RE: Wal-Mart sues disabled woman

RE: Wal-Mart sues disabled woman (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Casual Banter] >> Off the Grid

Message

MontrealPhoenix -> RE: Wal-Mart sues disabled woman (3/27/2008 8:09:31 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: pissdoll quote: ORIGINAL: MontrealPhoenix Walmart wants to take what's left of the settlement no, Walmart simply wants to take the portion of the settlement that is owed to them for the insurance they paid out that has now been reimbursed. her settlement INCLUDED reimbursement for the medical bills that were already paid. that money, quite frankly, should have been paid directly by the attorneys to the medical insurance company BEFORE the woman's portion was EVER given to her. bottom line, Walmart is in the right here, and the legal team this woman had really did her a disservice. they did NOT settle for enough. but her family agreed to it. now that they actually have to pay the bills THAT THE SETTLEMENT CALLED TO BE PAID, they are crying foul. this is NOT Walmart's fault. Right you are...BUT just because they're right, and just because they can doesn't mean they should. Furthermore, to hide behind the excuse of being fair to the other employees is reprehensible. The fact is they just want money. It's not like they would go bankrupt without it.

kittinSol -> RE: Wal-Mart sues disabled woman (3/27/2008 8:21:58 PM)
It's all fucked up - the trucking company should have paid her decent compensation without a lawsuit; Walmart should have forked out for her health expenses, since she paid for the insurance; it shouldn't be okay for those sharks to have a clause such as the one in their insurance contract; there should be proper state provisions to care for victims of such tragic accidents. I don't wish a fate like hers on my worse enemy.

Moloch -> RE: Wal-Mart sues disabled woman (3/27/2008 8:31:25 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: kittinSol It's all fucked up - the trucking company should have paid her decent compensation without a lawsuit; Walmart should have forked out for her health expenses, since she paid for the insurance; it shouldn't be okay for those sharks to have a clause such as the one in their insurance contract; there should be proper state provisions to care for victims of such tragic accidents. I don't wish a fate like hers on my worse enemy. No they should have sued for pain and suffering and not medical expeses. So who were they scamming? The wall mart insuranc or the trucking company? When another car hits me, either their insurance pays for the damages or my insurance pays for the damages not both its called common sence. Looks like the lawyer too the couple for a ride.

kittinSol -> RE: Wal-Mart sues disabled woman (3/27/2008 8:33:50 PM)
I think you'll find that nobody was "scamming" in this sad, sordid affair.

Moloch -> RE: Wal-Mart sues disabled woman (3/27/2008 8:38:06 PM)
So if I bill you twice for the same thing its ok?

MissAngelandsub -> RE: Wal-Mart sues disabled woman (3/27/2008 8:38:36 PM)
I work at wal-mart...ducks and I think it is horrible what wal-mart is doing. Makes me think agian about getting health insurance through them. I do have to say this....if Mr. Sam Walton was still alive this wouldn't have happened. He cared about the people that worked for him, he cared more for the associates than for the management ask anyone that ever met the man and they will most likely agree. It makes one think how things would be different from they are now if people in corporate offices took the time that man did to actually get to know the people that work for them and keep them in business. Oh I could go on about the differences but I won't. Wal-mart is wrong and very unsympathtic in this case.

kittinSol -> RE: Wal-Mart sues disabled woman (3/27/2008 8:39:32 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Moloch So if I bill you twice for the same thing its ok? That's not what happened, and you should know this, if you've read the story properly [;)] .

Moloch -> RE: Wal-Mart sues disabled woman (3/27/2008 8:41:44 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: kittinSol quote: ORIGINAL: Moloch So if I bill you twice for the same thing its ok? That's not what happened, and you should know this, if you've read the story properly [;)] . I did read the story, thats exactly what happened.

slvemike4u -> RE: Wal-Mart sues disabled woman (3/27/2008 8:45:16 PM)
This is certainly one screwed up and confusing situation.Why asn't the trucking co.'s injsurance paying the med.bills in the first place.The whole thing smells ,brings to mind that old joke about 1000 lawyers at the bottom of the sea. When i first read the story something else jumped out at me,was it a good idea given the mother's condition for the son to join the service .Don't want to be snarky here about a young man who wore this country's uniform and made the ultimate sacrifice,but all i can think about is this poor woman hearing that news as if for the first time over and over ......

LadyAyla7053 -> RE: Wal-Mart sues disabled woman (3/27/2008 8:54:17 PM)
And yet another reason that I refuse to shop at Wal-Mart. This is truly sad, Wal-Mart claims to want to help people in the USA but then they go and do something like this. Ya know if everyone in the country would see what Wal-Mart really is and boycott them they wouldn't make 90 billion dollars a year and eventually they would go out of business. But I know that is just wishful thinking on my part.

LadyAyla7053 -> RE: Wal-Mart sues disabled woman (3/27/2008 8:57:40 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: MissAngelandsub I work at wal-mart...ducks and I think it is horrible what wal-mart is doing. Makes me think agian about getting health insurance through them. I do have to say this....if Mr. Sam Walton was still alive this wouldn't have happened. He cared about the people that worked for him, he cared more for the associates than for the management ask anyone that ever met the man and they will most likely agree. It makes one think how things would be different from they are now if people in corporate offices took the time that man did to actually get to know the people that work for them and keep them in business. Oh I could go on about the differences but I won't. Wal-mart is wrong and very unsympathtic in this case. I definitely don't envy you, I have never shopped there nor would I ever work there. I do hope that one day you find a better place to work.

MissAngelandsub -> RE: Wal-Mart sues disabled woman (3/27/2008 9:05:08 PM)
well I wish the community I lived in had better places to work and shop so far I am making more an hour than I have ever made except when i worked in a factory and I have a good chance in moving up from cashier which I like the ability to do so. But where I live you either shop at wal-mart or you go without a lot of things plus its the cheapest place here for food...sad I know but when you are living on a short supply of income like alot of people in this community most of them retired and on a fixed income it comes down to the cheapest place is Wal-mart.

RazorJAK -> RE: Wal-Mart sues disabled woman (3/27/2008 9:07:56 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: slvemike4u When i first read the story something else jumped out at me,was it a good idea given the mother's condition for the son to join the service .Don't want to be snarky here about a young man who wore this country's uniform and made the ultimate sacrifice,but all i can think about is this poor woman hearing that news as if for the first time over and over ...... I'm not going to try to get into the man's mind regarding his reasoning or joining the service. But I can easily see him joining to be one less burden AND possibly being able to eventually help his mother's expenses. Remember, we're talking about a situation where the husband was all but forced to divorce the woman in order for her to be able to qualify for medical assistance. WalMart isn't the only villain in this whole mess. That doesn't make them any LESS vile for pulling this stunt. The people defending WalMart by claiming they're only looking at the bottom line seem to forget that every other one of the villains in this are only looking out for THEIR bottom line. The trucking company and their insurance trolls should have been paying for her medical bills without having to be sued. But to do so without being forced by the courts after a long and lengthy battle would be counterproductive to their profit margin. The lawyers on both sides most definately padded the case out as long as possible. After all, a speedy trial brings less money into the firm they're representing. They're simply looking out for the bottom line. Following the "looking out for the bottom line" logic, those who defend Wal*Mart's actions can't then claim the trucking company, insurance company and lawyers are in the wrong. The people on this thread who've been insinuating that the family is trying to scam money truly need to be taken out into a public place and become acquainted with the business end of a bastinada.

TheHeretic -> RE: Wal-Mart sues disabled woman (3/27/2008 9:16:05 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: kittinSol It's all fucked up - the trucking company should have paid her decent compensation without a lawsuit; <sings> And I think to myself... What a wonderful world. Unfortunately getting two parties to agree on "decent compensation" without a flock of lawyers works a lot better in theory than practice. Too many people see a lawsuit as a lottery ticket. Too many companies are willing to spend $5 next quarter than a dollar in this one. Then the lawyers... "Oh ye lawyers." How about Wal-Mart just takes whatever is left in the trust when she dies? This is why I have a living will.

Poetryinpain -> RE: Wal-Mart sues disabled woman (3/27/2008 9:16:12 PM)
~fr~ Question - how many of you have checked the fine print in your own employee health insurance plans? I'd be interested in knowing if that clause is in other policies? I'm on Medicare, and I haven't checked it, either, but if I had been in that woman's position, I'd have made sure I sued for the million dollars PLUS medical expenses to date. You know what really makes me mad? People who sue frivolously and get millions of dollars for something like a pair of pants. (I know - that guy lost, but you know what I mean.)And then this poor woman ...

MasterKalif -> RE: Wal-Mart sues disabled woman (3/27/2008 11:00:22 PM)
The way I see it...I see two "thieves" here, the biggest offender being Wal-Mart and second being the lawyers....it is just wrong that a corporation that declared 90 billion in earnings (more than some countries GDP) is unwilling to let a struggling family to keep a mere $447,000 which for a company like that is peanuts. It would have looked like an excellent public relations stunt if they had allowed the family to keep the money. Many of us can argue about the small writing and how Wal-Mart is legally entiled to "take" that money from the family, however it is totally unecessary....its like as if I were to take 5 dollars from a beggar because I was entitled to...when I know he needs it more than I do. It is also quite re-proachable the stance taken by the highest court of the land, the Supreme Court to deny even hearing the case...whatever happened to Justice and Equality of citizens? It seems that justice in this country is on the side of the one who has more clout and money....but the focus in any democracy should be the citizens, not the corporations as entities. I simply cannot blame the family their only option is to sue for the money or spend it as fast as they can, as they need it for her medical bills...I don't know how Wal-Mart can claim they support the average American when they kick them when they are down. This all translates to...don't buy cheap from Wal-Mart, pay a little more somewhere else and get better service and treatment. my two cents.

Level -> RE: Wal-Mart sues disabled woman (3/28/2008 4:12:04 AM)
A Wall Street Journal article on the Shanks situation: http://online.wsj.com/article/SB119551952474798582.html?mod=hpp_us_pageone

MichiganHeadmast -> RE: Wal-Mart sues disabled woman (3/28/2008 5:32:42 AM)
In Wal-Mart We Trust *Who did the most to help victims of Hurricane Katrina? According to a new study, it was the company everyone loves to hate* http://www.nationalpost.com/opinion/columnists/story.html?id=b65bd77e-511f-4e00-88a7-a53a2a5ea4ca&k=68939 But let's keep hating Wal-Mart, because, you know, we're all so fucking perfect ourselves.

kittinSol -> RE: Wal-Mart sues disabled woman (3/28/2008 5:59:10 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: TheHeretic How about Wal-Mart just takes whatever is left in the trust when she dies? This is why I have a living will. Surely you're speaking in jest - I wouldn't put it past Walmart to discreetly organise her execution in order to maximise whatever money would be left [8\|] .

thompsonx -> RE: Wal-Mart sues disabled woman (3/28/2008 6:08:38 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: MichiganHeadmast But let's keep hating Wal-Mart, because, you know, we're all so fucking perfect ourselves. Well yes you are right in my case but when you say so in public like this it is a little embarrassing.[:)] thompson

Page: << < prev 1 2 3 [4] 5 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.0625