The Watermark at Logan Square

Complaint: [redacted] I am rejecting this response because:Dear [redacted] , We received your e-mail with Watermark’s replyNothing new here, just more lies from MsT***It seems to be her forte to find the right lies to suit the expediency of the moment’s needBut to MsT***’s chagrin, we found the smoking gun that clearly shows the fraud that has taken placeThey are very clever with their tight knit, well organized, methodically executed schemeIn their response to you, they included papers that my mother allegedly signedIf you examine carefully the Co-pay Responsibility Acknowledgement form, the signature allegedly that is my mother’s, is clearly, without a doubt, a forgeryWe can prove this and we will in court Secondly, if you also examine the Medicare Secondary Payor screening document, the signature alleged to be my mother’s is clearly again another forgery that we can prove beyond any reasonable doubtIt appears that an administrator that witnessed these signatures on both forms, a Gabrielle R [redacted] , is the person we believe forged the signaturesMy mother has always said that they manipulated her into signing just one form, some obscure admission form that was not included in the documents sent by Watermark We believe they lied that this simply was not an admission form but some other form that has yet to be identifiedThese forged signatures are so sloppy that a two year old could have done betterThis is indisputable evidence beyond a doubt that a scam has taken place from the beginningNow, this is an entirely different situation, beyond a complaint to Revdex.com or small claims courtI am referring to a Federal criminal court caseIt appears to me that Watermark made an attempt to financially exploit our mother and God knows how many othersThey have violated a myriad of elder abuse lawsPlus, I am certain, and I will push this with the District Attorney’s office, that they violated the RICO act of against racketeering with schemes like thisAs for MsT***, she is either very stupid for not checking these signatures, or she is involved with trying to cover up this criminal activityOnce we start grilling the Watermark minions involved in this on the witness stand, they will either throw MsT [redacted] to the wolves or say she had no involvement at allWe shall see what we shall seeIn closing, as far as Revdex.com is concerned, you have done a wonderful job, but the job isn’t finishedAnd Revdex.com would be doing a disservice to potential future victims if you do not post the original complaintBut I trust that you will do soSincerely, [redacted] Complaint # [redacted]

October 25, 2017Dear *** ***: I am providing written response regarding complaint #***Short term resident ***was admitted to our Springs level of care for short term rehabilitation on 4/7/According to MDS Section C which is a standardized tool to determine
cognitive ability resident ***scored a which is the highest level of cognitionBased on this scoring she was determined competent to discuss and acknowledge the admission packetOn 4/8/resident ***was explained and the resident signed the Medicare Secondary Payer ScreeningOn 4/13/the resident was informed of her co-pay responsibility of $daily per Medicare Part A guidelinesFurthermore, the resident signed and acknowledged that she would be billed the co-pay amount per her health insurance companyOn 4/22/a notice of Medicare non-coverage letter was presented and informed ***that the effective date of the current skilled rehabilitation services would end on May 2, 2017.In closing, we have followed all pertaining policies and guideline notifying consumer of their coverageThe amount owed to the community totals $1,which is the financial responsibility of the resident starting on day of her stay*** *** did contact the business office and me personallyAfter attempting to explain financial responsibility he became irate at which point I politely ended the calll am including all pertaining documentation.Sincerely,Jennifer T

Complaint: [redacted]
I am rejecting this response because:Dear [redacted], We received your e-mail with Watermark’s reply. Nothing new here, just more lies from Ms. T[redacted]. It seems to be her forte to find the right lies to suit the expediency of the moment’s need. But to Ms. T[redacted]’s chagrin, we found the smoking gun that clearly shows the fraud that has taken place. They are very clever with their tight knit, well organized, methodically executed scheme. In their response to you, they included papers that my mother allegedly signed. If you examine carefully the Co-pay Responsibility Acknowledgement form, the signature allegedly that is my mother’s, is clearly, without a doubt, a forgery. We can prove this and we will in court.  Secondly,  if you also examine the Medicare Secondary Payor screening document, the signature alleged to be my mother’s is clearly again another forgery that we can prove beyond any reasonable doubt. It appears that an administrator that witnessed these signatures on both forms, a Gabrielle R[redacted], is the person we believe forged the signatures. My mother has always said that they manipulated her into signing just one form, some obscure admission form that was not included in the documents sent by Watermark.  We believe they lied that this simply was not an admission form but some other form that has yet to be identified. These forged signatures are so sloppy that a two year old could have done better. This is indisputable evidence beyond a doubt that a scam has taken place from the beginning. Now, this is an entirely different situation, beyond a complaint to Revdex.com or small claims court. I am referring to a Federal criminal court case. It appears to me that Watermark made an attempt to financially  exploit our mother and God knows how many others. They have violated a myriad of elder abuse laws. Plus, I am certain, and I will push this with the District Attorney’s office, that they violated the RICO act of 1970 against racketeering with schemes like this. As for Ms. T[redacted], she is either very stupid for not checking these signatures, or she is involved with trying to cover up this criminal activity. Once we start grilling the Watermark minions involved in this on the witness stand, they will either throw Ms. T[redacted] to the wolves or say she had no involvement at all. We shall see what we shall see. In closing, as far as Revdex.com is concerned, you have done a wonderful job, but the job isn’t finished. And Revdex.com would be doing a disservice to potential future victims if you do not post the original complaint. But I trust that you will do so. Sincerely,[redacted]Complaint # [redacted]