After receiving many questions about a previous posting, THIS IS WHAT HAPPENED TO ME BECAUSE OF POULOS INSURANCE, INC . Acting on behalf of POULOS INSURANCE, INC., corporation President Daniel P. Lussier (a.k.a. Dan Lussier) of Barton, Vermont had me served with a summons to appear at the Caledonia Court House, St. Johnsbury, Vermont. A hearing took place with Mr. Lussier representing Poulos Insurance, Inc. During the initial hearing, on the behalf of Poulos Insurance, Inc., Mr. Lussier manipulated the legal system and is alleged to have coerced the honorable Judge Roy C. Vance into pressuring myself to pay a sum of money to Poulos Insurance, Inc., for money that was never owed. The fact is that Poulos Insurance, Inc., lost money as a direct result of an act of negligence on their part. Poulos Insurance, Inc., demonstrated negligence for having neglected to have mailed to Union Mutual (my former insurer) the legally required notice of cancellation within the allowable time line (approximately 10 days). Had Union Mutual received from Poulos Insurance, Inc., the required notice of cancellation on time, Poulos Insurance, Inc., would have been entitled to receive from Union Mutual a full refund from a prepaid insurance premium. The notice of cancellation was actually received by Union Mutual approximately eighty-five days late. Union Mutual then acted within their rights and withheld from Poulos Ins., Inc., a large portion of money from their prepaid insurance premium. Even though Poulos Insurance, Inc., lost money due to their own negligence, in an effort to recover their loss, on the behalf of Poulos Insurance, Inc., corporate President Daniel P. Lussier falsely and publically accused me of owing Poulos Insurance, Inc., money in a court of law. It is a proven fact that all my accounts with Poulos Insurance, Inc., were completely paid in full. It is a proven fact that I had no contractual obligations with Poulos Insurance, Inc., and that I did not owe Poulos Insurance, Inc., any money whatsoever. And yet, after several months of verbal arguing, Poulos Insurance, Inc., pursued me in Caledonia Court. As a direct result of the actions of Daniel P. Lussier, who was acting on the behalf of Poulos Insurance, Inc., I was forced to defend myself and did so without a lawyer. It took three court hearings for me to succeed. During the first hearing, the honorable Judge Roy C. Vance actually conducted the hearing improperly. The second hearing was a hearing on appeal that I filed for. The hearing on appeal was heard by the honorable Judge Katherine A. Hayes in Superior Court. I was awarded a new hearing because Judge Roy C. Vance never allowed me to testify or present my evidence. The third and final hearing was conducted by the honorable Judge William B. Davies who allowed only provable relevant facts, opposed to the original hearing which allowed hearsay evidence (accusations with no actual provability). In consideration that at the time, Judge Davies was a “customer” of Poulos Insurance, Inc., conflict of interest issues were discussed, and mutually waved. Based upon the facts, Judge Davies determined that Poulos Insurance, Inc., had no physical evidence, and that the Statutes of the State of Vermont did not support any of the allegations made on the behalf of Poulos Insurance, Inc., against me. The hearing was concluded with Judge Davis ruling in my favor. In addition, no one filed an appeal on behalf of Poulos Insurance, Inc. Daniel P. Lussier (a.k.a. Dan Lussier), is the president of Poulos Insurance, Inc., and with that title Mr. Lussier would be presumed to be an expert in the field of insurance matters. Mr. Lussier and Poulos Insurance, Inc., unquestionably had the resources including, the background, the expertise, and the access to competent legal advisement to have effectively known well in advance that there was in fact no legal basis for Poulos Insurance, Inc., to have sued me. The behavior demonstrated towards me by Poulos Insurance, Inc., has raised many questions where the answers could establish merit in support of allegations yet to be made in regards to; prior intent; malice; unlawful acts in violation of the statutes and rules of the State of Vermont; violation(s) of state and federal privacy act laws; false swearing (perjury); unprofessional conduct; threats of coercion while performing deceptive representations against a person(s); malicious prosecution. There are consequences for this type of behavior! Public awareness represents merely the first step of the process.
Posted on: Sun, 27 Jul 2014 19:44:48 +0000
Trending Topics
Recently Viewed Topics
© 2015