Sedgwick Claims Management Services review: Discrimination

For more than a year I have been denied, as a matter of right, income from my LTD claim. I am finally at the end of my rope after a new team lead, Gabrielle Sleasman, inferred that I was a fraudster for demanding that payment be deposited into my account. Ms. Sluseman has not only committed an illegal act, but I found out that she has left notes on my account that will deny anyone else from fulfilling my request.

Ms. Sluseman falsely notated that the matter was resolved when it was not because the payment was direct deposited in the account. I would like to note that at no time was there a conversation with this individual; all exchanges came via email only. There was no mention at any time that the direct deposit was not completed but that the deposit was converted to check, complete with the check image. One should assume that once there is a check printed, the deposit has cleared the account.

Ms Sluseman, with the evidence of clearance has chosen to engage in libel by leaving disparaging notes, she has refused repeated accommodation requests and stated that she will no longer respond to emails sent. What is apparent is that this lead seems to equate clearance with cashing of the check. Additionally, she also did not look at a shred of evidence sent as I had asked her to do in writing. She did nothing but check an electronic link for a paper check. The paper check weas due to an account closure and as such, looking for an electronics void, as Ms. Sluseman did, was impractical and impossible since the void MUST be manually done. Ms Sluseman therefore ignored my request to verify that the check was indeed voided as I claimed it was and not cashed. Instead, she did nothing and tried to pass the buck to PNC; solid evidence that she never read PNC's statement that contradicted her assumptions.

She was also told that PNC had placed a stop on the payment of the check due to the amount as I was told that a voided check was needed to release payment. That was done several months before and I have yet to receive the equivalent sum in my account leaving me without check or funds thanks to team leadership. To think that the company issuing LTD would commit the offense of bias is unthinkable. It is also unfair to the work both myself and my case manager did. Ms. Sluseman could simply have initiated conversation for clarity but chose to cease responding, a gross abuse of power from a brand new team lead. With an incurable condition, a potential nightmare of retaliation through defamation

Disability is not an elective and her behavior to cease communications led to an EEOC filing for her blatant code of misconduct, ordering staff to engage in willful discrimination in lieu of conversation. Additionally, falsely claiming resolution by ignoring the facts and checking for electronic transmission with a paper check shows that more training of officers is needed if employees cannot comprehend that the status of an account requires a separate set of procedure. Ms. Sluseman had both the check information and snapshot as well as PNC's verification of a stop placement. The only conclusion that can be reached is the company poor selection of Ms. Sluseman for leadership. In short, the team leader chose the lazy approach and did not want to resolve the matter if she chose to cut communication rather than be exposed as incompetent.

View 0 more photos