AARP

Complaint: [redacted]From: [redacted] <[redacted]>Date: Fri, Jun 27, 2014 at 7:14 PMSubject: RE: You have a new message from the Revdex.com of Metro Washington DC & Eastern Pennsylvania in regards to your complaint #[redacted].To: "[email protected]" <[email protected]>, "[email protected]" <[email protected]>
Thank you for revising my complaint # [redacted].
I did actually receive a call from [redacted] (AARP Rewards for good) on June 18, 2014 offering me the items described in your letter that was sent to **. [redacted] on June 19, 2014, I was actually credited with $20.00 to my credit card but so far I have not received any of the products that you mentioned. 
I did call Rewards for Good on June 25, 2014 to clarify that the address that you specify the products was sent is incorrect. The right address is the following : [redacted], [redacted]. This address is in the AARP Rewards for Good records because this is address where they sent me the product that I ordered. They told me that the products haven't been sent yet and that they were going to contact the vendor to make sure that they have the right address and that they will notify me via email with the tracking number of the date they will send me the products.
I will appreciate your help in this matter and hope to have an answer to my complaint.
Thank you,
[redacted]
[redacted]
[redacted]

Dear **. [redacted],
This is a follow-up to your rebuttal of the resolution submitted to the Revdex.com regarding your concerns with [redacted] and their payment to your doctor. 
You are correct in that AARP does endorse the AARP Medicare Complete plan, underwritten by [redacted].  Please keep in mind that the providers of AARP-branded products and services market and sell the products, not AARP or AARP Services.
The disclosures that accompany an advertisement for AARP-branded Medicare Supplement plans state, in pertinent part, as follows: “AARP does not recommend health related products, services, insurance or programs. You are strongly encouraged to evaluate your needs.” By these statements, AARP members are informed that they must determine, based upon their own needs and circumstances, whether a particular product is valuable to him or her. AARP’s endorsement of the Medicare plans from United does not mean that the plans are the right choice for every AARP member. Choice of a particular insurance plan must be made by an individual based upon the individual’s personal circumstances.
 
As explained in our first communication to your complaint, since AARP is not the insurance provider we do not have access to information as it pertains to your policy with [redacted].  This information is protected under HIPPA privacy laws.  Any resolution to member’s concerns/complaints must be obtained through the providers, in this case [redacted]. 
We did hear back from [redacted] and have been advised that [redacted]’s Appeals and Grievances department has addressed your concerns in writing and within the letter they have included the Appeals &Grievance Coordinator’s name and contact information including your next level rights.  
We apologize if you are not in agreement with [redacted]’s decision to your concern regarding payment of your services to your doctor.  You must continue to work with [redacted] to obtain resolution to your concerns.
I apologize that we are unable to be of any further assistance with this matter.  If you would like for AARP to have access to your files with [redacted] for further research, you may fill out the enclosed authorization form and return it to me directly by fax at 202.434.6536.  Please be sure to make it to my attention.  We ask that you keep in mind that AARP is not in the position to guarantee any specific outcome.
If you would like to learn more about Medicare guidelines you may visit www.medicare.gov
AARP will continue to monitor the situation and evaluate our providers on a continual basis. 
Our priority will always be to ensure that the products and services that carry the AARP brand meet our standards and provide value to our members.  We apologize for any dissatisfaction and will continue to work with all of our providers to ensure that this priority is met.
 
Thank you for your feedback and for your membership with AARP.
 
[redacted] | Quality Analyst, Member Relations
AARP

You requested a copy of the mailings that were described in the complaint. I am attaching a copy of the most recent. The others were destroyed. However, I am unclear as to whether or not you will publish the details as you repeat quite often within your directions. 
Please do...

not publish my full address or the name or age of the individual in question. It seems that you need proof that the mail actually arrived at my address, so I've provided it. However I am NOT consenting to the publication of same.  
Please let me know immediately if this copy is too detailed and I will scan a redacted version. Thank you.

[A default letter is provided here which indicates your acceptance of the business's response.  If you wish, you may update it before sending it.]
Revdex.com:
I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID [redacted], and find that this resolution is satisfactory to me. 
Regards,
[redacted]

March 10, 2015
11pt">
Ms. [redacted] Revdex.com of Metro Washington DC and Eastern Pennsylvania
1411 K Street, NW, 10th Floor
Washington, DC 20005
RE: [redacted], Case #[redacted]
Dear Ms. [redacted]:
This is in response to the complaint, #[redacted], of [redacted], that was filed with your office on 3/42015. The complaint regards Ms. [redacted]’s dissatisfaction with AARP’s membership acquisition process.  I have investigated the case and would like to explain my findings.
According to our records, we received the [redacted]’s last renewal payment of $43.00, for three years, on 9/2/2013, for their membership # [redacted].  The account is current and paid through 12/31/2016.  I also found that Ms. [redacted] called our toll-free number, on 3/3/2015, to inquire about receiving an AARP offer, addressed to her husband [redacted], to join the Association.  The solicitation was mailed to their home address at [redacted]., Storrs Mansfield, CT  06268.  At that time, an AARP representative confirmed that the address we have on file is not the street address mentioned above, but rather the following PO box where the [redacted]’s wanted their mail delivered:
[redacted]
Storrs Mansfield, CT 06268
Our representative took action to suppress further AARP mailings from going to the street address.
We apologize for the solicitation received in [redacted]’s name.  I’d like to explain that AARP sends promotional membership materials to prospective and previous members to invite them to join the Association.  Sometimes solicitations may be sent in error either to current members or to non-members, in which a variation of the last name or address may not match with a member's account information, sending the unnecessary mailing.  Additionally, mailing list providers obtain name/address information from many sources, including telephone lists, warranty information, voter registration lists, etc. 
Since the [redacted]’s street address was not in our system, the offer went out to [redacted] as a new, potential member. 
In addition to these mailings, “generic” promotional pieces are sent out in mass mailings as part of AARP’s overall membership acquisition program.  These pieces are neither addressed to nor targeted to a particular person or household.  They are inserted either in shared mail programs (bundled with other offers from other retailers or marketers) in the regular US Mail, or inserted inside a subscription newspaper or catalog.  Since these are mass inserts, we do not actually know if the person receiving them is already an AARP member or if they live in a 50+ household.  
Recognizing Ms. [redacted]’s concern about double billing, she may be interested to know that it is AARP's long-standing policy to refund payments of membership fees received from members who renew in error. When an account receives more than two advanced payments, a refund is au[redacted]atically reimbursed to that member.
We would like to thank you for bringing this matter to our attention. It is our hope that through our actions we have demonstrated our commitment to enhancing the quality of life for all, as a responsible, effective consumer advocate.
Sincerely,
Hilary L[redacted]Member Communications Ombudsman
cc: [redacted]

January 5, 2015

class="MsoNormal">
[redacted]Revdex.com of Metro Washington DC and Eastern Pennsylvania1411 K Street, NW, 10th FloorWashington, DC  20005
Re: [redacted], Case # [redacted]
Dear [redacted]:This is in response to the complaint, #[redacted], of [redacted], that was filed with your office on 12/24/2014.  The complaint regards [redacted]’ concerns that she has received multiple invoices from AARP. 
I have investigated the case and [redacted]’ account is current and paid through 03/30/2018.  On 10/29/2014, someone purporting to be [redacted] visited the following website, [redacted], and responded to an AARP advertisement by clicking the option to receive membership information and an invoice. AARP’s online membership acquisition program has a number of programs in place to help detect duplicate names and addresses that may already exist in our membership database to prevent current members from receiving membership solicitations and invoices in error. Unfortunately, the system is not infallible given the sheer volume, similarities and variations of names, and an invoice was generated for [redacted].
We apologize for any aggravation these invoices may have caused.  The invoice has been deleted from [redacted]’ account. Regrettably, we cannot recall any invoices already in progress, and ask that she please allow 4-6 weeks for this change to take full effect. 
Should she have questions or receive additional invoices after this timeframe, have her contact me directly and I will be glad to assist her further.  I can be reached via email, at [email protected], or if more convenient, by mail to my attention, Hilary L[redacted], at AARP, Member Communications Ombudsman, 601 E Street, NW, Washington, DC  20049.
We would like to thank you again for bringing this matter to our attention. It is our hope that through our actions we have demonstrated our commitment to enhancing the quality of life for all, as a responsible, effective consumer advocate.
Sincerely,
Hilary L[redacted]Member Communications Ombudsman
cc: [redacted]

January 27, 2016
Ms. Kayla Jackson
Revdex.com of Metro Washington, DC and Eastern PA
1411 K Street, NW 10th Floor
Washington, DC 20005

Re: [redacted], ID #[redacted]
Dear [redacted]:

We are in receipt of your letter regarding Mary Brasker’s complaint that she continues to receive...

unwanted solicitations despite her efforts to have them stopped. We have investigated this matter and welcome the opportunity to respond.

AARP makes every effort to comply with stop solicitation requests. However, we do not have record of receiving any earlier stop solicitation requests from [redacted] at the PO Box address that she provided in her complaint. We are sorry for any inconvenience these mailings may have caused and it is our pleasure to honor her request at this time.
As of January 27, 2016, the following names and address have been added to AARP’s suppression lists: ([redacted]. and [redacted] at PO Box [redacted] Perrysville, IN [redacted]). Regrettably, we cannot stop mailings already in progress and ask that [redacted] please allow 12 weeks for the suppression to take full effect.
We know 12 weeks sounds like an inordinate amount of time to stop mailings but we must explain that direct mail bearing the AARP name and logo includes both our mailings and those of our member benefit providers. While we are able to suppress our own mailings very quickly, ending those of our providers takes longer.
Our providers typically are on a three month mail schedule which means that on any given day, mailings for the next two months have already been prepared and set. The first opportunity to remove names from the mailing list is in many cases the mailing set to go out in the third month. For this reason it may take a provider up to twelve weeks to delete mailings to a particular address.
If for an unforeseen reason [redacted] should receive any additional mailings after April 20, 2016, she may call me directly at ###-###-#### and it would be my pleasure to assist her further. I ask that she please have the solicitation available at the time of her call, as each mailing has specific codes that will help us to suppress her name more effectively. If more convenient, she may mail the solicitation to my attention at: AARP, Member Communications Ombudsman, 601 E Street, NW, Washington, DC 20049.

AARP also distributes “generic” promotional mail as part of our overall membership development program. These pieces are distributed either in shared mail programs (i.e. promotional mailings bundled with other special offers from other companies), or as inserts to subscription publications. These pieces are neither addressed to nor targeted to a particular person or household. Although the language on some of these generic pieces does include an offer to “Renew your membership,” these are mass mailings rather than targeted solicitations and we do not know or have control over who receives the solicitation or if the recipient is already an AARP member or if they live in a 50+ household.
Thank you for bringing this matter to our attention. It is our hope that through our actions we have demonstrated our commitment to enhancing the quality of life for all, as a responsible, effective consumer advocate.

Sincerely,

Darlene G[redacted]
Member Communications Ombudsman

[redacted]
Revdex.com of Metro Washington, DC and Eastern PA
1411 K Street, NW 10th Floor
Washington, DC 20005
Re: [redacted], File #[redacted]
Dear [redacted]:
We are in receipt of your letter regarding the complaint of [redacted] that he continues to receive unwanted email from AARP...

despite his efforts to opt out. We have investigated this matter and welcome the opportunity to respond.
AARP makes every effort to honor stop solicitation requests, and we include an opt-out link in our messages for mail recipients to opt out themselves. Our records show that [redacted] contacted AARP’s toll-free customer service number on September 14, 2015 to have his email suppressed from receiving email communication. Our records show that [redacted]’s email address ([email protected]) was previously opted out on June 18, 2015.
We are sorry to hear that [redacted] is still receiving email. I ask that he please send a copy of the email to my attention at [email protected] so that I can investigate this matter further.
Also, as of September 14, 2015, we have added the name of [redacted] and his mailing address ([redacted], Laguna Hills, CA [redacted]) to AARP’s suppression lists and the lists of our service providers. Regrettably, we cannot stop mailings already in progress and ask that [redacted] please allow 12 weeks for the suppression to take full effect. We know 12 weeks sounds like an inordinate amount of time to stop mailings but we must explain that direct mail bearing the AARP name and logo includes both our mailings and those of our member benefit providers. While we are able to suppress our own mailings very quickly, ending those of our providers takes longer.
Our providers typically are on a three month mail schedule which means that on any given day, mailings for the next two months have already been prepared and set. The first opportunity to remove names from the mailing list is in many cases the mailing set to go out in the third month. For this reason it may take a provider up to twelve weeks to delete mailings to a particular address. In the meantime, I look forward to receiving a copy of the email communication that [redacted] received so that I can resolve this matter for him soon.
Thank you again for contacting AARP. It is our hope that through our actions we have demonstrated our commitment to enhancing the quality of life for all, as a responsible, effective consumer advocate.
Sincerely,

Darlene G[redacted]
Member Communications Ombudsman

Dear [redacted],

class="MsoNormal">We are in receipt of your complaint to the Revdex.com regarding solicitations from [redacted].  AARP Services, Inc. responds to all correspondence received regarding our products and service providers.
I initiated a request to remove your name from our service providers’/[redacted] solicitation lists. We do ask to please allow 12 weeks for the suppression to take full effect. We know 12 weeks sounds like an inordinate amount of time to stop mailings but we must explain that direct mail bearing the AARP name and logo include both our mailings and those of our member benefit providers. While we are able to suppress our own mailing very quickly, ending those of our providers takes longer. Our providers typically are on a three month mail schedule which means that on any given day, mailings for the next two months have already been prepared and set. The first opportunity to remove names from the mailing list is in many cases the mailing set to go out the third month. For this reason it may take a provider up to twelve weeks to delete mailings to a particular address. I have advised our contacts at [redacted] that you have requested to stop solicitations directly to them on numerous occasions and have filed multiple Revdex.com complaints.
If you should continue to receive the mailings after 12 weeks, please forward a copy of the solicitation(s) you are receiving so that AARP can better determine why you continue to receive them.
You can forward them to my attention at:
AARP Services, Inc.
c/o Natasha W[redacted]
650 F St., NW
Washington, DC 20004
Thank you for bringing this issue to our attention and we do apologize for any frustration.
Sincerely,
Natasha W[redacted] | Quality Analyst, Member Relations
AARP Services, Inc.

[To assist us in bringing this matter to a close, you must give us a reason why you are rejecting the response. If no reason is received your complaint will be closed Administratively Resolved] Complaint: [redacted]I am rejecting this response because: The response they gave is their canned response.  It's the same response they gave me back on June 2, 2014.  They didn't mention the June 2, 2014 request. Their mailings have NOT stopped.  I received their last mailing on September 12, 2014.  According to my calendar, that is more than 12 weeks.  I don't think they are serious about stopping the mailings.  I don't think they care.  In this computer age they should be able to stop the mailings faster than 12 weeks.  In fact, they didn't even stop them after 12 weeks.  Their response is unacceptable.  Just stop the mailings immediately. Regards,[redacted]

May 12, 2015
11pt">
Ms. Brenda Freeman Revdex.com of Metro Washington DC and Eastern Pennsylvania
1411 K Street, NW, 10th Floor
Washington, DC 20005
RE:  [redacted], #[redacted]
 
Dear [redacted]:This is in response to the complaint, #[redacted], of [redacted], that was filed with your office on 5/11/2015.  The complaint regards [redacted]’s concern that after cancelling her membership in 2014, she is still receiving unwanted AARP-related mailings. I have investigated the case and found that [redacted] called our toll-free number to cancel her membership on 6/5/2014.  According to our records, her account was suspended on that day, 6/5/2014, and suppressions were placed on her account to stop further mail from us and AARP affiliates.  I understand [redacted] filed her complaint because she is still receiving mail from AARP and our service providers.
I hope [redacted] will accept our apology for any aggravation these mailings may have caused her.  I have placed additional suppressions on her account which will stop new membership offers.  I’ve also contacted AARP Services, Inc. to ensure that [redacted]’s name and address are removed from AARP’s Service Provider mailing lists.  We ask that she please allow 12 weeks for this request to take full effect. We know 12 weeks sounds like an inordinate amount of time to stop mailings, but we must explain that direct mail bearing the AARP name and logo include both our mailings and those of our member benefit providers.  While we are able to suppress our own mailings very quickly, ending those of our providers takes longer. Our providers typically are on a three month mail schedule which means that on any given day, mailings for the next two months have already been prepared and set. The first opportunity to remove names from the mailing list is in many cases the mailing set to go out in the third month.  For this reason it may take a provider up to twelve weeks to delete mailings to a particular address.
That said, I’m hindered to pursue this further without seeing the particular solicitations she’s receiving.  Should [redacted] receive solicitations after the first week in August, she may contact me directly and I will be glad to assist her further.  As each notice has specific codes that will help us suppress her name and address more effectively,  [redacted] will need to provide a copy of the mailing(s) she continues to receive.
I can be reached via email, at [email protected], or if more convenient, by mail to my attention at:
AARP, Member Communications Ombudsman601 E Street, NW, Washington, DC  20049.Attention: Hilary L[redacted]
I’d also like to explain, AARP distributes “generic” promotional pieces that are sent out in mass mailings as part of AARP’s overall membership acquisition program.  These pieces are neither addressed to nor targeted to a particular person or household.  They are inserted either in shared mail programs (bundled with other offers from other retailers or marketers) in the regular US Mail, or inserted inside a subscription newspaper or catalog.  Since these are mass inserts, we do not actually know if the person receiving them is already an AARP member or if they live in a 50+ household. 
We would like to thank you again for bringing this matter to our attention. It is our hope that through our actions we have demonstrated our commitment to enhancing the quality of life for all, as a responsible, effective consumer advocate.
Sincerely,
Hilary L[redacted]Member Communications Ombudsman
cc: [redacted]

June 19, 2015

class="MsoNormal"> 
 
Revdex.com of Metro Washington, DC and Eastern PA
1411 K Street, NW 10th Floor
Washington, DC 20005
 
            Re:  Becki J. Thomas, Complaint #[redacted]
 
To Whom It May Concern:
 
We are in receipt of your letter dated June 1, 2015 regarding the complaint of Ms. Becki J. Thomas regarding an invoice requesting payment for membership that she never initiated.  We have investigated Ms. Thomas’ concern and welcome the opportunity to resolve this matter.
 
Although Ms. Thomas expressed that she hasn’t requested anything from AARP, our system indicates that the billing invoices in question were created on January 26, 2015 by someone purporting to be Becki J. Thomas who visited the following website, www.qualityhealth.com, and responded to an AARP advertisement by clicking the option to receive membership information and an invoice.  We apologize for any frustration or inconvenience this matter has caused.
As of today, we have removed the credit order from our system.  Regrettably, we cannot recall any invoices already in progress, and ask members to please allow 4-6 weeks for this change to take full effect.  If Ms. Thomas should receive any billing notices after July 31, 2015, she may call me directly on (202) 434-3519 and it would be my pleasure to assist her further.  If more convenient, she can send the mailing or information to me at the following address:  AARP, Member Communications Ombudsman, 601 E Street, NW, Washington, DC  20049.
 
Thank you for bringing this matter to our attention. I hope that this information has been helpful, and we have demonstrated our commitment to enhancing the quality of life for all, as a responsible, effective consumer advocate.
Sincerely,
Angelo S. Bailey
Member Communications
[email protected]

class="MsoNoSpacing">March 4, 2014
Revdex.com of Metro Washington, DC
  and Eastern Pennsylvania
1411 K Street, NW 10th Floor
Washington, DC 20005-3404
Re: [redacted]
ID: [redacted]
This letter is in response to a recent complaint to the Revdex.com (Revdex.com) filed by [redacted]. In her complaint, [redacted] states that she has been promised the delivery of [redacted] ER based on winning an appeal for the prescribed medication with the AARP MedicareRX program. [redacted] further states that after several follow up conversations, she has yet to receive the medication.
We expect quality service from our providers and are sorry to hear of [redacted]’s dissatisfaction. After reviewing the complaint, we can certainly understand [redacted]’s concern over the delay in receiving the requested prescription. We provided [redacted] with this complaint for an expedited investigation and response to [redacted].
Should you have any additional questions, please do not hesitate to contact us.
                                        ...⇄            
Sincerely,
                                        ...⇄ D[redacted]
                                        ...⇄ Relations

[A default letter is provided here which indicates your acceptance of the business's response.  If you wish, you may update it before sending it.]
Revdex.com:
I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID [redacted], and find that this resolution is satisfactory to me.  On a side note, the cards were received via regular mail on 6-3-14, not by [redacted] as stated in their response to you. I will await the arrival of the refund check. That was not requested by me in my complaint, but is a nice gesture on their part. Hopefully this situation won't occur again in the future.
Regards,
[redacted]

April 8, 2014

class="MsoNormal"> 
 
[redacted]
Revdex.com of Metropolitan
      Washington DC and Eastern Pennsylvania
[redacted] [redacted]
[redacted]  [redacted]
           
            Re:  [redacted]
*
Dear [redacted]
 
We are in receipt of your letter regarding the complaint of [redacted] that he receives unwanted solicitations from AARP in the name of [redacted], who does not live at his address ([redacted]  [redacted]). We have investigated this matter and welcome the opportunity to respond.
 
Please know that AARP makes every effort to comply with stop solicitation requests, and we would like to apologize for any frustration [redacted] may have experienced in this matter.
 
We confirm that as of April 8, 2014, the name of [redacted] and the following address have been added to all of AARP’s suppression lists ([redacted]  [redacted]. We ask consumers to please allow 12 weeks for the suppression to take full effect. 
 
We know 12 weeks sounds like an inordinate amount of time to stop mailings but we must explain that direct mail bearing the AARP name and logo includes both our mailings and those of our member benefit providers.  While we are able to suppress our own mailings very quickly, ending those of our providers takes longer. 
 
Our providers typically are on a three month mail schedule which means that on any given day, mailings for the next two months have already been prepared and set. The first opportunity to remove names from the mailing list is in many cases the mailing set to go out in the third month.  For this reason it may take a provider up to twelve weeks to delete mailings to a particular address.
 
If Mr. Stallard should receive any additional mailings after July 1, 2014, he may call me directly at ([redacted] and it would be my pleasure to assist him further.  I ask that he please have the solicitation available at the time of his call, as each mailing has specific codes that will help us to suppress the erroneous name of [redacted] more effectively.  If more convenient, he may mail the solicitation to my attention at:  AARP, Member Communications Ombudsman, [redacted] [redacted]  [redacted]
*
AARP also distributes “generic” promotional mail as part of our overall membership development program. These pieces are distributed either in shared mail programs (i.e. promotional mailings bundled with other special offers from other companies), or as inserts to subscription publications. These pieces are neither addressed to nor targeted to a particular person or household. Although the language on some of these generic pieces does include an offer to “Renew your membership,” these are mass mailings rather than targeted solicitations and we do not know or have control over who receives the solicitation or if the recipient is already an AARP member or if they live in a 50+ household.
 
Thank you again for bringing this matter to our attention. We hope this information has been helpful and that through our actions we have demonstrated our commitment to enhancing the quality of life for all, as a responsible, effective consumer advocate.
 
Sincerely,
Darlene G[redacted]
Member Communications Ombudsman
[redacted] 
*

From: Revdex.com of Metro Washington DC<[redacted]>Date: Wed, Apr 15, 2015 at 9:18 AMSubject: Fwd: Fw: Complaint ID [redacted]To: [redacted] <[redacted]>
---------- Forwarded message ----------From: [redacted] <[redacted]>Date: Thu, Mar 26, 2015 at 3:03 PMSubject: Fw: Complaint ID [redacted]To: [redacted]
          Thank you for the update (and my Complaint ID Number).          I am providing you with a copy of the message sent to an e-mail address that AARP provides on its [redacted] page.         This latest effort to elicit a response to my several requests for information and assistance has neither been acknowledged nor answered; it seems destined to suffer the same fate as most (if not all, of the earlier messages that I have sent. (And that is to be ignored.)          You will note that I sent off a second e-mail to AARP (this one to Robert H[redacted], the person that you have listed on your web site as being the “AARP Ombudsman”). Need I tell you that there has been neither a response nor an acknowledgment to this fax (or have you begun to see the modus operandi of both AARP, and their namesake, AARP MedicareRx Preferred? Do you think, perhaps, that the two entities engage in extensive cross training? Or that, regardless of which telephone number, e-mail address, or fax number, etc. that you use, everything ends up in the same huge circular file that’s shared by all?          I have checked though the written communications received from AARP MedicareRx Preferred to see if they ever provided me with any written communication with respect to their intent to jack up the copayments on [redacted]. By and large, these communications are, for the most part, in the nature of “form statements.” What they all say with respect to “Updates to the [plan’s Drug List that will affect drugs you take” (Section 4) is the following: At this time, there are no upcoming changes to our Drug List that will affect the coverage or cost of drugs you take.” (By”drugs you take,” we mean any plan-covered drugs for which you filled prescriptions in 2014 as a member of our plan.”         To the average person, that seems to be a rather simple and straight-forward statement. What part of “no upcoming changes” do they believe allows them to jack up the prices by 800%?
         If this doesn’t get resolved quickly—and I’m talking about seven (7) business days here, I’m going to ask by Congressional delegation to look into the matter of whether or not AARP MedicareRx Preferred (a/k/a [redacted]) should be permitted to market Medicare products, and, simultaneously, whether or not AARP is acting in a manner that merits its being accorded “non-profit” status.          Consumers should not have to contend with the sort of stonewalling that is all too evident here! 
From:[redacted]
Sent: Wednesday, March 25, 2015 3:57 PM
To:[redacted]
Subject: Fw: Complaint re AARP MedicareRX Plan << Reference ID: [redacted] >>
      I have just come from your [redacted] web site, where I saw that AARP says the following about itself:                     “For more than 50 years, AARP has been serving its members and creating positive social change.”     Really?      Take a look at the exchange (or perhaps a better term might be “the one-sided exchange”) of e-mails between me and a representative of AARP. (There has been NO response to any of my requests that “Rita” do as I have requested.)     I have also sent a fax message to Jo Ann [redacted], AARP’s CEO. I followed this up by sending a second fax message to Robert R. H[redacted], AARP’s CFO and (according to a note on the Revdex.com site), its so-called “Ombudsman.”      Neither Ms. [redacted]son nor Mr. H[redacted] (or anyone in their respective offices) thought it might be appropriate—for representatives of a company that, allegedly, has the highlighted sentence as one of its core values—to see to it that, not only was a response to my fax made, but to, further, look into the matters about which complaints have  been voiced.      Perhaps someone at this e-mail address (which I also found on your [redacted] page) can do something to disabuse me of the growing belief that a huge gulf exists between what AARP says it is, and what—by its very actions—itself to be.                                      �...⇄ [redacted]
 
From: [redacted]
Sent: Thursday, March 19, 2015 10:44 AM
To: [redacted]
Subject: Fw: Complaint re AARP MedicareRX Plan << Reference ID: [redacted] >>
     Please note that I made a specific request that you acknowledge that you have have passed my messages along. As this has not as yet been received, will you please take the opportunity to now to do so.     The request being made, as I assume you know, is both a reasonable and ordinary one. It is, in fact, one that many others have made, down through the years—not only with the full expectation that it will be complied with—but one that’s been routinely complied with by the person receiving such request in a businesslike (if not courteous) manner.       It is indeed bad enough that I’ve been compelled to complain about the poor business practices of [redacted]/[redacted]; there seems to be no good reason why I should also be required to file similar complaints about those at AARP.                                     �...⇄ [redacted]
From:[redacted]
Sent: Tuesday, March 17, 2015 11:58 AM
To:[redacted]
Subject: Fw: Complaint re AARP MedicareRX Plan << Reference ID: [redacted] >>
     Ms. Rita:     As I’m sure you can readily see, I put a considerable amount of time, effort, and energy into, not only writing the message below, but in assembling the materials that were made a part of the attachment.     I have already placed a call to the number provided, and as I assume you already know, what a person who calls this number gets is an individual whose main task is to screen calls, take very limited information about the nature of he call, and then pass that information along. In other words, you really cannot have a conversation with that person that will lead to an answer that is much different than the one that starts off your second paragraph.     As I do not have an  “Organization Table” I’m not able to tell the individual who answers the call to whom--or to what department, etc.--I believe I should be connected with (or to where my message should be routed, etc.)
     With all of the above being the case, would it not be considerably more easier (let alone productive) for you to merely pass all of the information provided in this message (as well as in those previously sent) to the person or department that you believe has the overriding responsibility for handling complaints such as we have here? Or, at the very least, forward all of the messages that have been sent on to your department’s manager, and then allow that individual to see to it that my message ends up on the desk of a person who actual is “able to answer (my) inquiry based upon the information provided?”     Despite the sentiment expressed in your closing possibilities, I see very little evidence of AARP doing much at all in order to help make that goal an actual reality! And, with what has transpired here so far, AARP really thinks that people should think of them first whenever the question of “identity theft” arises? They’re kidding, right? If one can’t get a response, that is both timely and cogent, to a problem that both clearly apparent and concrete—such as the one here—why in the world should anyone believe that AARP (or one or more of its “favored sons”) can do any better in the murky realm of stolen identities?      Please respond, and acknowledge that you’ll do as has been requested.
                                        ...⇄ [redacted]
From:[redacted]
Sent: Tuesday, March 17, 2015 9:55 AM
To:[redacted]
Subject: Re: Fw: Complaint re AARP MedicareRX Plan << Reference ID: [redacted] >>
Dear Mr. [redacted]:
Thank you for contacting AARP, your connection to Real Possibilities for living your best life.  Unfortunately, I am unable to answer your inquiry based upon the information provided.  In order for us to assist you, please call us toll-free at 1-[redacted] (###-###-####) to speak with an AARP Member Relationship Associate.We look forward to hearing from you again.  Together, we're all about real possibilities. 
Sincerely,Rita Member Communications[redacted]
Every 2 seconds someone’s identity is stolen.  AARP’s Fraud Watch Network helps you spot and avoid scams so you can protect yourself and your family.  Check out our tools and resources at [redacted].
>> Original Message ...>> From: [redacted]>> To: [redacted]>> Subject: Fw: Complaint re AARP MedicareRX Plan>> Sent: 03/05/2015 09:03Let me add an additional point to the message I sent to you yesterday.  If you go to this site--http://[redacted]—you will find the following statement: “Different drugs in each drug class are listed in different tiers. For example, the class of drugs that help people with GERD (gastro esophageal reflux disease) is called proton pump inhibitors, or PPIs. The least expensive PPI is the generic, called [redacted], and it is always found listed in Tier I. Some of the mid-priced branded PPIs, like [redacted] or [redacted] are usually listed in Tier II. The most expensive PPIs, like [redacted] or [redacted], are listed on Tier III.” Guess what tier [redacted] has placed [redacted] in? I will have to take a somewhat closer look to the procedures that are established with regard to enrollment in these plans, but my initial impression is that one is allowed to leave one plan for another (in most instances) only during the so-called “open enrollment” period. Were it not for this restriction, I’d be looking for a suitable replacement for this company right now. An acknowledgment to this message, by the way, would seem to be appropriate, don’t you think? From: [redacted]mailto:[redacted]Sent: Wednesday, March 4, 2015 3:30 PMTo: [redacted]mailto:[email protected]: Fw: Complaint re AARP MedicareRX Plan I see that I did not attach the snippet to which reference was made to below before I hit the “Send” button; that snippet is now attached. From: [redacted]<mailto:[redacted]>Sent: Wednesday, March 4, 2015 3:12 PMTo: [redacted]mailto:[redacted]Subject: Complaint re AARP MedicareRX Plan I don’t know for how long you keep copies of e-mails from customers, so I’m not sure if you are now able to refer to a message that I sent you some time ago. In that message, I expressed some surprise over the fact that AARP seemed to be indicating to its membership that [redacted] was a company that would provide good value for the money paid to it, and would otherwise act as a good corporate citizen, etc. In that earlier message, I not only provided a synopsis of some of the less than praiseworthy practices that I’d encountered with the company while I was acting as the Conservator for my sister-in-law, but (perhaps of even more significant value), attached links to information that detailed with the many sanctions that had been assessed against this particular company by Insurance Departments across the land, and of the many judgments (and accompanying “bad press”) that also had been levied against the company, etc.In response to this earlier message, I received an e-mail from a woman at AARP who, on the one hand advised me that AARP was already aware of most (if not all) of the issues I’d raised, but on the other hand assured me that the entities at [redacted] that provided services to AARP members were separate and distinct operations (so to speak), and that their performance was monitored closely by AARP. In effect, I was told that none of the many failings that seemed to plague the day to day operations of this company had affected the divisions that were providing services to AARP members. I accepted what this individual wrote as being accurate and, as a consequence, signed up for the AARP Prescription Drug Program. Everything went along rather smoothly for the first year. Then, in February, the first inkling of “a problem” appeared when I received an “automated call” from United Health (or [redacted]) that indicated I had a prescription that was available to be refilled, an invited me to do so. Things went along fine until the point where the recording advised me that—instead of the $5.00 copayment that I’d been paying—I would be billed the amount of $39.95. I thought, for sure, that this was an error of some sort, so, when asked to respond by either “Yes” or “No” (with respect to whether the order should be processed), I replied “No.” After hanging up, I went through prior invoices for this particular prescription ([redacted] 20 MG capsules), and determined that my memory was correct, and that I had paid just $5 for all of the previous prescriptions. A day or two after that, I called [redacted], and (once connected) told the woman who answered the phone essentially what I’ve related above with respect to the call I’d received. After checking, she advised me (this was on 16 February, by the way), that the copayment for this drug would be what I’d been paying—$5.00--and that the $39.95 price that I thought I’d heard was probably the overall cost of the drug (with the insurance company being responsible for the amount of five dollars). Upon hearing this, I said,”Good. Then let’s go ahead and ship the refill to me.” It was at this point that she told me that the order had already been shipped; that it left on 12 February. As the package never showed up in my mailbox, I called [redacted] today, and reached a woman (who, judging by the manner, tone, and choice of words used, etc., was not having a good day), told me that the copay for that particular drug this year was, indeed, $39.95; that because “my insurance company” had decided to move it from one tier to another, its price had gone up. I pointed out to her that what we had here was an increase of almost 800 percent, and that, while I was neither a chemist nor a pharmacist, I was not merely hard pressed—but extremely hard pressed—to understand why a drug like [redacted]—which, in the grand scheme of things—was not at all a very complex product—had risen by such a seemingly excessive amount. She, as might be expected, could not answer that question. I asked (and not merely because of this particular response, but, more so, because of her overall conduct throughout the conversation) to speak to her supervisor. That person, I was told, was not available, but she’d said she’d transfer the call to someone else who would help me. I told her that I had asked to speak to her supervisor, and that is exactly to whom I wished to speak. She then said the supervisor would call me back with 24 hours.When this call was terminated, I called [redacted], and spoke to a woman by the name of Rhonda—who was polite, and wholly businesslike, etc. in the manner in which she handled the call. She indicated that she would submit (what I believe she referred to as) “a grievance” on my behalf. At the conclusion of this call, I did an on-line search for this particular medication, and came across an ad by [redacted]. You will find a snippet of the ad above. As you can see, [redacted] is advertising a product—“[redacted] Magnesium.” You will further note that the ad clearly indicates that each capsule has 20.6 MG (of the active ingredients of this medication in it), and that each box contains 42 capsules. Finally, note that the cost of each box is $16.97. So, I can purchase 84 capsules of [redacted] pills—in the same strength as those being offered by [redacted]/[redacted]—for just under $34.00 . . . or, I can get 90 of these pills fro [redacted] for $90.00. I don’t have my slide rule readily available to assist me in correctly determining what the additional 6 pills (to bring the total up to 90) from [redacted] would cost me, but I believe it’s safe to say that the cost of buying 90 pills from [redacted] would be a bit more than several dollars less than what [redacted] would like me to pay them. Now what really has to be kept in mind here is this: the price that [redacted] is charging is NOT “a copay”: it’s the full retail price! Not only, what [redacted] is selling is an “over the counter” version of this particular product, so that any Tom, Dick, or Harry who wishes to purchase it can just walk in off the street and do so. For starters, that means that one does not have to first incur the cost of a trip to the doctor’s office in order to get a prescription. And—even more important—no need to pay the hefty monthly premium costs that [redacted] is asking for, either, in order to get this medication that they have decided to move from the tier where it very clearly seems to belong, to where it now is. The representative of [redacted] told me that the overall cost of this medication (which [redacted] is retailing for some $34) is, as I now recall, $106.00 Do you think, perhaps, that [redacted], [redacted]—and yes, AARP, as well—should give some serious consideration to the question of why this particular drug is not being obtained from the same supplier that furnishes [redacted] with its product?
I called [redacted] yet a third time today, and reported the results of my investigation to yet a third representative. This particular woman told me that I was not the first person who had called in to, first, complain about the amount of the copayment being asked for, but t point out what [redacted] was selling (what seemed to be) the same product for. However, she seemed to have been under the impression that the costs that I was providing her with with “copayment costs,” and not the full retail cost of the product. She then pointed out that her position was that of a “Customer Representative,” and that she had no control over matters such a pricing, etc. In response to my question, she stated that she’d passed all of the pervious comments/complaints “up the line,” and assured me what she’d passed mine along as well. When I asked her for the name and telephone number of an individual at the company who was in a position to more fully discuss the matter with me, she stated that that information had not been made available to her. Again, in response to my direct request, she assured me that she would make a note in the file to the effect that I’d asked that I receive a call from someone at [redacted] (or [redacted]) who could more knowledgeably discuss this matter with me.
From my perspective, what I’m seeing here looks one hell of a lot like the sort of behavior from [redacted] that I inquired about earlier (and which has been rather well documented in both the media and in insurance department investigations, and in court rulings over and over again). In particular, note that part of my account with respect to the conversation with last representative: apparently lots of people have already called to complain about the seemingly untoward increase being demanded to provide this particular medication. And, also apparently, [redacted] seems to be acting here (with respect to the manner in which they handle complaints) as I have found them to act before: ignore them. Please pass this message along to the individual/department most closely aligned with the AARP MedicareRX Plans, and let them know that I’d really like to hear more about the, um, “rationale” that went into the decision to jack up the copayment on this particular medication. [redacted]
 
From: Revdex.com of Metro Washington DC
Sent: Wednesday, March 25, 2015 11:27 AM
To: [redacted]
Subject: Re: Fw: Complaint Form Received?
Good Morning Mr. [redacted], Your complaint was received. I apologize for the confusion we were having some technical difficulties with our website. Your complaint id # is [redacted].
On Tue, Mar 24, 2015 at 4:23 PM, [redacted] <[redacted]> wrote:
     Thank you for the prompt response.     Before I checked the two “consent boxes” (and then the “Submit” button), I clicked the “Print” button.     I am attaching a copy of the form I completed in both “.doc format” and “.pdf format.” You will further note I made certain to both place checkmarks in the required boxes on the form, and to also sign it.     My hope is you’ll find one (if not both) of these documents sufficient for the purpose of processing my complaint.      If this should not be the case,  please let me know, and I’ll once again go through the process on-line. Speaking of “on-line,” may I also suggest that you have one from your IT department take a look at the page; from my perspective, it did not appear to work as it should have.                                     �...⇄ [redacted].
From: Revdex.com of Metro Washington DC
Sent: Tuesday, March 24, 2015 2:19 PM
To: [redacted]
Subject: Re: Complaint Form Received?
We have no record of any complaint listed under your name or email address.  If your complaint was successfully submitted through our website or transferred to our office, you should have been provided a complaint ID and received a confirmation email from our office.  If you received a complaint ID, please provide that number so that we can do a more thorough search.  If not, please return to our website and re-file you complaint or email you complaint to this email address. 
On Tue, Mar 24, 2015 at 11:55 AM, [redacted] <[redacted]> wrote:            I was just on your page, and completed your “Complaint Form” with respect to some difficulties I’ve been having with AARP, and one of their “favorite son” providers of goods and services--“AARP MedicareRx Preferred’' (a/k/a  [redacted]).           When I got to the last page, I clicked on the two “consent” boxes, and then hit the “Submit” button. Nothing seemed to happen so, after waiting for a minute or so, I hit the “Submit” button a second time. When I did this, I was taken to another page, and a “404 error” (web page not available) came up.           So, my question is: was my complaint actually received?                                   �...⇄ [redacted]

May 2, 2014

class="MsoNormal"> 
Revdex.com of Metro Washington, DC and Eastern PA
1411 K Street, NW 10th Floor
Washington, DC 20005
 
            Re:  [redacted], Complaint #[redacted]
 
Dear [redacted]:
 
The following was previously submitted to **. [redacted] at the Revdex.com of Southern Colorado on April 24, 2014.  Should [redacted] have any additional questions or concerns, I ask that she please contact me directly at our AARP Washington DC Headquarters by email at [email protected], or she may call me at ###-###-#### and it will be my pleasure to assist her.
 
Best regards,  [redacted]
Manager, Member Communications Ombudsman
  
April 24, 2014
 
**. [redacted]
Dispute Resolution Specialist
Revdex.com of Southern Colorado
25 N Wahsatch Avenue, Suite 100
Colorado Springs, CO  80903
 
            Re:  Case #[redacted]
 
Dear **. [redacted]:
 
We are in receipt of your letter dated April 8, 2014 regarding the complaint of [redacted]. We do not have record of receiving any prior communication from your office regarding this case. Also, we would like to ask that you please process any future Revdex.com concerns with AARP through the Revdex.com in Washington, DC, where AARP is headquartered.   
 
[redacted] states that her AARP membership account, #[redacted], is current through October 2016.  However, she continues to receive renewal notices on another membership account, #[redacted], that does not belong to her. We have investigated this matter and welcome the opportunity to respond.
 
Our records show that in 2012 [redacted] had two different addresses associated with her name (PO Box [redacted], MS  [redacted] and [redacted], MS [redacted]). Because of the variation of her mailing address, a duplicate membership was erroneously created for her.  We apologize for this oversight and any inconvenience this matter may have caused.
 
We have combined the duplicate accounts into [redacted]’s original membership number, [redacted], at mailing address, PO Box [redacted], MS  [redacted], which is also the address listed on her complaint letter. We have also applied a one year credit for overlap that existed between the duplicate accounts during 2012-2013.  Additionally, in June 2013, [redacted] submitted a $43 renewal payment that extended her membership for a 3 year term. And as a courtesy for [redacted]’s patience as we resolved this matter, we would like to offer her a complimentary one-year extension on her account.  [redacted]’s new membership expiration date is October 31, 2018, and she can expect to receive her new membership cards within 4 weeks.
 
I hope that this information has been helpful, and we have demonstrated our commitment to enhancing the quality of life for all, as a responsible, effective consumer advocate.  If we can be of further assistance, please feel free to contact me.
 
Sincerely,
[redacted]
Member Communications
[email protected]

Dear [redacted]:
We are in receipt of your letter dated August 5, 2014, regarding complaint, #[redacted], of [redacted], rejecting AARP’s original response to the June 21, 2014 filing.  In his rebuttal he indicates that he received another acquisition or renewal mailing from AARP.  We investigated the matter further and welcome the additional opportunity to respond.
According to our records and as mentioned in our first response, [redacted]’s account is current and paid through 12/31/2016.  In response to phone requests from [redacted] from 9/26/2013 and 10/29/13, all appropriate suppressions related to our renewal mailings, including mailings from our service providers, were completed.  In addition to the suppression placed on our renewal mailing lists last year, I have today put a further suppression on [redacted]’s name and address from receiving future acquisition mailings.   Again, the name and address we have on file is:
            [redacted]            [redacted]            [redacted]  [redacted]
I’d like to explain, any mailings already in progress cannot be recalled.  We ask our members to please allow 12 weeks for this request to take full effect.  We know 12 weeks sounds like an inordinate amount of time to stop mailings, but we must explain that direct mail bearing the AARP name and logo include both our mailings and those of our member benefit providers. While we are able to suppress our own mailings very quickly, ending those of our providers takes longer. Our providers typically follow a three-month mail schedule, which means that on any given day, mailings for the next two months have already been prepared and set.  
I understand from [redacted]’s rebuttal that he has a sample of the mailings in question, but is unable to send us a copy.  Because each notice has specific codes that will help me suppress his name and address more effectively, I ask that [redacted] phone me directly so we might review the notice he received to ascertain the specific type of mailing and appropriate action to take. I can be reached by phone at [redacted] or via email, at, [email protected].
As stated in our original response, AARP distributes “generic” promotional mail as part of our overall membership development program.  These pieces are distributed either in shared mail programs (i.e. promotional mailings bundled with other special offers from other companies), or as inserts to subscription publications.  The majority of these pieces are neither addressed to nor targeted to a particular person or household. Although the language on some of these generic pieces does include an offer to “Join/Renew your membership,” these are mass mailings rather than targeted solicitations.
We would like to thank you for bringing this matter to our attention. It is our hope that through our actions we have demonstrated our commitment to enhancing the quality of life for all, as a responsible, effective consumer advocate.
Sincerely,
Hilary L[redacted]Member Communications Ombudsman
cc: [redacted]

April 22, 2016
Mr. [redacted]
Revdex.com of Metro Washington, DC and Eastern PA
1411 K Street, NW 10th Floor
Washington, DC 20005
Re: [redacted], File #[redacted]
Dear Mr. [redacted]:
We are in receipt of your letter regarding the complaint of [redacted] that AARP sends her billing...

notices although she does not have an AARP membership. We apologize for any inconvenience these mailings may have caused and welcome the opportunity to clarify this matter.
Our records show that on March 12, 2016 at 8:36am, someone purporting to be [redacted] visited the following website at www.QualityHealth.com from IP address, [redacted], and responded to an AARP advertisement by clicking the option to receive membership information and an invoice.
At this time, we confirm the invoice has been cancelled as of April 21, 2016. Regrettably, we cannot recall any mailings already in progress and ask that Ms. [redacted] please allow 4-6 weeks for the invoice suppression to take full effect. If for an unforeseen reason Ms. [redacted] should receive any additional mailings after June 2, 2016, she may contact me directly on ###-###-#### and it would be my pleasure to assist her further.
Thank you again for bringing this matter to our attention. We hope this information has been helpful and that through our actions we have demonstrated our commitment to enhancing the quality of life for all, as a responsible, effective consumer advocate.
Sincerely,
Darlene G[redacted]
Member Communications Ombudsman
[redacted]

[A default letter is provided here which indicates that the business has not responded to you directly.  If you wish, you may update it before sending it.]
Revdex.com:
At this time, I have not been contacted by AARP regarding complaint ID...

[redacted].
Regards,
Patricia H[redacted]