AAA American Air Conditioning and Heating

A response was sent 12/16/- outlining all payments made My findings conclude that the balance due was for the time which coverage was provided through August 18, In your inquiry to the Revdex.com, you mentioned a payment that was made on the date you requested cancellation of your policy Unfortunately, our records do not reflect that we received this payment Enclosed, please find a summary of your billing activity from May 18, – October 29,

Travelers position has not changed since our November 17, Department of Insurance response Therefore a response will not be going out to [redacted]

[redacted] - Travelers Home Owners InsuranceComplaint: [redacted] I am rejecting this response because: I received the letter from Travelers and spoke with them about this letter In fact, it is NOT correct by their own admission The representative I spoke with, MrThomas M [redacted] was also rude and tried to tell me there would be no further conversation on the matter and this was Travelers final decision And, by the way, please know you and Travelers certainly have my permission, by virtue of this filing, for my consent to address the my file What a BS statement saying they can't address the specifics of my policyTravelers states there were four claims during the or year period of review (no clarified timeline in their letter of November 17, 2015), and stated only two of the claims were weather related In fact, upon questioning, MrM [redacted] at Travelers admitted claims were found to be weather related; two claims on the same roof problems during this past October 2014-March winter with record setting snow accumulation and one prior weather claim back in Kindly confirm the total amount of the three weather related claims in four years is less than $13,to cover repairs The claims DID NOT replace a kitchen, or something of more substantial nature The 4th and final claim in May/June 2014, was the for the loss of a small hearing aid, in a public place I believe the amount received after the deductible was less than $These claims are what we have the policies for They are certainly NOT out of the ordinary nor excessive in total amount for a four year period, especially when there is severe New England weather Travelers should be required to review my 35+ year history of home owners, property and other insurance and my premiums paidTravelers should 1) promptly reinstate me with 2) full apology, 3) apply retroactive group policy customer discounts, 4) receive credit for senior benefit / inconvenience / stress and 5) be given full reimbursement for the cost of having to change insurance policies to a much higher rate and necessity for me to pur [redacted] an additional liability policy to satisfy [redacted] Bank, my mortgage lender In fact, treble damages should be stressedI am ready and willing to be interviewed by the [redacted] and [redacted] news media and will also consider asking a major Connecticut TV/Radio Network launch their own investigation If these minimal losses over a four year period cause Travelers to cancel long-time, loyal, senior customers, they should be publically humiliated and fined, accordinglyKindly continue your excellent Revdex.com/CT efforts for proper customer service and satisfaction Thank you very much and kindly confirm receipt of this continued complaint With kind regards, [redacted] ***, [redacted] , [redacted] [redacted]

A response was sent to [redacted] 12/29/ Both claims were denied due to policy exclusions Additionally, the roof leak claim was reopened, for consideration of documents received from [redacted] ***'s contractor, however, when Travelers requested a re inspection of the roof, it had already been replaced and contractor was just finishing up Travelers was not given the opportunity to re-inspect the roof therefore no further consideration could be given Contact information was provided in this response to [redacted] if she had any additional questions

A respnse was sent to [redacted] , February 4, "We completed a review of our policy records and we found a letter was sent to you on August 24, which indicated the chimney of your home was in need of repair(copy of letter included with the response) In the letter, we requested that you contact us within days to let us know your intentions for correction the condition noted Subsequently, when we had not received proof of reparis or a response, on November 18, we sent youa notice of non-renewal of your policy." Contact information was provided with this response to [redacted] to contact Travelers if they wish to discuss further However, Travelers was unable to locate a record or request for additional time to complete the repair prior to the cancellaiton date of January 7, 2015.%

A response was sent 12/11/ I understand that you have replaced your auto coverage with another carrier on September 30, Unfortunately, I was unable to locate a request prior to your recent call with our service center on November 23, The cancellation of your policy was processed effective September 30, A refund was sent back to your bank account on November 30, I have included a confirmation letter for your records No further billing will occur under the policy captioned above

A r*spons [redacted] was s*nt to [redacted] on 6/3/from Trav*l*rs M*lvill [redacted] Claim C*nt*r, outlining th [redacted] fact that th [redacted] polic [redacted] r*port includ*d his nam [redacted] and v*hicl [redacted] information, so Trav*l*rs b*li*v*d h [redacted] was involv*d in th [redacted] loss of 12/16/ Trav*l*rs att*mpt*d contact by phon [redacted] and mail to obtain a v*rbal stat*m*nt sinc [redacted] no r*ply was r*c*iv*d from [redacted] Trav*l*rs coll*ctions v*ndor was r*tain*d to assist in th [redacted] r*cov*ry of paym*nts mad [redacted] on b*half of our insur*d during th [redacted] r*cov*ry proc*ss, Trav*l*rs r*c*iv*d additional information from [redacted] confirming h [redacted] was not involv*d, and th [redacted] coll*ctions r*qu*st was clos*d, and a closing l*tt*r was s*nt to [redacted]

A response was sent to [redacted] on 7/11/from Travelers [redacted] Claim Center The response explained that Travelers Claim understands [redacted] does not have reliable cell service and Travelers has offered alternatives to facilitate communication [redacted] expressed his willingness to meet with a Travelers representative and it is Travelers hopes to secure all information needed to complete it's investigation at that time

A response was sent to [redacted] on 9/11/At the time the policy was issued a replacement cost estimator evaluation resulted in an estimated replacement cost, policy was issued with coverage for the dwelling at $400,and was agreed to by both parties An exterior inspection was conducted by an outside frim and the replacement cost for the dwelling was $589, The policy increased coverage, and insured was notified Since [redacted] submitted additional documentation about his home and an updated replacement cost calculation for his home was completed, it was determined replacement cost coverage is $438,500, previously communicated to [redacted]

Complaint: [redacted] I am rejecting this response because: I received an email which is below from the company saying somehting differentI was told that even after I send in the utilty bill that they still might not change the policyNow that I have contacted the company to let them know that I will send in the utility bill they are now reqesting that he has insurance with another companyEvery time I turn around it is something different with the compnay that they needBy contract law when they accept my payment in full on 6/10/ in the amount of $ my account was paid up to date in fullAnd since I canceled my policy before the next due date of 7/20/i should not have a balanceAnd from the records of the company they added [redacted] *** on 6/28/and I was told he would be removed on 6/29/I canceled my policy on 7/14/so there is now way I have a balance copy of email from copany [redacted] Add to contacts 7/30/ To: [redacted] [redacted] ***, Thank you for your e-mailAt this time, we do stand by our original decision to rate [redacted] as a member of your household and/or regular vehicle operator based upon the statements you and From: [redacted] ***, Thank you for your e-mailAt this time, we do stand by our original decision to rate [redacted] as a member of your household and/or regular vehicle operator based upon the statements you and he made to our claims department during the claims processWe are currently preparing our response to your Revdex.com complaint, but if you should have any additional documentation that you would like us to review for reconsideration you may send it to meWe would be looking for either a property lease agreement which was already in place, signed and notarized prior to the time of the loss or a utility bill (gas, electric or water) for the months leading, including and following the date of loss in the name of [redacted] ***Additionally, we would like to see verification [redacted] has either a non-owned auto policy or a personal insurance policyI cannot guarantee a change in our current position, but with additional documentation we can review the request to remove [redacted] again Sincerely, [redacted] v Sincerely, [redacted] ***

Complaint: [redacted] I am rejecting this response because: Travelers, Incdeliberately fabricated my statement in order not to reimburse my expensesI request a proof of the following statement: "seeing the other vehicle stop and put on their lights to indicate they were going to let out passengers at the entrance to a grocery store" Sincerely, [redacted]

A response was sent to [redacted] on 8/29/from Travelers Atlanta Claims Center Travelers position remains unchanged since the first response on 8/18/to this complaint Travelers attempted to subrogate the other insurance carrier for the damages paid on behalf of [redacted] policy but the other carrier denied liability Due to conflicting liability positions, inter-company arbitration was filed The arbitrator ruled that [redacted] was the majority at fault for the accident based on information sent in by both carriers The inter-company arbitration does not change our assessment of liability, but the decision made by arbitration is binding and final

A response was sent to [redacted] from Travelers Naperville IL Claim Service Center as follows: “Your complaint of July 8, 2014, has been forwarded to me for a responseTravelers Personal Insurance Company (“Travelers”) issued a homeowners policy to you beginning November 18, and renewing annually You have expressed concern with the denial of the roof damage based on the wear and tear and contest that the roof does in fact have storm related damage June 23, claim (Claim No.: [redacted] ) Travelers was notified on September 18, by you that there was hail damage to the roof and exterior of the home from a June 27, hail stormThis claim was assigned to Claim Professional [redacted] [redacted] contacted you on September 18, You explained that the tenant at this rental property had noticed water leak in the ceiling of the homeAfter a roofer came out to inspect they determined that there was hail damage to the roof [redacted] explained the claims process and set an inspection for September 20, with you and a roofing consultant, [redacted] ) On September 20, [redacted] inspected the loss with you, your contractor [redacted] and [redacted] The roof of the home was inspected first and we determined that there was no hail damage to the shingles on the roof The roof was deteriorating and showing signs of heavy wear and tearThe four layers of shingles on the roof along with poor ventilation led to the advanced deterioration that was exhibitedThere were no signs of wind or hailNext the garage roof was inspectedThis roof had one layer of shingles and was in better condition than the house roofThere was also no wind or hail damage seen on the garage roofNext the siding on the home was inspectedThere was no wind or hail damage to the sidingThere were mechanical marks on the aluminum siding but no marks that were consistent with hail damageFinally an inspection of the interior ceiling leaks in the bathroom and the dining room were inspectedThere were two leaks that damaged the paint on these ceilings [redacted] wrote an estimate for these repairs due to these leaksThis estimate totaled $Your policy carries a $deductible so no payment was made as the deductible had not yet been reached [redacted] explained his findings to you and [redacted] while at the homeAt that time you requested a re-inspection [redacted] informed you that you would be able to speak to his manager about the possibility of a re-inspection On September 23, you spoke with Unit Manager [redacted] in regards to the loss [redacted] explained that we would not be re-inspecting the loss as we had a roofing consultant on site with your contractor and no hail or wind damage was found He explained that our weather research showed there were no hail events in the area on the date of the reported loss and no signs of hail damage seen at the inspectionThere were also no signs of wind damageOn September 23, [redacted] called to review the estimate for the repairs to the bathroom and dining room ceilingThe call was ended at your requestThat day [redacted] mailed a copy of the estimate and a letter explaining that at that time the loss was under the $deductible June 23, claim (Claim No.: [redacted] )- On June 25, Travelers was notified by you that there was storm damage to the same rental property which was allowing damage to the bathroom and kitchen ceilings as well as the basement from a storm on June 23, This claim was assigned to Claim Professional [redacted] contacted you on June 25, and you explained that along with the damage mentioned above there is some damage to the gutters which is allowing the water to enter into the basement [redacted] explained the claims process and set an inspection for June 27, On June 27, [redacted] met with you and your tenant at the rental property to inspect the property [redacted] Claim Consultants also accompanied [redacted] to assist with accessing the roofFirst the interior of the home was inspectedThe same leaks that were seen on the prior claim were still present and had not been repairedThere was an additional leak in the hallway of the home [redacted] wrote an estimate to make the repairs in the hallwayThis estimate totaled $As with the prior claim your policy carried a $deductibleTherefore no payment was made for the hallway damageThere was also water damage noted in the basement of the homeNext the roof was inspectedThe same wear and tear damages were present from the initial inspectionThere was no hail or wind damage present and the roof was in the exact same condition as it was at the initial inspection in The gutters of the home were clogged and filled with water at the time of the inspectionDuring times of rain the gutter overflows and water pools along the exterior of the homeThis water then seeps into the home through the foundation which is causing the water damage into the basement [redacted] explained that this seepage of water in through the foundation is not covered under the policyOn June 30, a copy of the estimate for the hallway repairs, a letter explaining those repairs were under the deductible and a letter explaining why the seepage through the foundation was not covered was mailed to you [redacted] also called and explained the same We value your business and we are sorry that you are not satisfied with the claim decision Travelers understands that you would like to have the roof on your home replaced, but under the terms of your contract with Travelers, it will not replace roofing that is damaged by wear, tear or deterioration We trust this response will serve as sufficient explanation of our position regarding your claimPlease do not hesitate to contact me if you have any further questions.” [redacted] * Sr Compliance Consultant | Corporate Compliance, Consumer Affairs Travelers [redacted] [redacted] ** [redacted]

A response was sent to Ms Dumas, June 19, from Travelers Spokane WA Business Center as follows: "Thank you for your recent additional inquiry to Travelers through the Better Business Bureau We appreciate the opportunity to address your concerns First, please accept my apologies for your overall service experience with Travelers We pride ourselves on delivering the best customer experience and sincerely regret not meeting those expectations for you In re-reviewing your account closely, I can confirm that at the time your policy was issued by the NSL Financial Group on March 28, the policy did indicate that an inspection was to be orderedAdditionally, the welcome packet we mailed to you dated March 31, also indicated an inspector from an independent company may visit the property to inspect and report on its condition [redacted] I understand and respect your opinion that you feel Travelers should inspect properties prior to accepting the insuranceAt this time we do stand by our original response regarding the inspection and cancellation of the policyI will forward your suggestion regarding the inspection process and concerns to the appropriate department for reviewI apologize for any inconvenience or hardship this process has caused you."

A response was sent to [redacted] on September 4, from Travelers [redacted] ** Claim Center "Your email of August 26, to the Revdex.com, regarding the hail damage to your roof, has been forwarded to me for a responseThe Travelers [redacted] [redacted] (“Travelers”) issued a homeowners policy to you insuring your home located in [redacted] ***The policy was in effect on the date of the reported lossYou have complained that your home’s roof sustained hail damage which you feel requires a complete roof replacement and the inspection by the engineer was not unbiasedTravelers has inspected the property as well as hired an engineer to inspect the property and found no hail damage to the shingles on the roof." The response letter included a timeline of events regarding the claim and inspection outcomes "Travelers understands you would like to have your roof replaced, but multiple inspections show that the roof is not damaged by hailWe trust this response will serve as sufficient explanation of our position regarding your claimTravelers understands you would like to have your roof replaced, but multiple inspections show that the roof is not damaged by hailWe trust this response will serve as sufficient explanation of our position regarding your claim."

“Based on Travelers receiving a Virginia Department of Insurnace complaint, a response was sent to Mr [redacted] on 10/13/from Travelers [redacted] *** Business Center The policy terms have been corrected back to This was communicated to Mr [redacted] , and the appropriate return premiums will be applied to his account It is Travelers goal to work with our policyholders to review their property and help them understand the amount of coverage that may be appropriate for their needs Over time, adjustments may be need to ensure that the coverage limits remain consistent with the reconstruction value of the home Our records do not reflect that Mr [redacted] contacted his agent or Travelers to review his policy limits until the September discussion At that time, a review was conducted to estimate the replacement cost of his home and the coverage was revised accordingly.”

A response was sent to Mr [redacted] on 7/2/as follows: "You filed a claim due to damages sustained as a result of a fire/smoke loss on March 22, 2015, as a result of a chimney fireWe received the claim on March 22, 2015, at 2:pm and contact was made on March 22, 2015, at 3:pm to discuss the facts surrounding the lossDue to the home being uninhabitable, due to the amount of smoke, we coordinated with you all to set you up in a hotel until the inspection could take placeThe adjuster set an inspection time with you for March 23, at 1:pmAt the time of the inspection, Mr [redacted] chose to stay in the home while the rest of the family stayed at the hotelThe adjuster reviewed the property and discussed the scope with you and your contractor to get an agreed scope as to what needed to be done to clean the home and remove the fire damaged material to rid the home of the odorThe adjuster also approved an additional weeks of Additional Living Expense for your family to remain at the hotel until this work could be completedThe contractor’s then advised Mr [redacted] that no one could stay in the home during the cleaning process; therefore, he then joined the family at the hotel The adjuster completed his initial estimate on April 2, This estimate was provided to you along with the initial payment to be used to cover the costs of the cleaning repairs to make the home habitableOn April 6, 2015, you provided the claims adjuster with photos of soot still located within the cupboards after your contractor completed the cleaning and voiced concerns of damage to some of your flooring There was also some concern as to the extent of the damage to the fireplace In light of this additional information, an engineering firm was contacted to inspect the fireplaceThe adjuster also agreed to again meet with you and your contractor on April 14, 2015, to assess the additional damage and certain contents that had been cleaned but still smelled of smokeThe adjuster addressed the flooring damages and adjusted the estimate to include the additional repairs that were needed On April 17, 2015, the engineering firm inspected your home and the fireplaceThe firm concluded that the fireplace and chimney were structurally unaffected as a result of the fireThe engineer found that the actual fire was a result of the chimney being installed directly against the exterior framed wall, which caused the framed wall to combust when the chimney heated upThe chimney was improperly constructed against current residential code as it did not provide the minimum 2” clearance from any combustible materialsThe adjuster received the official engineer report on April 29, 2015, and provided a copy to you for your records The estimate was then updated to reflect the cleaning of the chimney and fireplace as the engineer confirmed no structural damage to the fireplace or chimney Your next concern was the chimney and the framing, which are currently against code The adjuster advised Mr [redacted] on May 8, 2015, that the policy did not provide coverage to correct improper workmanship; however, if the local municipality were to enforce an ordinance or law requiring additional work to be completed to meet that ordinance or law, the policy had additional coverage to account for those costsThe adjuster advised Mr [redacted] and your contractor that they would need to get something in writing from the local municipality outlining what exactly they were enforcing, if anything at all, before Travelers could proceed with any further adjustment to correct this issue The adjuster followed up with your contractor on May 27, 2015, to request status on any ordinance or law enforcements being made by the local municipality and received a response from the contractor on May 31, 2015, advising they have left multiple messages and had not heard backThe adjuster followed up again with the contractor on June 15, 2015, to determine whether any ordinance or law enforcements were being made The contractor responded that they only received a verbal response that the issue with chimney needed to be corrected and that the municipality was working on preparing an official write upWhen it became apparent your contractor was not placing a priority on gathering this information, the adjuster went straight to the municipality to expedite the process and obtained the necessary information to confirm the enforcementThe adjuster updated the claim and the estimate to include these additional costs and submitted this information to you on June 24, At this time Travelers is not aware of any additional issues regarding the repairs to your home In conclusion, the adjuster has responded timely with any requests made by you and has continued to coordinate with you to address your concernsThe only time anything was communicated to you about providing a name for a different contractor was when you voiced concerns regarding the lack of quality cleaning and/or the missing of areas on your contractor’s partIn response to these specific complaints by you, the adjuster advised that he could provide the names of additional contractors for you to consider if you were unhappy with your current contractorFurthermore, every time the estimate was updated to account for additional repair or cleaning costs, the adjuster issued an additional payment to you so you would have the funds available to complete that workIf any work was not conducted timely, it was not a result of the adjuster holding up a payment but, rather, an apparent lack of coordination between you and your contractorFinally, throughout the time the home was uninhabitable, you have had access to utilize your Additional Living Expense coverage to stay elsewhere until the cleaning was completed Moving forward, Travelers will continue to diligently work with you and your contractor to fully resolve any additional issues, which will include continuing to follow up with you and your contractor to verify that the repair work is commencingIf there are further belongings that may have sustained damage as a result of the loss, we will continue work with you to evaluate them to determine the reparability and/or replacement"

My mother and father have a house insurance policy which they have paid on for years not making any claimsDue to the heavy snow last year their garage sank in the middle due to posts not having footings under them.(they bought it that way not knowing) When I moved in last winter (their in their 70s) I removed the snow with a home made snow rake but it had already sunk down almost to collapseI had my mother make a claim because it was a structural problemI told the guy that I haven't touched anything because I didn't want it to collapse on meSo vines had traveled into the building's wall that I didn't pull outBecause of the vines and no footing they called it neglected and won't payMy parents pay this insurance company good money and when needed they come with excuses not results even paying a engineer to come look at it who then dug under my post losing what integrity it hadThey only needed to pay out $to fix this problem which is about what they paid the engineer to pass the buckVery disturbed by this and I'm contacting my friend in the US Senate to further investigate this practiceGood luck with this company as security for your investment they will promise you the world until it's time to pay you

A response was sent to [redacted] May 20, from Travelers Spokane WA Business Center as follows: " Thank you for your recent inquiry to Travelers through the Revdex.com We appreciate the opportunity to address your concerns When the policy was issued on March 28, effective March 27, a down payment in the amount of $was debited using the bank account information providedAn important billing notice was mailed to you on April 11, indicating that your deductions will be made on the 27th of every monthThe payment taken on April 28, for $was for your homeowners insuranceThe payment in question on April 21, for $was a regular monthly deduction for your Automobile policy Regarding the inspection, when a policy is issued we routinely inspect the homes to confirm the dwelling features and to make certain that the policy limits are sufficient to protect the home in the event of a total loss The report we received from the company that inspected your home indicated there were conditions of concern which you have addressed in your letter to us A request for proof of repairs was sent to you on April 23, Our Georgia Homeowners eligibility rules stipulate that a dwelling that includes unrepaired or hazardous conditions does not qualify for our homeowner program Therefore, as indicated in our letter, a Notice of Cancellation was issued to you advising that this coverage will end effective June 03, I would encourage you to provide proof of repairs as soon as possible, if that has not already been completed When the documentation has been received we will review the current status with underwriting to determine eligibility to continue coverage for your home Lastly, you requested in your letter that you receive a full refund of all premium paid to Travelers; unfortunately we are unable to meet your request as the premium paid to date is for coverage provided on your property beginning March 27, up to the cancellation date of June 03, A partial refund of the paid premium in the amount of $is scheduled to be returned to you; you should receive the funds within 7-business days [redacted] ***, I understand you may not be satisfied with this situation; but I hope that this communication provides an adequate explanation for our underwriting action

A response was sent to [redacted] on 6/6/from Travelers Knoxville TN Business Center as follows: Roman';">"Thank you for your recent inquiry to Travelers through the Revdex.com I appreciate having the opportunity to address your inquiry in this letter As we discussed on the telephone on June 5, 2014, we will processing a stop payment on the refund check that was sent in error to your wife and will be reissuing the check to you and will be sending it overnight via ***I appreciate your time and understanding while we resolved the unfortunate matterPlease accept our sincere apology for the service that was offered to you Again, we appreciate you taking time to share your concerns."