Todd Watson

May 18, 2000

Vice-President & General Counsel
Metromedia Restaurant Group
6500 International Parkway
Plano, Texas 75093

Mr. Watson:

I am in receipt of your May 8, 2000 letter; now posted to https://www.angelfire.com/biz/romarkaraoke/MRGThreat.html.

The complete correspondence stream between Ms. Farina (with you and Sherri Hancock as occasional cc:) is posted at https://www.angelfire.com/biz/romarkaraoke/stream.html.

I am quite taken aback at the threatening tone of your letter. In my June 5, 1998 letter to you and Lucy Finger (see https://www.angelfire.com/biz/romarkaraoke/Jun5doc.html), it is quite apparent the I was a recipient of "disrespectful and insulting correspondence," yet you didn’t see fit to intervene at that time. Weren’t my concerns and medical condition a legal obligation at that time?

As far as employees of the company going to great lengths to address requests for information, there are two reasons this has happened:

1. It’s their job.
2. Throughout the long history of these "needs," the evasive and unresponsive nature of Linda Farina’s attempts to "understand the issues" has led to unconscionable delays, unending frustrations, and needless disability. This may have led to strong, unequivocable language in having to write down from the eighth grade level in an attempt to be understood, but far from insulting.

The MRG Plan directs me to write to the Plan Administrator for any questions or adverse action resolution, but I have not been able to discern any limits on the frequency. It does apply an onus the Plan that these written explanations be able to be understood by the recipient, which you have continuously failed in.

The Plan also allows MRG the right and opportunity to examine a covered person. Exercising this opportunity would go a long way in resolving many long standing points of contention, but you have failed to do so. This leaves the correspondence method, with its built in delays, frustrations, selective exclusions, and failure to respond to the issues.

I apologize if anybody felt insulted, it sure wasn’t intentional. Adding citations about legal responsibilities (and penalties) may have been a bit over the top, but Ms. Farina has done little to downplay her image of being more concerned about the TPA instead of the Plan beneficiaries.

As far as your charge of disrespectful, I lost all respect for MRG a long time ago. Respect must be earned; it can also be lost. I have no legal obligation to respect anyone or anything that does not deserve it. The former corporate culture of "commitment to excellence" and "doing whatever it takes" has, as you unfortunately state, been overshadowed by a belief in compliance with legal obligations. Belief systems sometime take on the aura of altered reality.

I find it unfortunate, although not too surprising, that I am now being threatened with legal action for exercising my rights under the Plan. As an attorney, despite who you represent, you should not be advising me to go to court when I have not complied with Supreme Court decisions concerning egregious actions by ERISA plan administrators; I have not yet exhausted all administrative remedies. It is bad advice, and endangers my rights under the law.

Frustrated with incompetence,

 

R. James Martin

 

PS: Still operative is my request: "the name(s) of ALL First Health Medical Directors AND contract physician consultants that have been involved in BOTH my and my wife's cases (March 1995 to date).", as is the reminder "see also Armstrong v. Jefferson Smurfit Corp., 30 F.3d 11, 12 (1st Cir. 1994) (fiduciary must disclose material facts of which plan participants are unaware but need to know in order to protect their interests in dealing with third parties)."



The URL for this page is https://www.angelfire.com/biz/romarkaraoke/watson.html