March 13, 2026: I Asked Gallagher Bassett for an ADA Contact, a Phone Call, and One Answer

Exhibit · GIRMA, GMA, and Gallagher Bassett · Sent

Their intake system sent me seven claim notices in two days. I asked for an ADA contact and a phone call to sort it out. This is the request.

What it is

Two emails I sent Belinda Boscoe on the morning of March 13, 2026, after her 8:44 AM message explaining the seven claim numbers. The first, at 9:03 AM, told her about my hands and the surgery and asked for a call. The second, at 11:07 AM, is the first written accommodation request: an ADA contact, a phone call, and one answer about claim structure.

Why it matters

This is where the ADA record on this track begins. I did not start with ADA demands. I started with their intake error, and only asked for help after the error made the process unworkable with limited use of my hands.

What it shows

“Please let me know who the appropriate contact is for ADA accommodation requests related to claim communications, since I could not find any listed coordinator or intake process.” Three numbered asks. Response: none.

What it does not show

Any reply. The next message from the office was the April 1 denial, nineteen days later.

Transcript, 9:03 AM ET (verbatim)

Ms. Boscoe,

Thank you for clarifying that Claim No. [redacted] is the operative claim number and that the additional numbers generated by the intake system have been voided.

From my perspective, the process has been extremely confusing. I received seven or eight separate claim-number notifications generated by the intake system. For someone who has never gone through a municipal liability matter like this before, that is difficult enough to follow. In my case, it has been even more challenging because I currently have very limited use of my hands, and my first hand surgery is only a few weeks away.

I appreciate your acknowledgment of receipt, but the March 14 deadline referenced in my prior correspondence does not change.

[Paragraph redacted. It concerns the City matter, which is outside this record.]

Please have the assigned adjuster call me so that we can discuss next steps directly. At this point, it appears the City has no interest in resolving these issues voluntarily, and litigation will likely be necessary.

Also, when we originally spoke, my understanding was that carrier-side personnel wanted to be copied so they could remain informed. I provided that courtesy. If that is no longer necessary, I am happy to narrow the distribution list. Unless I hear otherwise, I will remove all carrier intake addresses and limit future emails to direct correspondence only.

[signature redacted]

Transcript, 11:07 AM ET (verbatim)

Ms. Boscoe,

I want to explain why I am asking for clarification and assistance.

I have never previously had to request an accommodation in a process like this. In most situations when someone becomes aware that a person has a disability, people tend to be very supportive and helpful. That has simply not been my experience during this situation, starting with the City’s records office and continuing through the current claims process.

Part of the difficulty has been the mixed signals I have received. Early on I was told on the phone that the carrier might be able to help obtain certain records. After that conversation there was a long period of silence. Later I was contacted indicating the additional claim numbers that had been generated were simply an accident and not an issue. Then today I suddenly saw a large number of my emails opened at once, some several days old, and received a request that the carrier be removed from my email communications. That change was completely fine with me, but it was very different from the earlier request that the carrier be copied on correspondence.

During the past 48 hours I received multiple claim notices, seven different claim reports in total. Each time one arrived I had to try to understand what had been created and what it meant for the process. Because of my limited use of my hands I even had to ask [a family member] to help print several of these notices for me so I could review them. I even wrote emails based on what they said which apparently was not correct.

If the system had not generated all of those notices, I would not be asking for this level of clarification or assistance. I am simply trying to understand the process and keep the record organized.

For that reason I again want to ask two things.

1. Please let me know who the appropriate contact is for ADA accommodation requests related to claim communications, since I could not find any listed coordinator or intake process.

2. I would still appreciate a brief phone call from the assigned adjuster or a supervisor so that I can better understand the next steps and avoid further confusion.

3. I also want to confirm something so I understand the process correctly. Since some of the issues involve the Brookhaven Police Department and others involve the City records office, please let me know whether those are treated as separate claims or whether everything is being handled under the single claim number referenced above.

[signature redacted]

Cited in

the March 13 Boscoe emails, March 16 follow-up, the April 1 denial, the GIRMA, GMA, and Gallagher Bassett record.

Correction history

Published September 5, 2026. No corrections yet.

I have invited GIRMA, GMA, and Gallagher Bassett to identify any inaccuracy on this page. As of September 5, 2026, it has identified none.

Back to the GIRMA, GMA, and Gallagher Bassett record · Gallagher Bassett claim handling · See the Proof