AT&T Charges $2,761.07 For A Broken Leg AT&T tells us 'proper protocols were not followed.' Tipped by munky99999 
According to the Chicago Tribune, an AT&T technician installing phone service tripped and fell on the customers premises, breaking his leg. Now normally, a carrier technician should be fully insured and bonded, but in this instance AT&T -- for whatever reason -- decided to try to make the customer pay the bill -- and sent them a letter informing them they owed $2,761.07. The homeowner says the walks were clear, and it "hadn't snowed in days," so they called to complain. When the consumer asked why they received a letter, they were informed it was standard operating procedure: "Our initial investigation indicates that you may be at fault for these damages," the letter said. "The current extent of these damages to our client is currently being determined but to date, we have paid $2,761.07 in disability payment on behalf of (the technician's) employer." Czerwien's wife called the number on the letter and was told it was a standard letter the company sends out. Luckily the consumer called the local news media consumer watchdog, and got AT&T To back off. The Tribune talked to local legal experts who note that at least under Illinois law, homeowners are not liable from injuries incurred from "natural accumulation" of snow and ice. But the law says that should users decide to clear their walkway, Illinois law says they have to do it "reasonably," meaning the user in this instance might be legally (and strangely) better off not shoveling his walkway. AT&T gave Broadband Reports (and the Tribune, apparently) duplicate statements saying that being charged for installer injury (as long as you don't attack them with say, a blender) is not normal. "AT&T has policies and procedures in place to address workers' compensation and disability matters, and we work with all parties involved to review individual claims," AT&T says "In this particular instance, proper protocols were not followed. AT&T provides benefit coverage for its employees who are injured while on the job."
|
  Z80APremium
join:2009-11-23
 ·Cox HSI
4 edits | I would have just turned it over to Homeowners Insurance And the insurance company will tell them to pound sand. Don't be fooled for a second. The ONLY reason ATT is backing off is because of the media attention.
They provide this injury benefit to all employees yet apparently they have a Dear A$ letter they send out and had an amount they were trying to extort from the customer? That makes no sense. | |
|  |  Romney2012Defeat Obama 2012-Chg we can believe inPremium
join:2002-03-03
USA
kudos:4 |  Re: I would have just turned it over to Homeowners Insurance
While having no specific knowledge of AT&T's contract with Sedgwick, it is std procedure to pay the claims mgt company a yearly fee to do this mgt. And it is also usual to reward the mgt company with stepped bonuses if they keep claims under certain pre agreed upon amounts.
Anyway, the point is Sedgwick is no doubt using an opportunity to reduce claims paid by AT&T by various means(including threatening and suing people) in order to meet bonus targets. When this hit the news and reflected on AT&T's rep, Sedgwick was no doubt pressured by AT&T to drop this particular counterclaim. | |
| |  joebarnhartPaxio evangelist
join:2005-12-15
Santa Clara, CA | said by Z80A:And the insurance company will tell them to pound sand. Don't be too sure. It's more likely that your HO policy would just PAY it. After all, it's easier to raise YOUR rates than go to court and fight. That's usually the choice the ins. company makes. | |
| | | Z80APremium
join:2009-11-23 | Re: I would have just turned it over to Homeowners Insurance My insur company never pays out. It's why the rates are so low. | |
| | | |  ReformCRTCSupport Your Independent ISP
join:2004-03-07
Canada | Re: I would have just turned it over to Homeowners Insurance Pay me some $$$, and I'll issue a policy to you today! | |
| | | |  jtudorXm 60's On 6 FreakPremium,MVM
join:2002-12-07
Morganton, NC | said by Z80A:My insur company never pays out. It's why the rates are so low. If that's true, then you are wasting your money buying that insurance. Insurance that never pays a claim is NO better than no insurance at all.
--
Best of luck
"Do, or Do not, there is no try!" Yoda
| |
|
| zed260Premium
join:2007-09-30
Cleveland, TN
kudos:1 Reviews:
·Charter
| said by Z80A:And the insurance company will tell them to pound sand. Don't be fooled for a second. The ONLY reason ATT is backing off is because of the media attention. They provide this injury benefit to all employees yet apparently they have a Dear A$ letter they send out and had an amount they were trying to extort from the customer? That makes no sense. truble is turning it over to home owner insurnce incrse your premiums | |
|
| | Well of course... When it becomes public proper procedures and policies were not followed. But until that time they will continue to hide behind the curtain trying to collect what they can. | |
| | | | Re: Well of course... Obviously, the "proper procedure and policy" that wasn't followed was the customer paying AT&T up instead of going to the media. Maybe they can add "won't go to the media" to the next revision of their Terms of Service.
--
-Jason Levine
Support a children's charity. Buy a calendar and/or a photo book. Shooting For A Cause | |
| | | jtudorXm 60's On 6 FreakPremium,MVM
join:2002-12-07
Morganton, NC | Re: Well of course... said by Jason Levine:Maybe they can add "won't go to the media" to the next revision of their Terms of Service. They might ass such a provision, and it would not surprise me if they did. . . .
But, I seriously doubt that such a provision would be enforceable if someone tried to fight it in court.
--
Best of luck
"Do, or Do not, there is no try!" Yoda
| |
|
 tvtekLive life to its fullestPremium
join:2004-03-07
Concord, CA
·Astound Broadband
1 edit | Not the customers fault I have a torn ACL that happened on customers premises back in 1997. My insurance through my employer covered it with no problem. I wouldn't think of putting the blame on the customer unless they blatantly has trip hazards, but if that were the case I would refuse to do the work anyway. 
--
Toyota - Moving Forward.....Unexpectedly! | |
| | fiberguyMy views are my own.Premium
join:2005-05-20
kudos:3 | Re: Not the customers fault While AT&T is covered by insurance as are the employees.. and trust me, I am no fan of AT&T as a company, the one thing that does bother me are some of the laws.
MN is no stranger to snow, after it snows, states need to crack down on people when it comes to keeping walkways, driveways, and parking lots clear.
My ex slipped in a parking lot at work.. there was a thin layer of ice.. that was an accident and there should have been more care taken as not to slip, but it's a fact of life and nature.
However, even MN has the same laws as IL, BUT, in MN, you are required to clear your walkways, and drive ways in a reasonable amount of time, which is usually defined as 48 hours after a snow fall.
If this customer hadn't cleaned their driveway in days after a snow, then the customer should have some liability in this.. notice I said SHOULD.. I think it just comes as part as living in an area like this. I see it the same as living in a tornado area and a tree falls down.. you gotta remove the tree.
As having been a tech myself, like you, I would have, if it was bad enough, refused to do the job until it was safe enough to move about the property in a reasonable way. And, a completely iced up or snow covered side walk/walk way isn't... a bag of salt cost about $5. There are a lot of lazy people out there that don't care.
In a way, and IF the customer had done NOTHING, then I could see AT&T's side, KIND OF... but, the tech, too, should be smart enough to know how to walk in winter conditions AND should be smart enough to know when something is or isn't safe and have the balls to tell a customer "clean it up first and reschedule your appointment" - IF it was in fact bad.. and by bad, I mean not even treated.
Even in bad weather, like right now, it's going into the mid 30's during the day and 20's at night.. the snow is melting and turning to solid ice at night.. for that reason, I salt regularly.. There has to be responsibility on all sides.
I don't think any of us have all the facts of the matter to make an honest judgment which is why my argument has a lot of IF statements. I do, however, know that (around here) most people are going to always blame the company and never the customer.
Based on the story, however, and the fact the customer stated it hadn't snowed in days, there should be no excuse for that walk way to have any ice or snow on it. If it wasn't at&t, it could be the post man.. | |
| | | rradina
join:2000-08-08
Chesterfield, MO | Re: Not the customers fault What does the sidewalk have to do with the service call? Refuse to complete the service call or don't use the sidewalk!
Are we adults capable of making our own decisions or are we mindless robots? If the later, then obviously we better create lots of protective laws because we're no different than amoeba responding to external stimulus. Cars speed, guns kill, food causes obesity and soiled underwear and the weatherman's failed prediction ruined your new suede jacket a la Seinfeld.
We need to STOP blaming someone else for every poor decision we make.
The other day my father read an article about asbestos and mesothelioma. He said he should sue the state because the building he worked in had asbestos. I asked him how long he knew about the problem. He said he knew about it for years. I asked him if he knew it was potentially dangerous. He said yes. I asked him if he did anything to raise awareness, ask that it be removed and/or quit and get a different job? He said no. I told him he shouldn't have a case against the state because he accepted no personal responsibility for the situation. (He's 75 and he has a spot on his lung they are watching. Of course he smoked for 50 years!!!!)
I work for a food retailer and we have video of people walking into the store, smashing grapes on the floor, sliding their shoe through the mess, laying down on the floor and then yelling for help. An ambulance is called, a lawsuit is filed, we send a DVD of the video and it quietly goes away.
I know there are legitimate cases of neglect and lack of proper diligence that create harmful situations. For those situations, there should be a proper investigation to determine fault. However, we all make mistakes and get hurt but in almost all cases, it's simple misfortune. | |
| | | | Mark HPremium
join:2008-05-18
Sterling Heights, MI | Re: Not the customers fault I think it would have been great to not present your evidence of the fraud, until it got to Court, this way the lawyer suing the grocery will have the greatest amount of money invested in the case, and the Judge can have a few words for the bad actor. | |
|
| |  ssj4androidRedefining Reality
join:2002-04-14
Wyoming, MI | Why should people be forced to clear their driveways and walkways (does that mean the path people walk along to get to your doors?) if they don't want to? It's their private property.
Of course a tech would have every right to refuse to work in unsafe conditions. I've had a tech leave due to a thunderstorm.
I've had a mailman not deliver mail because the roads were too bad. (We have a roadside mailbox) | |
| | | | | One quick question. Where can you get a bag of salt for $5? The cheapest you can get a bag of sidewalk/driveway salt that I have seen is $20 for a 40# bag. | |
| | | | | | Re: Not the customers fault said by Warmachine99:One quick question. Where can you get a bag of salt for $5? The cheapest you can get a bag of sidewalk/driveway salt that I have seen is $20 for a 40# bag. Costco. | |
| | | | | | | Re: Not the customers fault Ah. None of those around here. Carry on!! | |
|
| | | rpine
join:2000-07-06
Milwaukee, WI | Any Pick n' Save has a 25# bag for $4.50. Same for the local Mom and Pop True Value Hardware store in Milwaukee, | |
|
| | | | and disabled persons that cant shuvel and cant afford to pay some one to do it should what? roll over and go to jail for it? nope, sorry, i post a sign on my property stating something like "i am not liable for any damages as a result of your tresspassing on my property with out MY prior written concent up to and including death" easement be damnd if your on my property with out notice im not paying jack if you get hurt. | |
| | | | Avder
join:2002-05-08
Moorhead, MN Reviews:
·Midcontinent Com..
| Re: Not the customers fault Sidewalks are a public right of way. As a home owner in a city, you are basically agreeing to manage the walk as a service to the public who may need to walk on that sidewalk including mailmen, pedestrians, delivery guys, kids walking home from school, and what not. Don't like it? Don't live in a place that has sidewalks.
If you are disabled and a homeowner you are obviously either going to have to hire the work out somehow or see if there's some kind of local exemption, otherwise you face whatever penalty your city imposes. Around here you've got 24 hours to clear a walk, after that the city gives you a complaint and you have 24 hours from that to clear the walk or the city will clear it for you and bill you whatever it cost. If it happens more than 3 times in one winter you start facing misdemeanor charges and fines. | |
| | | | | | | Re: Not the customers fault said by Avder:Sidewalks are a public right of way. As a home owner in a city, you are basically agreeing to manage the walk as a service to the public who may need to walk on that sidewalk including mailmen, pedestrians, delivery guys, kids walking home from school, and what not. Don't like it? Don't live in a place that has sidewalks. If you are disabled and a homeowner you are obviously either going to have to hire the work out somehow or see if there's some kind of local exemption, otherwise you face whatever penalty your city imposes. Around here you've got 24 hours to clear a walk, after that the city gives you a complaint and you have 24 hours from that to clear the walk or the city will clear it for you and bill you whatever it cost. If it happens more than 3 times in one winter you start facing misdemeanor charges and fines. that i should have been an ID,, i do not own a home, but if i did, im sorry, ill take the jail time cuz i wouldnt pay a fine for something i couldnt physically prevent or afford to prevent. lets see, cost of city hiring some one to do it vs what $75 a day for me getting 3 hots and a cot, gee, which ones cheaper?
and your argument that i shouldnt own a home if im disabled is flat out snobby, condosending, and lacks any understading or compassion what so ever. | |
| | | | | | fiberguyMy views are my own.Premium
join:2005-05-20
kudos:3 | Re: Not the customers fault Your post is SOOOO misguided there bud... you can knock off the hypothetical "what ifs" since it's obviously not pertaining to you anyway... but you sit here trying to talk for people that ARE disabled, DO live in homes, and DO know how to take care of themselves... and guess what, today's your lucky day "cuz" I'm going to tell you.
1) Check with your local Helping Hands or other charitable organizations that offer assistance to disabled people.
2) Stop acting high and mighty and I can tell you that your neighbors would help you out. Hell, even here, in our neighborhoods, when we know someone is out of town and it snows, the neighbors chip in and help. It's clear that you don't know what it's like to live in an area that it snows, being you're from GA. But, if you're giving off the vibes to your neighbors like you do here, I wouldn't be surprised if your neighbors would let you rot.
3) Depending on just HOW disabled you are, and depending on the amount of stuff on your walk way, it's not that hard to grab some salt and spread it on your walk ways (in the case of ice) and if you're totally immobile, you shouldn't be living completely alone in the first place, should you?
Finally - If above all fails, then yea, then you should probably be living in an assisted care situation or in an apartment or condo with common grounds and not in a house you can't take care of yourself. That's just plain common sense. But you're coming off with things that don't even make sense.. such as your brilliant idea to post a sign that says "stay off with out my prior written permission"... tell that to the postal service... tell that to city workers.. and tell that to the people you call to your house for service becuase they're not going to have "written permission" as you state. AND, part of your responsibility is to take care of the public sidewalk in front of your house, a place that your sign would mean nothing anyway.
His argument that you shouldn't own a home, especially in the case if you can't take care of it, or care for it, is not snobby... its reality. It has nothing to do with being snobby, condescending. or lack of understanding or compassion... tell that to those who ARE disabled and DO make the choice to move somewhere they are going to be better off.. as they do it all the time. Its clear they are smart... and you aren't.
Sounds to me like you're just making an argument simply to argue.
By the way, if you can afford to pay the city the $75, which is going to be assessed to you, then you can certainly pay a kid or something the usual going rate of $20, or a plow service the $25 or $30 to clear it for you. Where do you think that $75 goes? (I don't expect you to know since you're arguing about something that doesn't affect an area you live in anyway) ... it goes on your taxes.. don't pay your taxes, what do you think happens to your home?
.. try to think next time. | |
|
| | | | Reviews:
 ·voip.ms
 ·Nexicom
·TekSavvy DSL
| said by Avder:If you are disabled and a homeowner you are obviously either going to have to hire the work out somehow or see if there's some kind of local exemption, otherwise you face whatever penalty your city imposes. Around here you've got 24 hours to clear a walk, after that the city gives you a complaint and you have 24 hours from that to clear the walk or the city will clear it for you and bill you whatever it cost. Maybe it depends on the city (or the country) but if you're elderly or disabled and physically unable to clear your sidewalk, you can phone the city and arrange to get it done (free). | |
|
| |  KrKHeavy Artillery For The Little GuyPremium
join:2000-01-17
Tulsa, OK
·AT&T DSL Service
| I disagree. The owner didn't create the hazard.
The person walking is aware there's ice and snow and they could fall. If they get hurt, well, they took their own chances, so to speak. I don't think we need a law saying "You will clean up snow and ice within XX hours or else you're liable."
Think of all the ez money bottom feeders could make then. "I was out walking my dog when I crossed the front of your driveway and fell and am wounded for life.... I'm suing". No thanks!
--
"Fascism should more properly be called corporatism because it is the merger of state and corporate power." -- Benito Mussolini
| |
|
 thenderScreen tycoonPremium
join:2009-01-01
Brooklyn, NY
kudos:1 | If the man is careless, this is not the customer's fault. AT&T is a real legitimate company. To not be insured for this kind of thing is asinine.
--
Macbook repair in NYC | |
| | | | Re: If the man is careless, this is not the customer's fault. I'm going to assume this more a case of a problem in AT&T's internal systems, as I had a similar problem occur. It didn't require the media or lawyers or anything complicated to resolve.
An AT&T telephone box got smashed by a car in our front yard. I called AT&T the following morning and reported the damage and explained the situation. AT&T repaired the box and then proceded to send us a letter stating we owed $300 for the repairs.
I called the number on the letter and explained the situation. The AT&T rep said "sorry about that, disregard the letter" and that it would be removed from our account.
I told them the Sheriff's department had responded to the accident and that they could contact them to find the responsible person. | |
| | Romney2012Defeat Obama 2012-Chg we can believe inPremium
join:2002-03-03
USA
kudos:4 | said by thender:AT&T is a real legitimate company. To not be insured for this kind of thing is asinine. They are self-insured up to very high amounts(as all large companies are). And they are outside insured for very large claims with outside insurance. | |
|
 N3OGHYo Soy Col. "Bat" GuanoPremium
join:2003-11-11
Philly burbs
kudos:1 | Your bill, delivered It never ceases to amaze me that companies that can destroy your credit, making it impossible to get a house, a car, and perhaps a job screw up so much.
But, you pay them a day late, and it's fees fees fees.
Verizon's billing exploits are legendary. Of course the phantom $1.99 beats $2,761.07 any day.
I'm starting to think I should just go to book fairs and expand my collection. Be done with all of them.
--
Petty people are disproportionally corrupted by petty power | |
|
thumbs down from:
Romney2012
| This is getting ridiculous the nonsense that these companies have been pulling lately is mind boggling. is it really going to take a violent revolt by the people of this country to get things back on track? | |
| | ATTuid
join:2010-02-24
Sullivan, MO | Re: This is getting ridiculous YES, AT&T needs to go the way of the dinosaur and become extinct...Just got laid off this past Saturday, and I can be honest in stating that your level of service is about to go downhill even more. They recently moved essentially all internet DSL troubleshooting to their "Tier 1 technical support" departments, who know how to do one thing and one thing only...roll service technicians to your home. Expect the number of complaints to start skyrocketing...From numerous internal websites I have viewed, AT&T cares about profits only. After all, when a company measures it's success by it's churn rate, you as a consumer should be running at the fastest possible speed to a new service provider. | |
|
 OlegBellsouth FastaccessPremium
join:2003-12-08
Birmingham, AL | WTF WTF AT&T is the one should pay the bill for bad service! | |
| Reviews:
·Optimum Online
·Verizon Online DSL
| Hmm So next time I order service from the local carrier I shouldn't permit installer to climb on anything to get service installed. Otherwise if installer slips I may get sent a medical bill.
To this logic, I suppose if I slip in front of the office building where I work, the medical bill gets sent to the building owner that employer leases building from.
So stupid it boggles the mind | |
|  ptrowskiGot Helix?Premium
join:2005-03-14
Putnam, CT
kudos:4 | I have an idea... I am going to go to AT&T property and break my leg. That should put them in a tailspin on how to handle it.  | |
| Reviews:
·Cybersurf Intern..
| 2761.07 is only to start. "Our initial investigation indicates that you may be at fault for these damages," the letter said. "The current extent of these damages to our client is currently being determined but to date, we have paid $2,761.07 in disability payment on behalf of (the technician's) employer." Czerwien's wife called the number on the letter and was told it was a standard letter the company sends out.
To date thats all he got. Meaning that's probably 1 month's pay for the guy.
They probably send that 1 out.. you say... ok no big deal. I'll pay the 3000$. Then by paying it you basically admit it's your fault. Then all the bills show up and you have to pay them.
--
--
if (value == 0)
return value;
else
return 0; | |
| | | | Re: 2761.07 is only to start. that's the way it works in Ohio. Especially with any tickets. If you pay the amount; you own it now.
--
www.twopugsbrand.com ONLINE STORE NOW ONLINE! up to 50% SRP of Happy Tails Spa products. | |
|
openbox9
join:2004-01-26
Alexandria, VA
kudos:2 | The Letter Isn't From AT&T It was from "Sedgwick Claims Management Services". AT&T should thump this company on the head and press on. | |
| |
See 6 replies to this post | |
 DrModemPremium
join:2006-10-19
USA
kudos:1
1 edit | AT&T Is Cheap The hospital charges $10,000 for broken limbs  | |
| |
See 6 replies to this post | |
| | corporate...? you can fill in the next word I'm sure.
AT&T is self insured...they don't pay any premiums and everything that happens is paid for by the company.
Them trying to get money out of a customer is not surprising even though it is totally ridiculous.
The tech is lucky that it wasn't a vehicle accident though since every one is the techs fault. Even if you get hit from behind it is a "measured" accident which means the employee driving gets in trouble.
I don't care what kind of snow and or ice there was...unless the customer built a trap door and lured the tech into it it was not their fault an "accident" happened.
ATT would like you to believe that every accident is preventable as am employee, but as a customer?
I would disco service for life with att if I were this customer. Of course I already have outside of the wireless contract I have. 8 months and counting for that. | |
| | | Not necessarily malicious I'm not letting AT&T or the company that sent the letter off the hook here, but you have to keep in ming how these things can get started and take on a life of their own. Consider what likely happened:
The employee broke his leg, so he had to file an incident report. On that report, it doubtless asks for the reason the incident occurred, to which he probably answered that he slipped on the snow and ice while at the customer's home. Next, AT&T files his injury on their insurance, which triggers an inquiry as to its nature, how it happened, any contributing factors, etc. The insurance company would have looked at the incident report, and someone there probably said, "Hey, we don't have to pay this claim that AT&T has filed for, since it looks like the injury occurred on someone else's property that must have been covered in snow and ice. Kick this one one over to them and let them pay." After that, the letter got generated and mailed.
Anyone who has ever worked in an organization knows there's a lot of CYA behavior happening all the time. One of the bad side effects of this is that unpleasant stuff gets pushed down the line as quickly as possible, since no one wants to be the one to admit the organization has made a mistake. This behavior is in no way excusable, but it's almost never malicious.
For the most part, corporations aren't immoral; they're amoral. They usually don't intentionally go out of their way to crush people, but they have no qualms about doing it. It's just like the pollution issue. I doubt any sane executives are out there looking for ways to pollute more, but they do cold, analytical calculations about how to maximize profits, and pollution controls are expensive, so they get cut unless there's no way around them. This, IMHO, is why you need regulations to curb unacceptable behaviors. If you view a company as an unemotional machine, then you have to place checks on its behavior to keep it from running amok, since it usually won't place checks on itself if they seriously impede profitability.
OK, didn't mean to ramble that much. | |
| | IanR
join:2001-03-22
Madison, NJ | Re: Not necessarily malicious I agree that this was proper process. The administration company properly informed the client that an investigation into the circumstances was under way and how much had been paid. The customer properly informed the administrator that they had abided by the law in pre cleared walkways etc.
I have recently returned home and while my driveway has been fully cleared the walkway to my hose is only partly cleared. Since I arrived at the house in darkness I waited until this morning to get out my shovel and try to clear as much of the remaining ice/snow. After over an hours woks I would say the path is now 75% clear. I am awaiting a bit more sun to melt some bostinate pieces.
But today I have Cablevision coming to fix my cablecards.
I think I have done my best and hope to 100% have the path clear today.
Basically it's give and take. As a homeowner we do have some level of responsibility to allow good and safe access to utility employees. That's a basic fact.
In the AT&T case I think that dues process has happened. Of course the media will claim that they got the administrator to "back off". In truth AT&T were likely to find that the customer did the right thing anyway. A lot of vested interests and claims. | |
|
DoubleKDoublek
join:2003-03-04
Beloit, WI Reviews:
·Charter
| Not AT&T's Fault Typical case of an insurance company trying to double dip.
This crap is on the rise and unchecked.
It is the insurance companies fault, what is insurance for to begin with? Manage risk over a larger demographic. Insurance companies feel that they should attribute fault back and forth to see if they can get someone else to foot part of the bill.
I really love the health insurance scam whereas you always get odd bills in odd amounts when you have a pretty clear copay and level of coverage. You pay it and you never see your money again. You call them on it and the claims "mysteriously" gets processed. | |
|  PathfinderDazed ConfusedPremium
join:2000-03-26
Mount Vernon, NY
·RoadRunner Cable
·Verizon Online DSL
| Could someone please point me to where anyone was charged anything?
I see that a Sedgwick Claims Management Services sent a letter saying that they are investigating and the landlord COULD be held liable but I don't see anywhere where anyone was charged anything.
JAMH
Just Another Misleading Headline | |
| | | Wow Just wow. It seems every time I think large companies can ot get any more dirty.....  | |
|  tshirtPremium,MVM
join:2004-07-11
Snohomish, WA
kudos:3
·Comcast
| It's standard operating proceedure..... It's standard operating proceedure, for any insurer to attempt to recover some or all of the cost ,IF they believe that the other party was negelent to some degree (the term is subrogation)
Probably based on the injured employees statement " I fell on ice in their walkway...." some agent/claims specialist was assigned to send the letter.
I agree once AT&T saw the potential for continuing bad PR, they told the claims management firm to back off.
Usually unless it was a deliberate act by the 3rd party(homeowner etc.) there is a set threshold (say under $5000) just to pay it off to avoid PR problems, however claims specialist once assigned a case may get a generous commision/bounty % of any money recovered. (not alot different than bill collection) fixing this probably cost AT&T quite a bit more than than the intail claim. | |
| JimFPremium
join:2003-06-15
Allentown, PA | A Customer Pays for Company Insurance, right? I think a customer can reasonably expect that if a company they are paying shows up for work, then the company has insurance and honors workman's compensation, or whatever. It is part of what you are paying for, isn't it? If you hire the kid down the street to do it, that is another matter. But this is AT&T, a big company, isn't it? | |
|  nunyaWho is John Galt?Premium,MVM
join:2000-12-23
O Fallon, MO
kudos:5
·Charter
·voip.ms
| Sedgewick Claims Ahhhh. Sedgewick Claims. As a former SWBT/SBC/AT&T employee, I can tell you with no hesitation that these people are dirty, rotten, filthy, scumbags and scoundrels.
This is also a setup for a dangerous precedent. How many utilities have equipment on your property? I have 6. Water, sewer, gas, power, phone, and cable.
When I worked for Ma Bell, I always assumed we had coverage for entering a customer's premise or easement. I'm going to check and see now if any states require utilities to be liable for their employees entering a customers property. Common sense would say yes, if common sense were still used today.
For instance, I know that AT&T is required to carry workmans comp in my state (Missouri) based on the number of employees they have. But, I'm not aware of anything that blocks them from pursuing a homeowner for recovering costs. If there isn't, there should be.
Otherwise, anyone should have the right to refuse a utility employee access to their property without a signed waiver.
--
Looks like Reverend Wright got his wish - God Damn America.
Nancy Pelosi - House Minority Leader 2010
Harry Reid - Senate Minority Leader 2010 | |
| | tshirtPremium,MVM
join:2004-07-11
Snohomish, WA
kudos:3 Reviews:
·Comcast
| Re: Sedgewick Claims As they said
"AT&T has policies and procedures in place to address workers' compensation and disability matters, and we work with all parties involved to review individual claims," AT&T says "In this particular instance, proper protocols were not followed. AT&T provides benefit coverage for its employees who are injured while on the job."
NORMALLY this would not have invovled the homeowner at all (somebody FU'd up) and wouldn't unlees the owner deliberately caused injury (sic'd their dog on them (even released a known vicious dog, rather than containing him/her), yanked the ladder, etc)
By statue (most places) your use of a service/utility (cable, power, water, sewer, etc.) grants them "reasonable and ordinary access" to service/check th that service (ie they can use the driveway/walkway to reach/read the meter, rather then sliding down/climbing back up the wire, even if it does not follow the same path. However (most places) they do so at their own (reasonable) risk (again, NO deliberate attempts to create additional hazards) | |
|
| |
|
|
