Insurance Terminatted

[Willlyjo]

Such a shame you can never see the embarassment you've caused yourself.

I've heard things about you from a Senior Member that has caused you (or should have caused you) much more embarrassment than I could ever subject myself to (intentionally or inadvertently), so don't try to effectively back up a moron like Mlanes with your history of embarrassing yourself, to discredit me--it won't work!

 

[Willlyjo]

In that case, I think you have cause to run your question past an employment attorney or possibly the US DOL. It would be one thing if you had neglected to submit the paperwork, or alternately if the policy had been cancelled outright. But if you submitted everything you were supposed to submit and the sole reason your policy was cancelled is due to an administrative error not of your making, this might be a violation of ERISA rules.

I am operating on the assumption that you signed and turned in the authorization for deductions to be taken, in whatever form your company uses (often it is part of the enrollment form). If you did not, it's another whole ball game.

Talk about embarrassing one's self. Why does the Op have to even consult an attorney at this point? He should confront HR/Payroll and there is where the solution lies! They aren't ignorant enough to let this thing escalate to the litigation process.

An attorney or thoughts of an attorney at this point is getting too far ahead of one's self.

 

[pattytx]

willyjo, please provide your credentials in this matter that should cause a poster to believe you over a Benefits professional with over 30 years experience in the field.

 

[cbg]

I've heard things about you from a Senior Member that has caused you (or should have caused you) much more embarrassment than I could ever subject myself to (intentionally or inadvertently), so don't try to effectively back up a moron like Mlanes with your history of embarrassing yourself, to discredit me--it won't work!

Uh-huh. You realize that Senior Member status has to do with post count only, right? That it has nothing to do with credibility? And that every time you post something like this, you only make yourself look stupid? I'm quite sure I know what Senior Member you heard from, if you heard from any at all, that is, and his primary issue is that he doesn't like women disagreeing with him.

If I had the kind of history you claim, sometime in the years I've been posting here the moderators would have done something to stop me.

 

[Willlyjo]

Uh-huh. You realize that Senior Member status has to do with post count only, right? That it has nothing to do with credibility? And that every time you post something like this, you only make yourself look stupid? I'm quite sure I know what Senior Member you heard from, if you heard from any at all, that is, and his primary issue is that he doesn't like women disagreeing with him.

If I had the kind of history you claim, sometime in the years I've been posting here the moderators would have done something to stop me.

I'm not claiming anything about your history, someone else made a few comments to me about your history and I believe him.

 

[Willlyjo]

willyjo, please provide your credentials in this matter that should cause a poster to believe you over a Benefits professional with over 30 years experience in the field.

Why bring credentials into this? Should the poster believe that he/she shouldn't go to HR/Payroll and try to resolve this matter like I suggested? That is the first step you know .

If no results there, then the next step is to "run your question past an employment attorney" as CBG says.

It isn't a question of believing me over someone else, it is a question of common sense. I'm not competing here like it seems you and others are.

Also, many many people without credentials at all on his scale, called Nixon a crook when he said he wasn't. Does that mean that all those people, since they can't provide credentials would not be believed in their accurate assessment of Nixon? I didn't think so.

 

[Proserpina]

Willlyjo - nobody here needs any help discrediting you; you're doing that perfectly all by yourself.

Now hush. Because seriously, even though you're good for joke fodder (and let's face it that is true both here and elsewhere), you're actually at risk of causing harm to legitimate posters with your inanity.

That's reprehensible. I would hope you'd think more of the poster than that.

 

[Proserpina]

Why bring credentials into this? Should the poster believe that he/she shouldn't go to HR/Payroll and try to resolve this matter like I suggested? That is the first step you know .

If no results there, then the next step is to "run your question past an employment attorney" as CBG says.

It isn't a question of believing me over someone else, it is a question of common sense. I'm not competing here like it seems you and others are.

Also, many many people without credentials at all on his scale, called Nixon a crook when he said he wasn't. Does that mean that all those people, since they can't provide credentials would not be believed in their accurate assessment of Nixon? I didn't think so.

Now, you've been asked to provide your credentials by several other members.

You refuse to back up ANYTHING.

Why is that?

 

[cbg]

For the same reason he won't provide legal backup for his positions when asked. He has none.

 

[>Charlotte<]

OP:

Please ignore Willlyjo. He's a forum joke who usually has no idea what he's talking about. These days, he's actually correct once in a while--but only because he's finally starting to learn a thing or two from the posters who have always been qualified to give good advice here. His advice is dicey, at best, and I think the only reason he's still here is because he has a huge chip on his shoulder, and he has some kind of delusion about being a self-appointed hall monitor.

I usually don't even bother arguing with him anymore. The best remedy is to just warn posters of his lack of knowledge and move on.

In summary, take Willlyjo's advice and it's a crap shoot. Take the advise of respected posters, and you should be fine.

 

[Willlyjo]

Now, you've been asked to provide your credentials by several other members.

You refuse to back up ANYTHING.

Why is that?

In case you didn't know, many responses are self-explanatory. Also, there is a great degree of opinion and experience based responses throughout this forum and have been for its entire existence.

The Ops who come here seeking advice based on experience and opinion know we are not lawyers but they can scan the responses for themselves and decide which responses based on experience, opinion and even the self professed expertise of certain arrogant members of this forum, are helpful.

 

[Proserpina]

In case you didn't know, many responses are self-explanatory. Also, there is a great degree of opinion and experience based responses throughout this forum and have been for its entire existence.

The Ops who come here seeking advice based on experience and opinion know we are not lawyers but they can scan the responses for themselves and decide which response based on experience, opinion and even the self professed expertise of certain arrogant members of this forum, are helpful.

Oh, I'm sure when any poster reads a response from you he or she very quickly makes their own judgment.

 

[Willlyjo]

Willlyjo - nobody here needs any help discrediting you; you're doing that perfectly all by yourself.

Now hush. Because seriously, even though you're good for joke fodder (and let's face it that is true both here and elsewhere), you're actually at risk of causing harm to legitimate posters with your inanity.

That's reprehensible. I would hope you'd think more of the poster than that.

What delusion causes you to imagine I'm discrediting myself? My posts have been quite accurate, to the point and highly articulated. On the otherhand, responses (like yours) to my posts have been highly inaccurate, nit picking, condensending, arrogant, spewed with name calling, disgusting, lewd and fabricated.

What is inanity? Don't you proof read before posting? Credentials? Yeh...looks like it.

 

[cyjeff]

In case you didn't know, many responses are self-explanatory. Also, there is a great degree of opinion and experience based responses throughout this forum and have been for its entire existence.

The Ops who come here seeking advice based on experience and opinion know we are not lawyers but they can scan the responses for themselves and decide which response based on experience, opinion and even the self professed expertise of certain arrogant members of this forum, are helpful.

OP....

Willlyjo has won exactly one case. One.

He believes this makes him an expert in every aspect of the law. Forget that the other posters here have been consulted dozens or hundreds or thousands of times over their career ... that these are the people that actually learned and studied and have their personal compensation tied up in being consistently correct.

Willlyjo will never give you his credentials... because he has none. You can tell when this happens because he falls back upon the "response based on experience and opinion" stuff.

Do you want his opinion or expert advice? OP, you should decide carefully.

 

[Willlyjo]

Now, you've been asked to provide your credentials by several other members.

You refuse to back up ANYTHING.

Why is that?

Why back up anything that is self-explanatory? If I posted that blood was red then what would I have to do to back that up? Isn't it rather obvious?


I really believe that some (most) of you go so far out of your way to attack me that you really make yourselves look uneducated and uncredentialed.