that person's lawyer, the right to be heard according to law. A judge shall not initiate, permit, or consider ex parte communications, or consider other communications made to the judge outside the presence of the parties concerning a pending or impending proceeding except that:
(a) Where circumstances require, ex parte communications for scheduling, administrative purposes or emergencies that do not deal with substantive matters or issues on the merits are authorized; provided: (i) the judge reasonably believes that no party will gain a procedural or tactical advantage as a result of the ex parte communication, and
(ii) the judge makes provision promptly to notify all other parties of the substance of the ex parte communication and allows an opportunity to respond.

(b) A judge may consult with court personnel whose function is to aid the judge in carrying out the judge's adjudicative responsibilities or with other judges.
(c) A judge may, with the consent of the parties, confer separately with the parties and their lawyers in an effort to mediate or settle matters pending before the judge.
(d) A judge may initiate or consider any ex parte communications when expressly authorized by law to do so.
(8) A judge shall perform judicial duties without bias or prejudice. A judge shall not, in the performance of judicial duties, by words or conduct manifest bias or prejudice, including but not limited to bias or prejudice based upon race, sex, religion, national origin, disability, age, sexual orientation or socioeconomic status, and shall not permit staff, court officials and others subject to the judge's direction and control to do so.
(9) Proceedings before a judge shall be conducted without any manifestation, by words or conduct, of prejudice based upon race, sex, religion, national origin, disability, age, sexual orientation or socioeconomic status, by parties, jurors, witnesses, counsel, or others. This section does not preclude legitimate advocacy when these or similar factors are issues in the proceedings.

B. Administrative Responsibilities

(2) A judge should require staff, court officials and others subject to the judge's direction and control to observe the standards of fidelity and diligence that apply to the judge.
(3) A judge having knowledge of a violation of these canons on the part of a judge or a violation of Rule 8.4 of the Rules of Professional Conduct on the part of a lawyer shall take or initiate appropriate disciplinary measures.

C. Disqualification

(1) A judge shall disqualify himself or herself in a proceeding in which the judge’s impartiality might reasonably be questioned, including but not limited to instances where:
(a) the judge has a personal bias or prejudice concerning a party or a party's lawyer, or personal knowledge of disputed evidentiary facts concerning the proceeding.

FACTS:

A court order was issued on June 27, 2000 reporting that maternal grandfather, Fred Nance Jr., is granted visitation of minor child Romeo Ashford every other weekend from 6:00 pm Friday to 6:00 pm Sunday. Nance has reported the violation of this court order numerous times by temporary guardian Julia Johnson. For violating the court ordered visitation for Romeo Ashford, this court has never reprimanded Ms. Johnson. Presently, the sitting judge, McGury, has not granted Nance his visitation per court order of June 27, 2000, nor has she held Ms. Johnson in contempt of court for violating the court order of June 27, 2000 outlined in Nance’s motions.

On or about August 2, 2002 Nance filed an appeal with the 1st Judicial District Appellate Court of Illinois. On page 4 of the courts opinion it states “…The trial court entered an order directing that the issue of visitation by Fred Nance be mediated by the Cook County Department of Supportive Services. Subsequently, on June 27, 2000, the court entered an order allowing Fred Nance to visit Romeo on alternate weekends from Friday to Sunday and mandating that he pick up and return the child to Johnson for each visitation.”

Attorney Ceko never facilitated or obeyed the court order for mediation by the Cook County Department of Supportive Services. To cause undue harm and embarrassment Attorney Ceko, with the support of Attorney Bergmann and Judge McGury, has requested in her Guardian ad litem report of May 20, 2005 that Nance participate in a home study with the Cook County Department of Supportive Services to support his continued visitation, altering the court order of June 27, 2000.

Judge McGury has allowed the courtroom staff, that is, Cook County Deputy Sheriffs’ and clerks, to degrade and humiliate Nance in open court (attached Sheriff’s complaint). Judge McGury has allowed attorneys Bergmann (attorney for Julia Johnson temporary guardian) & Ceko (GAL) to circumvent the processes of the court ordered violations, which Nance has raised in open court with written motions (attached). Nance has requested of Judge McGury that the attorneys respond in writing to Nance’s motions to avoid costly and arduous litigation with a bystanders report if needed for the appellate process, and to assist the pro se litigant in his attempts to argue his case. Judge McGury has decided that the attorneys do not have to file written responses to Nance’s motions. There is no court reporter in this courtroom. Leaving any objections to the oral reply of the attorneys up to a bystanders report.

On June 3, 2005, Nance filed a motion requesting that Judge McGury find guardian Julia Johnson in contempt of court for violating the court order of June 27, 2000, in that, on May 20, 2005 Julia Johnson requested in open court that she had made arrangements for the minor child to visit relatives out-of-town on the Memorial holiday weekend. Nance relinquished his visitation for Memorial Day, May 27, 2005, so that Johnson could take the minor child out of town to visit other relatives.

Johnson agreed that Nance would have two weekends in a row, that is, June 3rd & June 10th, 2005 for visitation. Nance claimed in his written motion that on June 1, 2005 Johnson left a phone message at Nance’s home stating that the minor child came back home but that Julia Johnson sent the child back out of town and that that the child will be out of town in Minnesota and will return sometime at the end of June 2005. Judge McGury decided that attorney Bergmann did not have to answer this written motion in writing to respond to it. Subsequently, Nance is not getting his court ordered visitation.
Nothing was done on June 10, 2005 to facilitate my immediate visitation.

On May 20, 2005, Judge McGury allowed attorney Bergmann to present an oral motion for supervised visitation. During the proceedings on May 20, 2005, Nance raised the issue of receiving visitation on May 13, 2005, and the minor child having socks on his feet that were extremely dirty, which Nance brought to court with him for public viewing. Attorney Bergmann objected and informed Judge McGury that the issue of the socks was not before the court, directing the court and pointing to Nance’s written motion.
Judge McGury sustained the objection and did not entertain the issue of the socks because it was not in Nance’s written motion. Yet, Judge McGury entertained attorney Bergmann’s “oral” motion for supervised visitation. This is a disparity of treatment toward a pro se litigant. This violates the codes mentioned above in this letter and pro se litigants’ pleadings as described in Supreme Court opinions.

Therefore, Nance respectfully request an investigation into the matters brought forth in this complaint, and the accompanying complaint filed with the Attorney Registration and Disciplinary Commission (ARDC). Regarding the ARDC complaint, Nance is not suggesting this entity circumvent the proceedings of the ARDC, but rely upon the Rules and Facts as if fully disclosed herein.

It is my belief that Judge Kathleen M. McGury and Attorneys Bergmann & Ceko are acting in a conspiracy and scheme to deny Nance’s visitation of the minor child, and to purposely discredit Nance’s efforts for relief through the judicial system. I will post this complaint on my website.

cc: Attorney Registration and Disciplinary Commission

Update: December 2, 2006

This is still an issue.

Here we go again. VOTERS!!! VOTERS!!! VOTERS!!! WHERE ARE YOU? WHO WILL ASSIST OUR CHILDREN? THIS IS NOT AN ISOLATED INCIDENT. IF OUR PENALTIES FOR CHILD SUPPORT CANNOT BE CALCULATED BY THE ILLINOIS DATABASE FOR THE DEPARTMENT OF HEALTHCARE & FAMILY SERVICES, THERE ARE MANY OTHER CHILDREN OUT THERE WHO CANNOT HAVE JUST DUE PENALTIES CALCULATED FOR THEIR CHILD SUPPORT.

WHO WILL HELP THE CHILDREN? OUR POLITICIANS WILL NOT. THE CHILDREN IN QUESTION ARE NOT THEIR CHILDREN. MAYBE THERE ARE OTHER REASONS. WRITE YOUR CONGRESSMEN AND WOMEN. FIND OUT WHO IS HELPING THE CHILDREN.

IF THEY CANNOT PROVIDE AN ANSWER, VOTE FOR SOMEONE ELSE. THERE ARE IMPORTANT POLITICAL RACES COMING UP IN THE YEAR 2006. VOTE FOR THOSE WHO HAVE YOUR BEST INTEREST IN MIND.

DO NOT LET THE POLITICIANS HAVE YOU VOTE IN "BLOCKS" AS IF THEY ADVOCATE FOR A PARTICULAR RACE OR ETHINICITY. THEY ARE TAKING OUR VOTING POWER FOR GRANTED.

November 26, 2005

Illinois Department of Healthcare & Family Services
Mr. Barry S. Maram, Director
201 South Grand Avenue
Springfield, Illinois 62763-0001

Re: 2004 D 650237 Darlene Bouyer-Nance (petitioner) vs. Lawrence Gaston (respondent) with child support for Kristina Gaston

Mr. Maram:

This is a follow-up to the 3 previous letters published and posted on http://clickforjusticeandequality.blogspot.com/, which this letter is also published and posted.

This is the 4th letter sent to your office requesting enforcement of a judicial court order demanding Mr. Lawrence Gaston pay child support every month, by the 3rd of the month, of $100.00 as ordered by the court. As of November 26, 2005, Kristina Gaston has not received her allotment of $100.00 for November 2005. This brings the total owed to Kristina to $450.00 using the figures submitted to us by your Acting Administrator, Pamela Compton, which is in your system’s database.

A letter dated September 6, 2005, addressed to my wife Darlene Bouyer-Nance, from Ms. Compton states, in part, “…Research shows that Cook County court order 2004D0650237 became effective August 13, 2004. This order obligates Mr. Gaston to pay $100.00 per month in current support for your child, Kristina Gaston…As of August 26, 2005, the balance due on your account is $350.00.” This does not include charges to Mr. Gaston for late fees as outlined in this court order.

Ms. Compton continues her statement, in part, “…Your desire to see legal consequences and penalties imposed on Mr. Gaston is acknowledged….While recommendations are made and specific penalties may be requested, the decision rests solely with the judge hearing the case on what penalties he or she will impose.” It appears no recommendations or penalties will arise because your office is punishing Kristina for bringing this to your attention and posting it to the Internet. In order to have this case brought before a judge, the Cook County States Attorney’s office must act.

Ms. Compton reports, “…These penalties are not imposable by the Division of Child Enforcement; they are judicial penalties. The failure to pay child support is a civil, not criminal, matter.” Mr. Maram, you need to change the name of your department from “Child Support Enforcement” to something else because it is surely not child support enforcement. Your department is not “enforcing” any child support court order in this matter. It is merely an entity to pass the buck.

My wife and I have attempted to address this issue in open court with Illinois’ Cook County State Attorney’s office, to no avail. A Cook County States Attorney presented this matter when the judicial court order became effective. It was not civil then, unless the Cook County States Attorney’s office handles civil matters. It would seem to us laymen the Illinois State Attorney’s office would work with your “Child Support Enforcement” in gathering the necessary remedies to comply with the judicial court order. It is ludicrous for the public to believe child support is enforceable by civil remedies paid out of the pockets of a child’s parents seeking enforcement of a judicial court order. It is ludicrous to believe this court order should be enforced through “civil” remedies. This is absurd.

We, the voting public, cannot depend on any promises from this administration under Governor Rod Blagojevich. As outlined in previous letters to you, Mr. Blagojevich has implemented new “laws” to supposedly crack down on “deadbeat” dads. If his new agenda means anything to his appointees, they should be active in implementing his strategies. It appears the only thing enforceable under this administration is retaliatory acts from this administration upon my family for bringing to the public’s attention the non-actions and ludicrous statements of this present government.

Mr. Gaston now lives with another daughter and her mother in Southern Illinois. Has Mr. Gaston alerted “your” system of moving his residence? He would not be hard to locate if research were done to find the mother of the other child who may be receiving some sort of public assistance. Mr. Gaston and his other child are using the “public aid” system to pay for their medical treatments. Mr. Gaston is seeing doctors who are billing the “public aid” system for his medical expenses. If I remember correctly, the Illinois Department of Healthcare and Family Services is Public Aid now, isn’t it?

Nevertheless, it appears we are reaching your “magic” number of $500.00 for some sort of relief. At last count it seems Mr. Gaston owes $450.00. Ms. Compton reports, “The 9% interest for past due current support was also mentioned in your husband’s correspondence. At this time, our database is unable to calculate and add interest to account balances.” What a statement by a government entity that spends millions of taxpayer dollars!!! If the 9% were calculated, Kristina would be at $490.50. I did these calculations with a small hand-held calculator. Even so, Kristina is almost at your “magic” number of $500.00.

We, and probably the public who view my website, would like to know what will happen when Kristina reaches your “magic” number of $500.00. C.L.I.C.K. for Justice and Equality is being viewed as far as Australia, Africa, New Zealand, Germany, the United Kingdom, and Canada. People need to know how politics and nepotism work in Illinois. We, the people, need to know how “our” tax dollars are spent.

I would like to take you to an earlier statement made above, which Ms. Compton made, it is “The failure to pay child support is a civil, not criminal, matter. There is something seriously wrong with your department’s thinking. Unless it is what is commonly known as “mainstream” thinking. Mr. Barack Obama is familiar with this thinking. He believes in “mainstream” thinking. This must be the thinking of our Illinois Governor. How long does Kristina wait for justice, or is there no justice for the children of Illinois?

Respectfully submitted,


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

cc: Mr. Rod Blagojevich, Governor of Illinois
Mr. Barack Obama, United States Senator of Illinois
Mr. James Meeks, Illinois Senator
Mr. David Miller, Illinois State Representative
Mr. Dick Devine, Illinois Cook County States Attorney
Ms. Colleen Glass, Illinois Cook County States Attorney Supervisor
Mr. Durman Jackson, Illinois Cook County States Attorney Supervisor
Ms. Barb Radtke

SHOP BEST BUY AT YOUR OWN RISK. IF YOU WANT TO BE DISRESPECTED, DO YOUR SHOPPING AT BEST BUY.

Ms. Judy Telschow, Executive Resolution Specialist for Best Buy, reports in her letter of May 4, 2006, "...Our Lansing Calumet store states they have documentation contradicting your allegations Mr. Whiteside pushed your daughter's game onto the floor." From this statement, we can conclude this specialist did not personally view the "documentation". This examples how Best Buy "investigates" its customers' complaints.

Do not be fooled or think you will not lose your rights tomorrow, if they take my rights today.

Update: May 12, 2006

On May 4, 2006 I received a response to my reply from Best Buy. Best Buy supports their customers being disrespected by their management. I have posted their response in the comment section to my second letter to them.

Update: April 27, 2006

On or about April 25, 2006 I received a response from Best Buy. I have posted their reponse, verbatim, in the comment section below. Please read it. I am posting my response to their reply.

April 27, 2006

Mr. Bradbury Anderson, Vice Chairman & CEO
Best Buy
7601 Penn Avenue South
Richfield, Minnesota 55423-3645

Re: Unprofessional Behavior and Character of Assistant Manager Brand Whiteside – Lansing Store #312- Part II

Mr. Anderson:

I received a letter dated April 21, 2006 from Ms. Judy Telschow, Executive Resolution Specialist responding to my letter dated April 16, 2006. Her letter reports my letter to you was forwarded to her for review and response. Ms. Telschow’s response is unacceptable.

Ms. Telschow begins with jargon stating Best Buys’ integral and ethical stance toward customer care, which does not mean anything toward resolving the issue. This is no time for her to advertise your business integrity and ethics. That went out the window when your manager acted as he did.

She goes on to report, “I would like to address your concerns.” She does not address my concerns! She also reports, “I spoke with the management of our Lansing Calumet Store (#312), and although their account of this incident varies significantly from yours, I do appreciate your contacting our offices to share your concerns.” What does this mean? She is sweeping the issue under the rug. What does she expect her management team to say? Does she expect them to admit to what I wrote? If she does, she is just as crazy as the team of managers you have at your Calumet store. She does not suggest an apology to my wife. She does not report what Best Buy is going to do about my daughter’s game being pushed on the floor by your manager. She does not report how my daughter’s game will be repaired from being knocked to the floor by your manager.

This response from your “Executive Resolution Specialist” is outrageous and ludicrous. If your “Executive Resolution Specialist” team is made up of individuals such as Ms. Telschow, you have a sorry team.

I will post Ms. Telschow’s letter, verbatim, in the comment section of my first posting. I will post a beginning script also suggesting the world think about whether they want to shop in a store where disrespect is condoned by the management and the corporate office.

Respectfully submitted,

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

Update: April 23, 2006

Mr. Bradbury Anderson and Best Buy have not contacted my wife about this issue. We believe Best Buy is ignoring our issues. If this is how they operate, the public should consider shopping elsewhere for their needs. If Best Buy violates my interest and integrity with harassment and nefarious behavior today, do not think or believe they will not violate yours tomorrow.

April 16, 2006

Mr. Bradbury Anderson, Vice Chairman & CEO
Best Buy
7601 Penn Avenue South
Richfield, Minnesota 55423-3645

Re: Unprofessional Behavior and Character of Assistant Manager Brand Whiteside – Lansing Store #312

Mr. Anderson:

I, Fred Nance Jr., am writing this letter on behalf of my wife, Darlene Bouyer-Nance. I will write this letter from her perspective. I will also write from the perspective of my daughter, Kristina Gaston 11-years-old, who witnessed her mother being degraded and embarrassed in a store full of customers. In addition, I called and talked to this purported manager. I did not mention my wife in my conversation with this manager.

On April 14, 2006 at approximately 4:45 pm (CST) my wife entered the Best Buy store located at 17151 Torrence Avenue, Lansing, Illinois hoping to get assistance with our daughter’s Play Station II Portable (PSP). This PSP was a gift, which we do not have a receipt. The PSP was bought from Best Buy. My wife wanted your employees to look at the game to see what was wrong with it.

Your employees reported they could not do anything for my wife because she did not have a receipt. My wife requested to speak to a supervisor or manager. The salesperson stated he would let my wife speak to the manager. Mr. Brand Whiteside approached my wife.

My wife stated to Mr. Whiteside she wanted a technician to look at the PSP to see what was wrong with it. My wife informed Mr. Whiteside what she believed was wrong with the PSP. Mr. Whiteside stated she could not exchange it because she did not have a receipt. My wife did not state she wanted to exchange the PSP. My wife stated again something was wrong with it and she wanted someone to look at it. Mr. Whiteside stated to my wife if she wanted someone to look at it the cost would be $80.00. My wife said okay I want someone to look at it.

My wife started feeling like she was being slighted and demeaned by Mr. Whiteside. My wife asked Mr. Whiteside who was his supervisor. Mr. Whiteside stated “I am the supervisor. I am it.” My wife stated to Mr. Whiteside she knows there was someone higher up than him. Mr. Whiteside stated, “We got three managers and I am the only one here.” Mr. Whiteside then informed my wife he would not let a technician look at it anyway. My wife stated again to let her see someone over Mr. Whiteside.

Mr. Whiteside told my wife if she wanted to talk to someone else she should contact the corporate office. The PSP was sitting on the counter. Mr. Whiteside threw his card at my wife and as he drew his hand back he knocked the PSP on the floor on his side of the counter. My wife stated I know you are going to pick it up and I hope it is not broke. Mr. Whiteside walked away stating, “I am not going to pick it up.” My wife stated to Mr. Whiteside she was going to have to walk around on the other side of the counter to pick it up. My wife walked around to the other side of the counter and picked up the PSP from the floor. Mr. Whiteside told my wife to get out of his store. My wife started going toward the exit of the store. A female salesperson approached my wife asking her what was the matter. The female salesperson heard the conversation between her and Mr. Whiteside. My wife stated to the female salesperson I know you have another manager for this store. The female salesperson stated to my wife there really is no one else here.

Mr. Whiteside approached my wife again. Mr. Whiteside heard my wife asking for another supervisor. Mr. Whiteside stated to my wife I told you I am it. Mr. Whiteside stated I am it tomorrow because I am opening up tomorrow. My wife stated to Mr. Whiteside, “I should call the police on you.” Mr. Whiteside looked at his phone stating to my wife do you want use my phone. My wife stated to Mr. Whiteside if I call the police you are the one going to jail. My wife left the store and called me at work. It was approximately 5:10 pm (CST).

I called the Best Buy Lansing store. I asked to speak to Mr. Whiteside. Mr. Whiteside came to the phone. I asked to speak to his supervisor. Mr. Whiteside stated he did not have a supervisor. Mr. Whiteside stated he had a district staff. I asked Mr. Whiteside for his corporate office number. Mr. Whiteside gave me 1-888-BESTBUY. I asked Mr. Whiteside if I could have his district manager’s name and phone number. Mr. Whiteside stated with hostility “I gave you the information you wanted, correct.” I asked Mr. Whiteside “who are you talking to you?” Mr. Whiteside stated, “I gave you the information you wanted, correct.” I stated, “who are you talking too?” I asked Mr. Whiteside if this was the way he spoke to everyone who called Best Buy. Mr. Whiteside stated, “I gave you the information you wanted, correct.” Then he hung up on me. At no time did I mention my wife’s name or the incident above to Mr. Whiteside.

This manager’s character and behavior is outrageous and discourteous. I searched your website to get your name, Mr. Anderson. On April 14, 2006 at approximately 5:20 pm (CST) I called Ms. Sue Busch at 612-292-4000 ext 4. I called Dawn Bryant at 612-291-6119. I did not get an answer at either number. I called 888-BESTBUY. I spoke to Ms. Sras who took my verbal complaint. Ms. Sras informed me Mr. Jim Sipple was Mr. Whiteside’s General Manager. Ms. Sras informed me my complaint was filed under case #26318178.

Mr. Anderson, I know you do not run a company where your customers are disrespected and humiliated when attempting to get assistance or to purchase an item. This humiliation and disrespect took place in front of our 11-year-old daughter. How do you think our daughter felt seeing her mother disrespected and humiliated? This humiliation and disrespect took place around potential customers and the staff of the Lansing store #312.

I informed my neighbors. I had one neighbor tell me he will think twice about shopping at Best Buy if this is the way they treat their customers. I will post and publish this letter on my website at http://clickforjusticeandequality.blogspot.com/. It is my hope to spread this incident to as many people as can be reached. The public needs to know how the managers of your Lansing Illinois store operate. The public needs to know what kind of managers you employ. This is not an isolated incident. Mr. Whiteside spoke to me in an unprofessional way. I did not even mention my wife’s incident. I merely asked for his supervisor. This man is sick. He has no people skills. I can imagine how his staff is treated.

How many people have complained to Mr. Whiteside where he upset them so they started cursing him out? How many people has Mr. Whiteside called the police on after he has prompted them to act out because of his behavior? Mr. Whiteside needs more than training. Mr. Whiteside talks like he is above the law or the concerns of the public who are your consumers. How many staff do you have mirroring this behavior? I know you know in an employment setting the behavior and character of our superiors are mirrored by our staff. This will create dissent among the consumers.

Therefore, I would like an investigation into this matter. I would like to know something has changed in the Lansing Illinois store to prevent consumer harassment, humiliation and disrespect.

In addition, my daughter’s PSP suffered more damage when Mr. Whiteside knocked it on the floor. It is hard to believe a manager acted as Mr. Whiteside did. It is hard to believe a manager would make a customer walk around on the side of the business counter to pick up their merchandise, whether it was knocked over by the consumer or the employee. This is outrageous. Where did you get this guy? Mr. Whiteside should pay for the damages incurred due to the PSP being knocked on the floor. How can Best Buy employ a person with this type of character? I will surely look to buy elsewhere in the future. I hope future customers who read this correspondence on the Internet think twice about shopping at Best Buy. I am mailing a hard copy of this letter on April 17, 2006. I will fax a soft copy to Mr. Anderson to assist in an immediate solution to this matter.

Respectfully submitted,

Fred L Nance Jr., ABD, MA, CADC, NCRS
http://clickforjusticeandequality.blogspot.com/

Update: August 12, 2006

The Illinois Department of Transportation denied my request for reimbursement for repairs due to potholes in the street of Illinois. The reasoning used for this decision predicates itself on Illinois case law. Again, the Illinois Courts are legislating from the bench.

Update: July 2, 2006

Response letters from the Illinois Department of Transportation are copied verbatim in the comment section of this writing.

July 1, 2006

Mr. Rod R. Blagojevich Governor of Illinois
Office of the Governor
207 State House
Springfield, Illinois 62706

Re: Illinois Department of Transportation – File # 721699

Mr. Governor:

On January 11, 2006 I wrote a letter to Mr. Timothy W. Martin, Illinois Secretary of Department of Transportation (IDOT), about damage to my car tire on an Illinois street (pothole).

On May 7, 2006 I wrote you about this claim and the denial of reimbursement. Mr. Martin assigned Mr. James E. Sterr, IDOT Chief Bureau of Claims. Mr. Governor, how can an entity investigate itself? You have put in place the Office of Inspector General for such a task. Mr. Sterr wrote a letter to me stating, in part, “…The Department is permitted to pay claims where it is deemed negligent and a legal liability exists. The amount of claim is not a determining factor as to liability or compensability. The Department utilizes liability guidelines as established by cases before the Illinois Court of Claims…Ms. Ridge’s letter explained the legal reasons why a denial was proper. On or about January 10, 2006 you completed and submitted a claim form to our Schaumburg office. That office reviewed highway incident reports for thirty (30) days prior to the alleged incident. There were no prior reports of potholes or any other defects at 95th and Stoney Island.”

Why does this department have to be negligent or legally liable to reimburse a taxpayer for damage to their vehicle? Negligence and legal liability should not be the barometer for damage to a taxpayer’s vehicle. The department had nothing to do with the pothole being in the street. What are the social policy implications of this approach toward liability? We all know our courts are legislating from the bench.

Therefore, the amount of the claim should be a determining factor whether a case is deemed necessary for court action. The court cost alone would be more than the liability. This department leaves a taxpayer and constituent with no means of recovery. Taking it to court would defeat the purpose of a $64.30 charge. What does my case have to do with other incidents reported? Why didn’t the Schaumburg office look back 6 months? There have been tremendous potholes at this location for years. Some people do not know how to complain. People just go on with their lives letting people like Martin and Sterr continue to oppress and suppress people. This is a crazy decision.

Your constituents need to know how you are running your office. Hopefully, someone who lives in the area will view my website and pass the word on to beware of Governor Blagojevich and his department heads in November. We need to elect someone different until they get it right. You cannot continue to oppress a people. This pothole is in the “black” neighborhood. I talked to a “white” person at Pepboys where I replaced my tire. He informed me he was reimbursed for his tire repair when he reported it. This is really how Illinois politics works, if I am white I am right.

Governor, this is ludicrous. What does this mean? Why does this absolve the State of Illinois their reasonable responsibility? We are talking about $64.30. If the State of Illinois is not liable because your department deems there is no negligence or legal liability, then the voters of Illinois need to know how you “really” operate. This may be why the Feds are in your house.

A Federal investigation appears to be appropriate because not only does this department operate in a nefarious fashion you also have other departments operating from a tyrannical and despotic perspective. It may be because of nepotism. Who knows? There needs to be a change in November. This office is terrible. This is not just happening to me. I just happen to be a social policy analyst. The issues I am addressing with your office are real and are happening everyday, all day. It is not going to stop because you are not going to stop it. You talk a good game but your players are not good.

Nepotism is the rule of the day. Mr. Sterr is not going to rule against Ms. Ridge. Who is Mr. Sterr related too? Who is Ms. Ridge related too? I will take this issue to another level of investigation. You claim to have an entity in place to investigate your government’s actions. Why didn’t Secretary Martin request the Office of Inspector General to investigate? May be Mr. Martin said to himself, “oh, it just $64.30. Let’s just take it away from the “black” man. He doesn’t deserve anything anyway.”

Respectfully submitted,

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

cc: Timothy Martin,.Secretary of IDOT James Sterr, Chief Bureau of Claims http://clickforjusticeandequality.blogspot.com/

Update: June 11, 2006

On or about June 9, 2006 I received a reply letter from the Illinois Department of Transportation (IDOT). The reply is posted in the comment section of this writing. IDOT sent Governor Blagojevich a copy of this response.

Update:

Illinois Governor Rod Blagojevich's Department of Transportation uses litigation jargon to resist liability of $64.30 for damage to Illinois resident automobile. Illinois resident automobile damaged when hitting potholes in the street of Illinois. Please see posting for May 6, 2006 regarding details of the automobile accident and pothole damage. This letter is dated January 11, 2006 to the Illinois Department of Transportation.

I received a response letter on May 3, 2006 from Ms. Christine Ridge, Region #1 Litigation Respresentative of the Illinois Department of Transportation, which is posted verbatim in the comment section. Governor Blagojevich is attempting re-election in Illinois.

You the public must determine if you want to re-elect a Governor who permits his department heads to act in the manner stated in the comment section of this writing. We pay taxes for road repairs. Must we also pay for repairs to our cars when we hit the potholes in the street of Illinois. We also pay the salaries of the people who fixed the potholes.

Where is the money really going? It seems the Illinois Department of Transportation needs the $64.30 requested for the repairs to my car. I submitted all the paperwork with repair documentation to the Illinois Department of Transportation.

May 7, 2006

Mr. Rod R. Blagojevich
Governor of Illinois
Office of the Governor
207 State House
Springfield, Illinois 62706

Re: Illinois Department of Transportation – File # 721699

Mr. Governor:

I, Fred L Nance Jr., am writing this letter respectfully requesting your office intervene in this matter. I wrote a letter to Mr. Timothy W. Martin, Secretary of IDOT, stating I incurred damages to my car tire on January 10, 2006 in the amount of $64.30.

I filled out all the necessary paperwork providing receipts for the repair. Ms. Christine Ridge, Region #1 Litigation Representative, acknowledges and admits in her letter dated May 1, 2006 damages were incurred to my vehicle. The damages came from multiple potholes in the street located south of 95th Street on Stoney Island Avenue, Chicago, Illinois.

These potholes have been unattended by IDOT for months. I submitted the IDOT claims form on or about January 12, 2006. In my letter dated January 11, 2006, I informed Mr. Martin the damages incurred happened on January 10, 2006 at approximately 10:30 pm (hard copy of letter attached with full details of the accident). On or about May 3, 2006 I received a letter from Ms. Ridge reporting, in part, “…the courts have consistently recognized it is not possible for the Department to have notice of every defect immediately upon its occurrence. Liability, therefore, must be determined based on our notice of a defect and lack of expedience in repairing said defect. Since in this case repairs were made within a reasonable amount of time after notification of the defect, the State of Illinois, Department of Transportation is not legally liable for your loss.”

Why is Ms. Ridge citing or quoting Illinois law in this matter? Is this normal procedure for such a minor cost? IDOT is outrageous and ridiculous. Mr. Governor is this what your constituents can expect from this office, which you are responsible? Should the taxpayers who provide some of the money for repair of the roads in Illinois with their tax dollars expect their government to act in this manner using litigation jargon to escape its “natural” notification responsibility? Why does IDOT have a damage claims form or office?

If this is how your government operates the taxpayers of Illinois should be informed. As stated previously, these potholes under the viaduct south of 95th Street on Stoney Island Avenue have been there for months. Ms. Ridge also reports in her letter to me, “A member of our Emergency Traffic Patrol first noticed the hazard at approximately 8:30 pm on January 10, 2006 and our Communications Center was notified at that time. Repairs were scheduled for January 11, 2006 and were completed by 6:40 that morning by our area maintenance staff.”

Governor, are we supposed to believe IDOT learned of these potholes 2 hours before my car incurred its damages? Come on. These potholes have been there for months. The public is not that stupid. If this is the way your department heads handle their business, then its time for a change in government. This is outrageous.

Sir, I sent you copy of my initial complaint about this incident on or about January 11, 2006 by fax. I posted the initial letter on my website at that time also. I will post this letter with the initial letter to IDOT from January 11, 2006 on my website, hoping your constituents understand my plight and the operation of your present government.

I will post and publish Ms. Ridge’s response letter in the comment section of the posting of this letter. Your constituents need to understand if I lose my liberties today, they will lose theirs tomorrow. We need a new government. Your government wants its constituents to pay for the Illinois roads to be repaired and it wants us to pay for damages to our cars incurred before your repairs, and your government wants us to understand we do not have a leg to stand on if we proceed to litigation regarding the unfairness of it all.

Is this the message you want to send? I guess our tax money also goes for the salaries of the employees repairing the roads. Where is our money really going? As you continue to campaign for re-election inform the voters of Illinois of how your government really operates. Let them know if they incur damages from potholes in the streets of Illinois, present law will report your government is not liable for their loss.

This should go over very well for you. I expect to get a check in the amount of $64.30. Is this publicity really worth $63.40? Ms. Ridge and her staff is a rare commodity. I guess she believes you need this kind of publicity. Well I have no problem providing it for you.

Respectfully submitted,

Fred L Nance Jr., ABD, MA, CADC, NCRS
Social Policy Analyst
cc: Ms. Diane O’Keefe, District Engineer Mr. Michael Fitzgerald, Claims Manager Mr. Steve Peters, Communication Center Manager http://clickforjusticeandequality.blogspot.com/ C.L.I.C.K. for Justice and Equality (website) P.S. Hard copies mailed to Governor Blagojevich. All other individuals mentioned above sent fax copies of this letter only.

Update: July 2, 2006

Response letters from the Illinois Department of Transportation are copied verbatim in the comment section of this writing.

July 1, 2006

Mr. Rod R. Blagojevich
Governor of Illinois
Office of the Governor
207 State House
Springfield, Illinois 62706

Re: Illinois Department of Transportation – File # 721699

Mr. Governor:

On January 11, 2006 I wrote a letter to Mr. Timothy W. Martin, Illinois Secretary of Department of Transportation (IDOT), about damage to my car tire on an Illinois street (pothole). On May 7, 2006 I wrote you about this claim and the denial of reimbursement. Mr. Martin assigned Mr. James E. Sterr, IDOT Chief Bureau of Claims.

Mr. Governor, how can an entity investigate itself? You have put in place the Office of Inspector General for such a task. Mr. Sterr wrote a letter to me stating, in part, “…The Department is permitted to pay claims where it is deemed negligent and a legal liability exists. The amount of claim is not a determining factor as to liability or compensability. The Department utilizes liability guidelines as established by cases before the Illinois Court of Claims…Ms. Ridge’s letter explained the legal reasons why a denial was proper. On or about January 10, 2006 you completed and submitted a claim form to our Schaumburg office. That office reviewed highway incident reports for thirty (30) days prior to the alleged incident. There were no prior reports of potholes or any other defects at 95th and Stoney Island.”

Why does this department have to be negligent or legally liable to reimburse a taxpayer for damage to their vehicle? Negligence and legal liability should not be the barometer for damage to a taxpayer’s vehicle. The department had nothing to do with the pothole being in the street. What are the social policy implications of this approach toward liability? We all know our courts are legislating from the bench. Therefore, the amount of the claim should be a determining factor whether a case is deemed necessary for court action. The court cost alone would be more than the liability. This department leaves a taxpayer and constituent with no means of recovery. Taking it to court would defeat the purpose of a $64.30 charge.

What does my case have to do with other incidents reported? Why didn’t the Schaumburg office look back 6 months? There have been tremendous potholes at this location for years. Some people do not know how to complain. People just go on with their lives letting people like Martin and Sterr continue to oppress and suppress people. This is a crazy decision. Your constituents need to know how you are running your office.

Hopefully, someone who lives in the area will view my website and pass the word on to beware of Governor Blagojevich and his department heads in November. We need to elect someone different until they get it right. You cannot continue to oppress a people. This pothole is in the “black” neighborhood. I talked to a “white” person at Pepboys where I replaced my tire. He informed me he was reimbursed for his tire repair when he reported it. This is really how Illinois politics works, if I am white I am right.

Governor, this is ludicrous. What does this mean? Why does this absolve the State of Illinois their reasonable responsibility? We are talking about $64.30. If the State of Illinois is not liable because your department deems there is no negligence or legal liability, then the voters of Illinois need to know how you “really” operate. This may be why the Feds are in your house. A Federal investigation appears to be appropriate because not only does this department operate in a nefarious fashion you also have other departments operating from a tyrannical and despotic perspective. It may be because of nepotism. Who knows?

There needs to be a change in November. This office is terrible. This is not just happening to me. I just happen to be a social policy analyst. The issues I am addressing with your office are real and are happening everyday, all day. It is not going to stop because you are not going to stop it. You talk a good game but your players are not good. Nepotism is the rule of the day. Mr. Sterr is not going to rule against Ms. Ridge. Who is Mr. Sterr related too? Who is Ms. Ridge related too? I will take this issue to another level of investigation. You claim to have an entity in place to investigate your government’s actions. Why didn’t Secretary Martin request the Office of Inspector General to investigate? May be Mr. Martin said to himself, “oh, it just $64.30. Let’s just take it away from the “black” man. He doesn’t deserve anything anyway.”


Respectfully submitted,


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

cc: Timothy Martin,.Secretary of IDOT
James Sterr, Chief Bureau of Claims
http://clickforjusticeandequality.blogspot.com/

Update: April 20, 2006

I have not heard anything from Mr. Timothy Martin. I should have received my refund by now. This is our system in action. What a mess. I have only been waiting since January 11, 2006.

As of March 22, 2006, I have not heard anything from Mr. Timothy Martin. I should have received my refund by now. This is our system in action.

On or about February 2, 2006, I received a response from the Illinois Department of Transportation, Secretary Timothy W. Martin. The response is posted in the comment section below. I have not received a response regarding my reimbursement. I hope to receive the reimbursement for the tire I purchased soon. I bought the tire with a credit card.

January 11, 2006


Mr. Timothy W. Martin
Illinois Secretary of Department of Transportation (IDOT)
2300 South Dirksen Parkway
Springfield, Illinois 62764

Re: Pothole on Stoney Island, South of 95th Street, Cook County Illinois

Mr. Martin:

On January 10, 2006 at approximately 10:30 pm my tire was punctured when I drove into a pothole located on Stoney Island, South of 95th Street, in Cook County Illinois. The pothole is in the left lane of traffic, under the overpass, a ¼ of block south of 95th Street. It was raining, traffic was moving briskly, and I had to stay in my lane, which was the left lane. I could not avoid the massive pothole in the street.

I bought a set of 4 tires from PEPBOYS AUTO, 17015 Torrance Avenue, Lansing, Illinois on September 17, 2005, account # 0889 1157820, phone number 708-895-5859. I have a Nissan Altima. I obtained an estimate of $64.30 this morning. I replaced my tire on January 11, 2006 at PEPBOYS AUTO for $64.30. I am seeking reimbursement for the replacement of my tire, and repair of the road where the tire damage took place.

I called your office in Springfield at 217-782-6828. I talked to Susan. I informed her of my dilemma. Susan gave me phone number 847-705-4110 to the District Office, Region 1. I called and spoke to Jennifer. I requested the manager’s name of Region 1. Jennifer gave me Ms. Diane O’Keefe as IDOT’s District Engineer Manager of Region 1. I informed Jennifer of my dilemma. She asked me if I wanted to file a claim. She transferred me to IDOT’s Claims Department. I spoke to Nicole explaining the situation. I requested her manager’s name. I was given Mr. Michael Fitzgerald as the manager of IDOT’s Claims Department. Nicole informed me she would send a claims form to my home. I asked Nicole how long was the process for reimbursement. Nicole informed me reimbursements take up to 90 days. Sir, this is absurd and ludicrous.

I informed Nicole I wanted the damaged road where the pothole is located repaired. Nicole transferred me to IDOT’s Communications Center. A woman answered the phone. I gave her the location of the damaged road. She stated IDOT knew of the repair needed to the road at that location. This raises issues. Why hasn’t IDOT repaired the road? How many complaints/damages have been filed with your office regarding this pothole?

I asked the person who answered IDOT’s Communication Center phone for the manager’s name. She asked me why I wanted it. I told her I was going to write this letter and post it on my website. She informed me I could get the manager’s name from IDOT’s website. I asked her was she refusing to give me the manager’s name. She informed me Steve Peters was IDOT’s Communication Center Manager. The lady reiterated I could go to IDOT’s website to the get the name of her manager. The lady informed me the pothole at the location I have reported will be fixed today, January 11, 2006. She would not give me her name.

Sir, I will have to pay for this new tire with money I do not have (credit card). If IDOT knew of the repair needed to the road, why isn’t it repaired? I had to change the tire in the rain. This road where the pothole is leads to the Bishop Ford expressway, I 57, and I94 North. This pothole is in the left lane of traffic. When my tire burst, I had to cross 4 lanes of traffic, in the rain, with my 11-year old daughter in the car. It was hazardous and dangerous changing my tire at that location with cars zooming by me at speeds exceeding 40 miles an hour. My daughter and I were coming from a pleasant evening event with our church. This was not a good way to end our evening.

Therefore, I am requesting two things: (1) an immediate reimbursement for my tire; and (2) the road repaired at the location cited above. I will publish and post this letter on my website at: http://clickforjusticeandequality.blogspot.com/.


Respectfully submitted,

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

cc: Ms. Diane O’Keefe, District Engineer
Mr. Michael Fitzgerald, Claims Manager
Mr. Steve Peters, Communication Center Manager
Mr. Rod Blagojevich, Governor of Illinois
http://clickforjusticeandequality.blogspot.com/

P.S. All individuals mentioned above sent fax copies of this letter only!!!! No hard copies mailed.

Update: November 24, 2006

There has been no response from Orland Park Nissan's Customer Service Department.

Update: November 19, 2006

There has been no response from Orland Park Nissan.

Update: November 11, 2006

There has been no response from Orland Park Nissan's Customer Service Department regarding the replacement or adjustment of my bumper.

Update: October 29, 2006

There has been no response from Orland Park Nissan's Customer Service Department regarding the replacement or adjustment of my bumper.

Update: October 23, 2006

I have not heard anything from Nissan Motor Co. LTD. I visited Orland Park Nissan's Customer Service Department, without an invitation. I informed them when driving my ride is bumpy and rough, that the car pulls to the left or right when stopping and that the rear bumper is not aligned correctly and is getting worse suggesting it may fall off. I hand-delivered a copy of my July 17, 2006 to Chuck Piano, Principal Owner, and Tom Walker, Service Director.

Nissan's Customer Service Department determined, from both the advisor and tech driving, the ride quality is normal for this type of car; and that the suspension is tight. It is assumed the car is in normal condition. Regarding the car pulling to one side or the other, they report both the tech and advisor drove the car and could not duplicate my concern. Regarding the alignment of the bumper, they report the tech cannot adjust the bumper. The advisor reports she will have to discuss the issue with her service manager regarding adjustment.

The issues with the bumpy ride and the car pulling to one side or the other during a stop may be a dysfunction in the quality of this type of car. The issue with the alignment of the bumper and possibility the bumper falling off is another animal. If the bumper cannot be aligned, this car should have been replaced for me and sent back to production when I first reported it. Why would Orland Park Nissan want its customers to have and own a car with type of defect?

I will report what happens in the next update.

Update: September 16, 2006

I have not heard anything from Nissan Motor Co. LTD or Illinois' Orland Park Nissan's Customer Service Department. Consumers beware.

Update: August 24, 2006

I have not heard anything from Nissan Motor Co. LTD or Illinois' Orland Park Nissan's Customer Service Department. Consumers beware.

Update: August 12, 2006

I have not heard anything from Nissan Motor Co. LTD or Illinois' Orland Park Nissan's Customer Service Department.

Update: August 7, 2006

I have still heard nothing from Nissan Motor Co. LTD or Illinois' Orland Park Nissan's Customer Service Department. On August 5, 2006 I received in the mail a copy of my vehicle registration ID card from Orland Park Nissan. I bought this car on April 27, 2006. Orland Park Nissan paid for my vehicle registration on August 3, 2006. It took them more than 90 days to pay for my vehicle registration. This is why I received notice of vehicle registration for my old 1998 Nissan Altima, which I traded in on April 27, 2006. Secretary of State Jesse White would have held me responsible. I have been driving around with license plates on my 2006 Nissan Sentra since April 27, 2006, which were not registered to the car, believing Orland Park Nissan had paid taken care of the vehicle registration.

Update: August 5, 2006

No response from Nissan Motor Co. LTD or Illinois' Orland Park Nissan's Customer Service Department. This organization is not reliable. I received Renewal Fee statement from the Illinois Secretary of State License Renewal Department. This statement reports a renewal for my old 1998 Nissan Altima, which I used as a trade-in at Orland Park Nissan. The license plate I had on the 1998 Nissan Altima is now on the 2006 Nissan Sentra. Am I driving with a plate on my car, which is registered to another car? Orland Park Nissan should have reported they own the car to the Secretary of State. Orland Park Nissan should have informed the Secretary of State about the transfer of title and plates. I paid for this service. It is the responsibility of Orland Park Nissan to report.

Update: August 2, 2006

No response from Nissan Motor Co. LTD or Illinois' Orland Park Nissan's Customer Service Department.

Update: July 29, 2006

Mr. Carlos Ghosn of Nissan Motor Co. LTD has not responded to my letter. Consumers beware of Orland Park Illinois Nissan's Customer Service Department.

July 17, 2006

Nissan Motor Co. LTD
Mr. Carlos Ghosn, President & CEO
P.O. Box 685001
Franklin, Tennessee 37068

Re: Orland Park Nissan, Illinois

Mr. Ghosn:

On July 11, 2006 I visited Orland Park Nissan Customer Service Department seeking assistance with my “new” Nissan Sentra 2006. My first concern was the car pulling to the left when I stop the car. It was my belief I needed a wheel alignment. My second concern was smelling gas when I used my air conditioner for the first time.

It was raining slightly when I brought my car in for service. After driving my car, the service person informed me there was nothing wrong with the car as to my concerns. I asked the service person did he think the car would pull to the left when he drove it in the rain. I thought they would give the car a diagnostic check for the wheel alignment. The service person that drove my car did not answer my question but walked past me handing his analysis to Ms. Heather Wilde who informed me there was no diagnostic machine available at their location. I complained to the salesperson who sold me the car. He took me to his a supervisor. This supervisor directed me to the service department supervisor.

The service department supervisor informed me he would send my car to get it check out. About an hour later, the supervisor returned my car, showing me a paper stating some results of testing informing me nothing was wrong with my car.

Sir, my car still pulls to the left when I stop. There may be something wrong with the manufacturing of this product, since Orland Park Nissan’s test is negative.

The initial service person’s test drive for the smell of gas turning on the air conditioner was negative also. I have not smelled the gas fumes again, but the air conditioner does not blow cold air sufficiently. No one from Orland Park Nissan checked the Freon in the air conditioner. I should not have to put Freon in a new car. Are there reported defects with this model car?

Sir, I bought this car on April 27, 2006. I have 5,582 miles on the car. I have been doing some extensive driving in this car. The issues I presented are justifiable for the driving I have done. I previously took this car in for service on June 6, 2006 for an oil change. I complained of the car riding and running rough. The service person drove the car and reported there was nothing wrong with it. I also complained of the bumper not being aligned properly. The service person found the bumper is slightly off, but stated they cannot adjust it. Are there reported defects about this product?

When I brought the car in, both times, I asked for a temporary car to visit a near by restaurant while the service was being done to my car. I was told both times by Ms. Heather Wilde there was no car available. On my visit of July 11, 2006 when the service department supervisor sent my car somewhere for analysis, he provided me with a loaner that Ms. Wilde told me was not available. Please alert me to the policy covering a loaner when getting your car serviced.

Also, when I visited the first time on June 6, 2006 my car was washed after servicing. They did not afford me this service on my second visit. I do not think I should have asked for the car wash. Nissan’s service appears to be inconsistent.

Therefore, I respectfully request better service on my vehicle equal to others visiting the service department and purchasing vehicles at this facility. I submit the following questions for your review: How can I get my bumper adjusted? What can Nissan do about the car giving such a rough ride? Can I have someone check my Freon? Can I visit a Nissan service department where there is a diagnostic machine on the premises to check my wheel alignment and brakes? In the analysis requested, can it be determined if I have any factory defects in my automobile? If you are able to accommodate me with these request, can I get a loaner vehicle while this service takes place?

Sir, I am not satisfied with the service I have received from this dealership. I am not satisfied with this car.

Respectfully submitted,

Fred Nance Jr., ABD, MA, CADC, NCRS
http://clickforjusticeandequality.blogspot.com/

cc: Mr. Brad Bradshaw, Vice President & General Manager, Nissan Division