Insurance: Disgruntled ex-employee or the truth.

woodchip · Post by **woodchip** » Sat Jul 04, 2009 10:14 am

I wonder where the trial lawyers stand in the new Utopian govt. medical insurance plan? Will they still be able to sue for medical malpractice? How much does the medical profession pay for malpractice insurance and would there be a effect if malpractice claims were reduced. So many question that will emanate from a legal prospective under a govt. insurance plan.

Bet51987 · Post by **Bet51987** » Sat Jul 04, 2009 10:58 am

And Dak..... When you're finished reading dissent's link, read this. It shows the mindset of the \"Grand Old Party\".

http://nearing.newsvine.com/_news/2009/ ... ker-wvideo

Bee

Spidey · Post by **Spidey** » Sat Jul 04, 2009 11:36 am

Sorry Dak, you obviously did misunderstand my question.

Will Robinson · Post by **Will Robinson** » Sat Jul 04, 2009 12:07 pm

I hate to break it to you Bee but health care isn't a \"right\". It is a luxury. It usually comes right after food and shelter on most peoples list as far as how basic it is but is certainly not a right.

It would be nice if the government could provide it to everyone but there is no precedent for it in our law.
At best we might get the government to regulate the industry in a way that it is affordable to those with moderate income and subsidized by government for the poor.

When politicians start proclaiming things as \"rights\" then people expect them to provide those things and protect them from a loss or shortage of those things.
It is irresponsible for them to do so and they don't say these things because they care about you but rather to make you a loyal voter for their party.

Right now Obama admits he and members of Congress won't make use the same health care he says taxpayers should provide for you. Obviously because it would be a serious downgrade, taxpayers provide them a much better quality program.
But regardless of that hypocrisy he will be glad to have you vote for his party because he has spouted off things like 'you have a right to health care'!

Spidey · Post by **Spidey** » Sat Jul 04, 2009 12:36 pm

Ehhh, and I hate to break it to you but…health care “is” a right, health insurance is not.

Think back to the old days before we had the system we have today, as I said before, doctors used to charge people according to their ability to pay, and people were never denied care.

In most primitive societies the doctor is free, and if it weren’t for the rules and laws in this country, anybody could practice medicine, including myself.

Ones health care is a right!

CORD · Post by **CORD** » Sat Jul 04, 2009 9:36 pm

So, I should have the right to taxpayer financed healthcare if I: smoke and get emphysyma, lung cancer, and any number of smoking related diseases? These are self inflicted illnesses. What about obese people, should they have the same right to taxpayer financed healthcare because they choose to eat McDonald's, KFC and Stuckey's every day rather than a balanced, healthy diet? I don't think so. That's what they choose to do to themselves. Why should I help pick up the tab for their poor life choices? Meanwhile, because I choose a healthier lifestyle, I only have to go to the doctor for annual physicals, and routine testing. I can pay for that out of pocket and only need insurance for catastrophic events.

Healthcare is a choice, not a right. If you choose to be unhealthy,(for whatever reason), you should pay for the outcome of those choices on your own dime, not mine.

Spidey · Post by **Spidey** » Sat Jul 04, 2009 10:08 pm

Don’t confuse the right to have something, with the right for someone else to pay for it.

Basic human needs…

Food
Shelter
Clothes
Health

Basic human needs are not a luxury!!!!!

If you are hungry, you go to the woods and shoot something and eat it…that’s a right…or you can go to McDonalds…that’s a luxury.

Don’t get the two confused, you have the right to be healthy, but you don’t have the right for someone else to pay for it.

....................

The issue here should be, affordable health care, not forcing someone else to pay for it.

Tunnelcat · Post by **Tunnelcat** » Sat Jul 04, 2009 10:21 pm

CUDA wrote:TC you can get all the quotes you want, but when the Insurance company gets involved they write their own quote, and that's what they pay off of. and then the fun starts. insurance companies DON'T CARE about your quotes. Oregon law states that,

"Your Insurance company may not limit the costs of the repair to your vehicle in regards to appearance, function, and safety"

And yet they violate that all the time. INTENTIONALLY.
your options are to get attorneys. most reputable shops will make to proper repairs without getting paid for it. Imagine what will happen when the government is setting their own rules on how they will do things.

While I agree that possibly 30% of the costs is for administration. have you sat in a DMV lately?? when you take away ALL the incentive to be efficient (Profit) you will end up with a health-care system that will function like the DMV.

Cuda, you're right on all counts here, but the operative problem with our health care is that we can't EVEN GET QUOTED PRICES, IN ADVANCE for medical procedures if you're just an individual. The insurance industry has the clout to call and fix prices as they see fit. The hospitals and clinics make up the difference by charging poor slobs with no health insurance and probably no money HIGHER PRICES for the same procedures! If you have ANY assets like a home or car, they WILL put leans on those properties and possessions to get their payment, in blood money and unfortunately, bankruptcy. Gee, they fixed you all up, but now you're BROKE and HOMELESS! My question is where's the market pressure for increasing productivity and efficiency to lower costs and prices if everything is hidden from the consumer and they can't make their own informed decisions about what they purchase?

I spent $4500 dollars for the 15 minutes it took to get my broken wrist pinned by an orthopedic surgeon. Most of that charge came from the 2 hour (equipment use/personnel and anesthesia recovery time) while in the surgery center. One effing broken bone and my 7500 dollar insurance deductible didn't even get dented. That's on top of $119 a month for the privilege of even having insurance. What's absolutely crackers about all this that the director of the surgery center wanted their money UP FRONT BEFORE SERVICES RENDERED and she revealed to my husband and I that if we hadn't had any insurance, it would have cost us only about $1000, but they wouldn't reveal that little factoid to us BEFORE the surgery! If we'd gone up to the hospital, it probably have cost us about three times the $4500, that's want the hospitals usually charge uninsured! What a scam!

Spidey's has a point, is the pursuit of a healthy life a right or a privilege? That's the question we need to debate in order to fix the health care mess. I see anti-abortion fanatics justifying killing doctors in order to prevent murders of babies, but what about AFTER these saved babies are born? Do they still have a right to grow up and live in good health in the U.S.? And if it's a right, how do we get it down to a fair, manageable and reasonable cost for all?

Oh, and you guys will like this, the liberals and Obama are beating each other up over what to do about it, so don't worry, socialized medicine will never get established in this country.

INFIGHTING

CUDA · Post by **CUDA** » Sat Jul 04, 2009 10:53 pm

does a person that abuses their own health have a "right" to health-care????

Smokers?
drug users?
the seriously obese?
these are just some of the examples of personal health abuse there are more.

these people have made a choice to abuse their health. do we then owe the free medical care??

TC wrote:Oh, and you guys will like this, the liberals and Obama are beating each other up over what to do about it, so don't worry, socialized medicine will never get established in this country.

I said that about 10-12 posts ago

Spidey · Post by **Spidey** » Sat Jul 04, 2009 11:10 pm

This country is founded on the idea that we all have inalienable rights, basic human needs are, in my opinion, part of those rights.

Therefore the government’s obligation in this matter is to provide a system where people can provide for their own health care…not provide that health care.

.......................

I have a cataract, I very much need to have it fixed. The operation takes about 10 minutes, and needless to say…I can’t afford the operation…

This condition is not my fault, nor is my T2.

What do you have to say about that?

BTW…if I lose the other eye…50/50 chance…I will be blind.

Will Robinson · Post by **Will Robinson** » Sun Jul 05, 2009 8:10 am

Food and water are essentials. Everything else is a bonus.
Most humans seek shelter as the next thing on their list.
Anything from a multi million dollar home to a cardboard box....whatever our finances will allow we all look for shelter.
A house/shelter is not a right. Just because everyone feels like they need it doesn't give them the right to take it. Go squat in a box on someones property claiming you have no home and see if the police protect your \"right\" to a shelter!

A skilled medical technician to help you avoid disease and organ failure is not a right.

Krom · Post by **Krom** » Sun Jul 05, 2009 9:37 am

I'd gladly pay $30 for a doctors visit from a good enough general practitioner, even if I could see a specialist for $3,000. But I never have that choice, its always the specialist.

My last trip into the clinic was from food poisoning, I had figured it out myself before I even got there. You go to a clinic, tell them you are dehydrated and ask for an IV, they give you one then charge you almost $1000 for two liters of fluid, using a room for a few hours and almost zero skilled labor. Any intern earning $10/hr could have provided the entirety of the treatment I received, I knew the diagnosis before I even got there and the care wasn't particularly fast. Was it worth the price? Hell no! I should have just stayed home and tried my best to choke down water from the fridge. Why is it I have to pay for this enormous building, and a huge staff to run it when all I need is practically the least amount of care imaginable?

The hospitals and clinics are HUGE unmanageable bureaucracies themselves that drive up the costs of everything to these levels that nobody who really needs it can afford. To say I have zero confidence in the governments or especially insurance corporations ability to solve the problem of \"too much bureaucracy\" would be an understatement. Talk about a snowballs chance of freezing over hell. I'd say the odds of the government solving the root of the problem are less likely than my odds of getting struck by lighting 6 times while being bitten by two different sharks in a fresh water pond in a cave.

Spidey · Post by **Spidey** » Sun Jul 05, 2009 10:21 am

Will, you are actually going to stand there and tell me “I don’t have the right to go to a doctor” Well get in my way…and see what happens!

…………………………..

Krom, just get a friend to refer a GP, you can go there and pay cash, your insurance company can’t stop you.

dissent · Post by **dissent** » Sun Jul 05, 2009 10:26 am

Krom wrote:... I'd say the odds of the government solving the root of the problem are less likely than my odds of getting struck by lighting 6 times while being bitten by two different sharks in a fresh water pond in a cave.

heh!

The Public Option is no longer inevitable.

and, from one of the links in that article

Republicans who oppose the government-run "public option" in health insurance, including Ohio Rep. John Boehner and South Carolina Sen. Lindsey Graham, have been repeating that it's a bad idea because the Congressional Budget Office has slapped it with a high price tag. But although the CBO did score drafts of two health reform bills recently, neither included a public plan for scoring. That doesn't mean there aren't plenty of reasons to be skeptical of a public option: It could end up creating a bloated, government-backed health-care monopsony that blunts medical innovation by sticking to stingy provider payments; or it might end up unwieldy and fantastically expensive if cost-control measures fail and political pressures force it to shell out for any and every imaginable procedure. Over the long run, it's very likely that it would significantly reduce competition amongst insurers. So wariness about the public plan is warranted, but opponents need to be careful not to pull the CBO over to their side before it's actually weighed in.

(emphases mine)

Bet51987 · Post by **Bet51987** » Sun Jul 05, 2009 10:56 am

There is no viable competition among insurers. That's the problem.

Bee

Spidey · Post by **Spidey** » Sun Jul 05, 2009 11:33 am

Insurance will fail to provide affordable health care in either competitive or economy of scale mode.

CUDA · Post by **CUDA** » Sun Jul 05, 2009 1:38 pm

Spidey wrote:Will, you are actually going to stand there and tell me “I don’t have the right to go to a doctor” Well get in my way…and see what happens!

you absolutely have a right to go to a Doctor. and you have a right to open your wallet pay that Doctor. you do NOT have the right to expect FREE services from said doctor

Spidey · Post by **Spidey** » Sun Jul 05, 2009 4:15 pm

*sigh* & *sigh* again

The issue for me is the PRICE of health care & the method of paying for it, not getting or providing FREE health care…I’ll leave that to the liberals.

Tunnelcat · Post by **Tunnelcat** » Sun Jul 05, 2009 4:47 pm

Spidey's got the right point Cuda. We don't want free or subsidized health care, we want affordable health care! My husband's got cataracts in BOTH eyes and it would cost us about $11,000 to have it done (the one price we have been able to find out beforehand). He's going blind very quickly and as a result, he can no longer legally drive and I have to help him read a lot of things. That cost doesn't even factor in the hassle and extra costs AFTER surgery. Problems like dealing with new glasses and possibly laser surgery in the future to get rid of reforming scar tissue that blocks your vision again (a very common side effect of the surgery).

Cuda, what about young people, especially young males, that go out and trash or break their bodies in extreme sports (which most like to do) or that hurt themselves by driving too fast and then get into accident? Are they abusing the health care system too? How about the senior citizens in our society? When one gets old, the odds of a medical problem are almost guaranteed, it can't be avoided, even if they took scrupulous care of their bodies in life. Do we just let them get sick, suffer and die? What if they were your own parents or relatives who got sick and couldn't afford medical help because they're retired, on a fixed income, and stuck with our lovely high-priced health care system? I've seen far too many stories in the press of sad sack people that got hurt or sick, that have had to resort to charity to get medical help because they were broke or bankrupt. There was even one story in the paper today. We can't all get charity, can we?

Tunnelcat · Post by **Tunnelcat** » Mon Jul 06, 2009 8:52 pm

Here's the mindset that's part of our problem. There's a video link in here too.

GRASSLEY'S SOLUTION

Will Robinson · Post by **Will Robinson** » Mon Jul 06, 2009 10:32 pm

I've read the Bill of Rights and the Miranda \"Rights\" and health care isn't in there...where else should I look?

By the way I'm not trying to start a semantic argument here.
I think it's important to address the reality of the situation if you want to discover solutions instead of taking the politicians bait and just accept the premise of their demagoguery simply because the high cost of health care is frustrating.

The reason that distinction is so important is because the politicians argument that 'it's a right' so 'vote for him' is similar to a whore accepting the argument of a street pimp who tells her he is the solution to her hard luck trying to earn a living...

The high cost for health care can be dealt with without selling our soul to the devil. The government took over the retirement plan of americans and that plan is broke...they took over the health care of our military, you know the military, it's an organization that has the HIGHEST ALLOCATION of all the funds our government spends every year...and they get ★■◆● for health care!!

Do you really think Obama and Nancy Pelosi are going to fix the problem? Or is this yet another example of them using us? You know like when they said: \"You never want a serious crisis to go to waste\" and then they rammed through a trillion dollars of non stimulating pork spending and power grabbing in the name of an economic stimulus plan!

With help like that who needs cancer?!?

Stroodles · Post by **Stroodles** » Tue Jul 07, 2009 7:57 am

Danged double post =|

Stroodles · Post by **Stroodles** » Tue Jul 07, 2009 7:58 am

It confuses me how people can POSSIBLY think government run healthcare is a good thing. Look at Europe with their nationalized health care. How well did that end for them? As a general rule, our government is inefficent at everything it does. Our schools, our medicare, etc.

There is a number of reasons why the current health care is so expensive, and malpractice lawsuits are a big part of it. I know someone pointed out that you can't win against an insurance company in a lawsuit because of their lawyers and such, but against the doctors it's not the same thing. The public loves the picture of the poor innocent citizen getting oppressed by the mean ole' doctor and hospital. If you don't believe that malpractice suits are out of hand, look at TV. There's commercials for it everywhere. People that didn't know they were treated badly at a hospital, but such and such company on TV insists you were. \"You may not know it, but you're entitled to money!\" It's like a lottery. You didn't dislike the quality of care, but some lawyer says you can cash in? Oh Yeah! The whole entitlement in general is disguisting. People think that they should get whatever it is they want without any work. The truth is, you aren't entitled to very much at all. You're entitled to the unalienable rights, that's about it.

The ridiculous cases that people try to sue for in pathetic attempts to make money? Those hurt too. The doctors are out a LOT of money to defend themselves in court. The vast majority of a time a doctor is sued, his or her career is gone. No one wants to hire a doctor who was sued for malpractice. Even if they didn't do anything and the case was flat out dismissed. Their career is basiclly ruined. And with all the malpractice lawyers floating around, no doctor is safe, no matter how honest they might be.

That's why health care is so expensive.

Spidey · Post by **Spidey** » Tue Jul 07, 2009 8:07 am

Will...Did you read the part of the Bill of Rights that says (para) “Your rights are not limited to those enumerated” or do you really think you need the “right” to breath, I don’t see that there either.

I think perhaps you and others are using “entitlement” instead of “freedom” they both fall under the category of “rights”.

Jeffbane says…

Right
entitlement or freedom: a justified claim or entitlement, or the freedom to do something (often used in the plural)

Entitlement
government program helping specific group: a government program that targets a particular section of the population to receive specific social benefits

Note “the freedom to do something” this is the context I an using “right” here, not “entitlement”.

I can’t speak for the usage by others.

Will Robinson · Post by **Will Robinson** » Tue Jul 07, 2009 8:41 am

Spidey wrote:....

Note “the freedom to do something” this is the context I an using “right” here, not “entitlement”....

If the freedom to purchase health care is what you are after then you already have that right.

If you want the government to force private individuals to provide that health care at a cost below what the market currently supports then you are asking for an entitlement.

I'll agree that the cost is outrageous and I would welcome some action on the government to bring costs down if they would do it in a way that doesn't turn the health care industry into the equivalent of the Social Security administration but make no mistake about it you, nor I, have the right to such an action just because we want it.

Just because a particular thing fits the description of "not enumerated" doesn't mean it doesn't also fit the description of violating someones rights to force them to provide it for you.

Spidey · Post by **Spidey** » Tue Jul 07, 2009 4:56 pm

And you know as well as I do, that health care is not operating on proper market principals. (this is my point, right from the beginning)

I’m not asking for cheap health care, I even expect to pay a premium price for a premium product.

But WTF!

Will Robinson · Post by **Will Robinson** » Tue Jul 07, 2009 10:04 pm

Spidey wrote:And you know as well as I do, that health care is not operating on proper market principals. (this is my point, right from the beginning)

I’m not asking for cheap health care, I even expect to pay a premium price for a premium product.

But WTF!

I'm completely with you in that sentiment. I just want people to reject the bait set out by the liberals who would do no more than dangle the issue like a carrot in front of a mule just to get us to pull their cart for them on election day.

I think Obama has identified some of the issues fairly but his solutions are all about government taking over instead of government cutting through the bull★■◆● and exposing the price gouging and insurance profiteering.
He's smart enough to know better but the average voter isn't so he's taking advantage of the situation. He's just as guilty as the profiteers for using the issue to build party power at our expense instead of trying to create a real solution.

Stroodles · Post by **Stroodles** » Wed Jul 08, 2009 7:27 am

Right you are, the government wants publicity, re-election, and thus power. They're not in the buisness of solving problems, they're in the buisness of looking good.

Tunnelcat · Post by **Tunnelcat** » Wed Jul 08, 2009 4:48 pm

Stroodles, medical malpractice is NOT a big part of our health care costs. It's at most around 2% of the total cost of U.S. health care.

http://www.factcheck.org/president_uses ... ts_of.html

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/06/17/opini ... .html?_r=1

However, MY individual health insurance premiums have been rising at about 20% a year for the last 10 years, and it rose a whopping 40% just this last year!

dissent · Post by **dissent** » Wed Jul 08, 2009 6:02 pm

tunnelcat wrote:Stroodles, medical malpractice is NOT a big part of our health care costs. It's at most around 2% of the total cost of U.S. health care.

I'll try to drum up some data to support my response (not much time tonight), but my reading of your factcheck article does not support your claim. Generally, I get the feeling from speaking to a number of medical practitioners that their skyrocketing malpractice insurance rates are a good part of the reason why their services rates are so high, and also a good part of the reason why the doctor supply is dropping in a number of medical specialties because the docs just don't want to have to keep dealing with these escalating costs.

Trial lawyers love it though, and they're deep in the tank for Obama.

Spidey · Post by **Spidey** » Wed Jul 08, 2009 6:34 pm

It’s all clear to me now, the problem in the health care industry…

IS ALL MY FAULT!!!

Thank you Mr. Vice President, who made it all clear to me today, when he laid the blame for the problems square at the feet of the uninsured. And he didn’t even make any attempt to differentiate between the deadbeats and other uninsured.

And instead of fessing up, that people don’t pay because of the ludicrous prices, or that the system needs other type of reform, he instead went on to reiterate the same old propaganda, that everyone needs to be insured instead.

Well I was pissed, but now I’m simply going ballistic! I have never failed to pay a medical bill, and not only that, I forgo even getting needed services, because of the prices. (that are my fault of course)

Yup, blame the victim, classic!!!

Tunnelcat · Post by **Tunnelcat** » Thu Jul 09, 2009 9:57 pm

dissent wrote:Generally, I get the feeling from speaking to a number of medical practitioners that their skyrocketing malpractice insurance rates are a good part of the reason why their services rates are so high, and also a good part of the reason why the doctor supply is dropping in a number of medical specialties because the docs just don't want to have to keep dealing with these escalating costs.

Trial lawyers love it though, and they're deep in the tank for Obama.

I will agree that malpractice rates are very high, but as a percentage of the high costs to the consumer, I still think it's a small proportion out of the total health care cost we're bearing now. Insurance lobbying to Congress and advertising make up a much larger cost percentage.

But as a thought experiment dissent, what would you replace malpractice lawsuits with in order to protect people from injury, or death by medical mistakes? The medical community sure hasn't found a way to police itself and insure patient safety. Give me a better idea to replace it.

Spidey · Post by **Spidey** » Thu Jul 09, 2009 10:09 pm

Malpractice lawsuits sure as hell don’t protect patients, the root of this problem lies deeper in the system. I can’t really comment on what to do in reguards to this issue, but not expecting doctors to be God might help.

Two things I would do tho…

1. Ban those commercials…”did you eat a burger ten years ago…call us and sue somebody”.
2. Cap the damages.

Sorry for answering for dissent….I’m bored…

dissent · Post by **dissent** » Thu Jul 09, 2009 10:31 pm

Spidey wrote:Sorry for answering for dissent….I’m bored…

No hay problema, compadre!

tunnelcat wrote:But as a thought experiment dissent, what would you replace malpractice lawsuits with in order to protect people from injury, or death by medical mistakes? The medical community sure hasn't found a way to police itself and insure patient safety. Give me a better idea to replace it.

Dunno. There is no way to 100% guarantee patient safety. The wikipedia article is not authoritative, but it raises some interesting points.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tort_reform

Stroodles · Post by **Stroodles** » Fri Jul 10, 2009 7:01 am

I agree on the commericials point. If you need someone you've never met to TELL you that you've been wronged, you probably aren't too bad off.

If you have SERIOUSLY been mistreated, then you'd be willing to go find your own lawyer with actual effort.

Tunnelcat · Post by **Tunnelcat** » Sat Jul 11, 2009 4:45 pm

Spidey wrote:Malpractice lawsuits sure as hell don’t protect patients, the root of this problem lies deeper in the system. I can’t really comment on what to do in reguards to this issue, but not expecting doctors to be God might help.

Two things I would do tho…

1. Ban those commercials…”did you eat a burger ten years ago…call us and sue somebody”.
2. Cap the damages.

You're right, they don't, so I agree that punitive damages are a drain on the whole system, we're all paying for it and also doesn't contribute to solving anything. However, compensatory damages are a whole different issue.

Say for example, a patient has some normally simple surgery that because of a doctor's mistake, causes him or her to permanently lose the function of an arm or leg, or GO BLIND. This person can no longer work at their previous capacity anymore, so who's responsible and should they even be compensated because of the drastic change in their lifestyle and loss of former work ability? The doctor, the hospital or society? Or do we just kick them out the door and let them fend for themselves anyway they can?

If you get rid of punitive tort, what do you put in place to police the medical system and ensure that it's more proactive in protecting patients from bad doctors and methods? Right now, doctors are a clubby closed group and will always close ranks to protect themselves from anyone implying they've made a mistake and that they need to correct it. Also, there seems to be no incentive to put in place a system to keep track of and correct said mistakes. There just doesn't seem to be any motivation with doctors and hospitals to improve the system to cut down on medical mistakes, even WITH our present tort system.

The commercials I was referring to were not just the sleazy ambulance-chasing lawyer ads, but all that pharma crap on TV trying to sell drugs to people that don't even know anything about medicine and health insurance company ads extolling how wonderful and cheap THEIR insurance will be if you just switched to theirs. It's all a money pit.

Spidey · Post by **Spidey** » Sat Jul 11, 2009 5:17 pm

Those are good questions, and I sure as hell don’t have all the answers. But I don’t believe in punishing someone for a \"mistake\" we probably need to have in place, a system for compensating people for the results of a \"mistake\". And I would probably be in favor of some sort of “socialist” remedy for these things. (as in some sort of disability payments)

Now if a doctor commits a criminal act…that’s a different story, and you don’t even want to know what I would like to happen in that case.

Tunnelcat · Post by **Tunnelcat** » Mon Jul 13, 2009 11:25 am

Spidey, you DEFINITELY wouldn't like this

doctor then.

PATEL

Here's some interesting health insurance rabble rousing by a CIGNA insider. He really exposes the primary problem concerning health care in the U.S. He comes right out and says that it's Wall Street driven, not consumer driven, so it's not in the patients interest. Some of this stuff should make Americans really MAD.

http://www.pbs.org/moyers/journal/07102009/profile.html

http://www.prwatch.org/blog/35267

Insurance: Disgruntled ex-employee or the truth.

Re:

Re:

Re:

Re:

Re:

Re:

Re:

Re:

Re: