Complaint Review: Psychology CT and Associates - Waterford Connecticut

Stop trolling.  Throw away the postcard.

To summarize for our viewers:

Sam S. has been solicited by "Sam G." (AKA Gary Samad of ContlnulngEdCourses dot net, Inc.) via postcards sent year after year.  After the ~1st, Sam S. preferred not to continue to recieve them, but "Sam G." uses the state's list of addresses of licensees to send masses of mailings.  Gary thus recommended Sam S. contact the state for a possible solution.  Sam S. honored that request and asked the state who said the one who determines if Sam S. gets mailingsis the soliciter, not the state, therefore Sam S. referred back to the soliciter (Gary Samad of ContlnulngEdCourses.Net, Inc.) who refused to stop the mailings.  With fixation/determination (as Sam. S. gives the latter to his patients, and the former when called for, e.g. to work on something trouble the patient even the problem it needs a high level of attn., until the problem is resolved!), Sam S. went to the BBB (Gary stated).  No record of this BBB transaction seems to appear, at least currently, on the BBB's website, however.  Gary has further made a trolling accusation, a threat to contact the Dept. of Public Health, questioned his mental health, and claims he "continues to troll us after a year and a quarter now".  How will Sam S. respond?  See below for the latest update!

Dear Gary:

I am waiting on some more concrete information from you and also for you to follow through on what you've said.  I hope to clarify things further on this round of the debate.  I surely remain curious as to how you'll next respond.  Points are as follows.  Please reply in-line, if possible, or by showing the #s for each point so that our viewers, whoever they may be, can best follow this debate:

1. Trolling Accusation: I do understand why you'd think I was trolling, seeing this debate appearing in multiple websites.  I could have made the same accusation of you when I saw that y_scam's website has your very same statements written there.  One might think you are trolling me, but I didn't jump to conclusions as you had when you said I was trolling.  The truth is something that ripoffreport has exposed (thanks Ripoffreport!).  I direct you to read what is found in each post we've been doing here, which is where Ripoffreport states, "Foreign websites steal our content".  There it is explained that there are websites, mostly Russian, which copy what is written on this website and then place it there with an offer to remove it if they're paid handsomely to remove it.  Now, I realize as you listed "0utscam" in at least one of them, and you may have not written it here, that maybe you are actually going to multiple websites to list grievance against my filing a grievance.  If that's the case, then look in the mirror, for it is you who has listed all this on many websites, while I have it on one (or two if BBB has something that I couldn't find).  If that isn't the case, then y_scam has cleverly modified your words, or you listed "0utscam" somewhere here and I didn't notice it, to improve search engine rankings for "0utscam", which is the same company as y_scam.  
2. "If this doesn't stop soon, we will be filing an ethics complaint with Samuel Schaperow's licensing board."  My reply was, "Please do. Anyone looking at the internet can see that no "trolling" is occuring by seeing that there aren't many websites in which my grievance has been listed.  I invite you to contact the ethics board, as this is not an ethics board situation and I'd like you to learn from them that your threat is minsinformed".  Maybe you feel I've not continued whatever it is you think I was did, so you didn't follow-through.  But, as best as I can tell, rather than, it appears, your filing a formal complaint as you now would need to to honor your threat, you just continue to debate.  That leads me to point #3:
3. "Continues to troll us after a year and a quarter now": If my engating in this interesting debate is trolling, then as you are doing the same, you are also trolling.  That would be the pot calling the kettle black.  If you mean something else, then see other points listed here for clarification.
4. Questioning my mental health: If engaging in a debate, and in the way I'm doing it here, shows poor mental health, then indeed people should not see me.  However, if your accusations are largely unfounded and this in actuality shows something ill about your mental health (I'd be more qualified to determine states of mental health, unless you think offering continuing ed courses makes you skilled at it?, though in reality this is only a snippet of you I'm seeing and it would be very hard even for an expert to make a determination about your overall mental health w/this limited info.), then possibly others should stay clear of your mental health and/or other continuing education courses you offer.  I would recommend as an alternative what I've used for years at excellent prices with excellent content and great ease of use: CE4less.com.

Please be sure to reply at your convenience. 

Sam Schaperow of Psychology CT and Associates continues to troll us on this trivial issue of not just throwing away the 25 cent postcard that we mail to him if he doesn't like it.

If you are a potential customer of Psychology CT or Samuel Schaperow in Connecticut, a licensed mental health professional, maybe you should question his mental health first.  He is licensed by the Connecticut Dept of Public Health, License number 1110.

Anyone looking at the itnernet can see that no "trolling" is occuring by seeing that there aren't many websites in which my grievance has been listed.  I invite you to contact the ethics board, as this is not an ethics board situation and I'd like you to learn from them that your threat is minsinformed. 

Lastly, I maintain that the state's position (per their email) is that it is up to you to include or exclude people from mailings.  If you have someone from the state that says otherwise, please foward me their contact info. 

Thanks.

-Sam

Sam Schaperow aka Samuel Schaperow, PsychologyCT.com, xx Vauxhall Street Ext., Waterford, CT 06385-4135, (((REDACTED))), [email protected] continues to troll us after more than a year about the trivial issue that he receives a postcard from us every two years and he can't figure out how to just throw it in the recycling bin. He has already posted my very clear message to him about how he might be able to get his name removed from the licensing board mailing list, which is where we receive our mailing information. We don't maintain the database. There is no legal right to be removed from mailing lists. We would love it if he were removed from the list, but it is out of our control. The fact that he is fixated on this and is supposedly a mental health professional, gives me pause. It should give you pause, too, if you are considering him as your therapist.

Rebuttle of:

"We don’t control the address list, your licensing board does.  You must contact them to remove your address from their database, if that is even possible".

     Sincerely,

     Gary Samad

     ContlnulngEdCourses dot Net, Inc.

     858-484-4304

In fact, I did make the licensing board contact this soliciter suggested, but the soliciter was incorrect (note the statement I quoted above shows he knew it may not be possible), as the contact stated they have no ability to prevent these solicitations (they do have a list of providers w/addresses, but not a "mailing list" per se, so they don't remove the list of providers).  Anyone who finds they get too many mailings and wishes to have them stopped should be able to make that request to the company sending mailings, and that company should comply, not threaten to contact the licensing board....  I thus implore people to reconsider use of this company. 

Sam

P.S. Note he called himself "Sam G." here, but hs name is Gary Samad.