ExcelMale
Menu
Home
What's new
Latest activity
Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
New posts
Latest activity
Videos
Lab Tests
Doctor Finder
Buy Books
About Us
Men’s Health Coaching
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Navigation
Install the app
Install
More options
Contact us
Close Menu
Forums
Testosterone Replacement, Low T, HCG, & Beyond
Blood Test Discussion
The LabCorp Experience: Then and Now
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Re-Ride" data-source="post: 101682" data-attributes="member: 8395"><p>Orrin, Yep, the "something that has changed" is noted in #12 above. When the shoe is... the corp will take 1 maybe 2 seconds to announce "That's a sista company, nothing to do with us". </p><p></p><p> From an accounting perspective your pre-paid lab order is a different account, different customer. Few $ or not it is still extortion to demand payment on an unrelated customer/account as a condition to perform on their obligation per the pre-paid voucher. </p><p></p><p>You complied with the terms of your purchase agreement? If so a refusal to perform conditional upon a new arbitrary requirement ( paying off an unrelated debt ) constitutes breech. It's onerous because they engaged in illegal collection activity as well as violated the state code of business ethics. You can likely complete an on-line consumer complaint in a few minutes. </p><p></p><p>Most private parties are ethical. "I owed them $15. Paying them is the right thing to do". Corps actively play on those feelings on their tireless march to undo every consumer right that has been enacted. Reminds me of a recent case where an 88 year old grandmother went in to cardiac arrest after receiving a call from an "ambulance company looking for next of kin" .</p><p></p><p> The nephew, riding his bike some years back, had been hit by a negligent car. He had sustained only a few scratches and bruises. The investigating policeman cited the driver and told the victim he was calling an ambulance. Knowing that he would be hit for $1,500 bill the victim declined stating he'd take a taxi instead. The cop called the ambulance anyway; he had a kickback deal. The victim declined both the look over and the expensive ride. They sent him a $1,500 bill anyway which he rightfully protested. </p><p></p><p>The ambulance company victimized the accident victim then went on to victimize his granny years later. As we consumers continue to shrug off these infractions we hasten the day of return to the 1920's where everything from collections to evictions is handled by thugs with metal pipes.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Re-Ride, post: 101682, member: 8395"] Orrin, Yep, the "something that has changed" is noted in #12 above. When the shoe is... the corp will take 1 maybe 2 seconds to announce "That's a sista company, nothing to do with us". From an accounting perspective your pre-paid lab order is a different account, different customer. Few $ or not it is still extortion to demand payment on an unrelated customer/account as a condition to perform on their obligation per the pre-paid voucher. You complied with the terms of your purchase agreement? If so a refusal to perform conditional upon a new arbitrary requirement ( paying off an unrelated debt ) constitutes breech. It's onerous because they engaged in illegal collection activity as well as violated the state code of business ethics. You can likely complete an on-line consumer complaint in a few minutes. Most private parties are ethical. "I owed them $15. Paying them is the right thing to do". Corps actively play on those feelings on their tireless march to undo every consumer right that has been enacted. Reminds me of a recent case where an 88 year old grandmother went in to cardiac arrest after receiving a call from an "ambulance company looking for next of kin" . The nephew, riding his bike some years back, had been hit by a negligent car. He had sustained only a few scratches and bruises. The investigating policeman cited the driver and told the victim he was calling an ambulance. Knowing that he would be hit for $1,500 bill the victim declined stating he'd take a taxi instead. The cop called the ambulance anyway; he had a kickback deal. The victim declined both the look over and the expensive ride. They sent him a $1,500 bill anyway which he rightfully protested. The ambulance company victimized the accident victim then went on to victimize his granny years later. As we consumers continue to shrug off these infractions we hasten the day of return to the 1920's where everything from collections to evictions is handled by thugs with metal pipes. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Share this page
Facebook
Twitter
Reddit
Pinterest
Tumblr
WhatsApp
Email
Share
Link
Sponsors
Forums
Testosterone Replacement, Low T, HCG, & Beyond
Blood Test Discussion
The LabCorp Experience: Then and Now
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
Accept
Learn more…
Top