Acuity, a Mutual Insurance Company

Review: My name is [redacted] and I am the power of Attorney for my parents [redacted] and [redacted] since this house was bought and they have been living here for almost five years. I signed the mortgage papers for them with my POA powers and have no restrictions. I have filed a claim for my parents as I am the POA and have documents from both of them turned into the company, With four contractors saying I need two thousand more dollars to make it ''as is'' they refuse to compensate me for the extra amount. Furthermore - the supervisor of the adjuster REFUSES to acknowledge the legal documents recognized by the state of Wisconsin. ( I have no restrictions on the POA) They do not give you what is owed to repair to ''as is'' and do not follow legal documents. I guess they make their own laws. They cannot refuse legal documents just because they don't know the law. Instead they want them to sign a paper with their signature with just a witness. My parents are tired of having to sign just one more paper.Desired Settlement: My resolution along with my parents' wishes is to get the money needed to fix the issue and accept the POA as the legal form it is from the state of Wisconsin and stop ignoring the law.

Business

Response:

ACUITY received notice of a claim on May 12, 2016 for an alleged date of loss of April 25, 2016. We inspected the property in question on 5/12/16. On 5/15/16, we discussed our inspection findings and scope of damages with [redacted] regarding the roof damage and interior water damage and hand delivered the estimate to [redacted] on 5/17/16. We then attempted to make contact with our actual policyholders to discuss the claim. We first heard from our actual insured on 5/23/16 at which time we indicated we would need a signed policyholder's release before we could issue payment. We first received the Power of Attorney [redacted] refers to on 5/24/16 at 8:48am even though [redacted] was informed we would need this on 5/12/16 when the claim was originally filed. ACUITY then submitted the POA to our attorney to review and we had our typical policyholder's release revised to suit this unique situation and sent the revised release to [redacted] for his signature today 5/25/16 at 10:29am and will issue payment upon receipt of the signed release being returned. As for the discrepancy with regards to the loss payment, our adjuster completed a thorough inspection of this property. The inspection revealed minor wind damage to the roof and some interior water damage. There were a couple of holes in the valley that we gave the insured the benefit of the doubt on. Despite the fact that the water damage and the roof damage did not occur the same day we did not require a second loss being set up and did not apply a second deductible even though our policy is a per occurrence policy.. The roof warranted a minor repair and did not warrant replacement. Our estimate was fair and reasonable. It should be noted that [redacted] filed his complaint with the Revdex.com the same day he provided the Power of Attorney.

This company is stll living in the 1960's. their systems are completely out of date, when they are unable to send a email.

Review: My daughter was hit at a [redacted]'s gas station by a client of Acuity -- after speaking with [redacted] on the phone and her telling me to continually to contact my insurance company they basically stated there was no proof that their client hit my car. My daughter called the police but they couldn't send anyone to private property. She will be filing a police report & stopping back by the gas station to see if she can get signed statements and video of the accident. The damage was minimal but the agent stated they only video the pumps but according to my daughter it was right by the front door so we will follow up. It was very upsetting that they immediately washed there hands of this. They may have good rates but only because they will not pay claims they owe. I will continue to try to get information regarding proof of fault. It is questionable why a ** driver would have a WI company.Desired Settlement: They need to pay for fixing the damage their client caused to my vehicle. I see that this is not the 1st complaint against them!

Business

Response:

Please accept this response from ACUITY, A Mutual Insurance Company to the complaint filed by [redacted].

The loss involves a vehicle collision that occurred in a gas station parking area in [redacted] was operating the 2005 VW Passat owned by [redacted] was operating the

2002 Chev 3500 owned by [redacted].

The investigation occurred between 8/23/13 and 8/26/13. The claim was assigned to [redacted] for

handling. The investigation activities are listed below.

• 8/23/13, [redacted] verified Collision and Liability coverages were in place for the claim.

Phone contact was made with [redacted]. Mr. [redacted] stated he entered the gas station from

the street and was stopped behind a row of parked vehicles waiting for a gas pump to become

available when Ms. [redacted] backed from her parking stall and hit the stopped vehicle of Mr.

[redacted]. Mr. [redacted] stated at no point after entering the property from the street did he make

any backing maneuver. The point of impact to the 2002 Chev 3500 was the passenger side rear

corner. It was also stated the police were called but would not come due to the collision having

happened on private property. There are no independent witnesses.

• 8/23/13, Phone contact was made with [redacted]. Ms. [redacted] stated she was backing from

her parking stall and she saw the vehicle of Mr. [redacted] backing also. Ms. [redacted] stopped her

vehicle and was backed into by the vehicle of Mr. [redacted]. The point of impact to the 2005 VW

Passat was the trunk near the license plate. Ms. [redacted] verified the police were called but

would not come and there are no independent witnesses.

• 8/23/13, A phone call was received by [redacted] from [redacted] stating the gas station

cashier witnessed the collision and Ms. [redacted] wants Acuity to process the claim for her vehicle

damage.

• 8/23/13, [redacted] called [redacted]'s gas station and spoke with [redacted] and [redacted]

indicated he is the [redacted] and [redacted] is a Cashier. [redacted] stated their video system is

aimed at the pumps and there is no footage of the parking stalls nor the aisle behind the stalls.

[redacted] advised she did not witness the collision but did see Ms. [redacted] exiting her vehicle and

talking with Mr. [redacted].

8/23/13, Photos of the 2005 VW Passat were received by [redacted] from [redacted]. The

photos verified damage to the vehicle but did not indicate how the damage happened. Ms.

[redacted] was advised Acuity is not disputing there was a collision.

• 8/23/13, Based on the above investigation ([redacted]'s conversation with Mr. [redacted], Ms.

[redacted], Ms. [redacted] and [redacted]. Also viewing of the damage photos of Ms. [redacted]'

vehicle.) [redacted] called [redacted] and explained this is a word vs word collision with

each driver saying the other backed into them. When neither party is able to prove their version is

the accurate one, an offer of payment from the policy of [redacted] cannot be

made. Ms [redacted] was advised to contact her insurance carrier for coverage consideration. Ms.

[redacted] expressed frustration with the decision and abruptly ended the conversation. A Liability

denial letter was emailed to [redacted] on 8/23/13 and the claim file was closed on 8/26/13.

I trust this is the information you require. Should you need any additional information, please call me at

the number indicated below.

Sincerely,

###-###-####

###-###-#### fax

Review: I have been with acuity since 2005. In 2015 my employee was rear ended in his work vehicle by an uninsured motorist. He did not miss work but needed brief chiropractic care. They paid the claim but treated my business very unkind with suggestions that my employee was dishonest to which I complained about on the survey they provided to me. In early 2016 they decided to do an in person audit of my company and told me that they did not know how to correctly code my business. They recommended that the state come and audit my business. Dealing with the state was actually easier than dealing with them. They were VERY uneducated in the state codes in which I had to do the research to get my business coded correctly. I am VERY dissatisfied with their service and professionalism in this matter and decided to switch insurance companies to which they have decided to fine me 10% of my yearly premium. I have never signed any contract with them agreeing to this. I feel that this is ridiculous as they have had my business since 2005 and all of a sudden have decided that I was not coded right. I have run my own business for many years and the customer always has the right to go to another business when they feel they are being serviced better and are not penalized for doing so. I do not want this amount that they are charging me to be turned into a collection agency as I do not owe them any money on my policy coverage. It was paid up until the cancellation date. The fine that they are trying to assess me is $939.96 for cancelling my policy. Thank you for your time and consideration in advance.Desired Settlement: To have this cancellation fine dismissed of which I have not signed any paper work agreeing to such terms. Additionally not have this turned over to any collection agency. If need be I will have this reviewed by my legal counsel and if such collection action is taken I will seek reimbursement for legal fees from Acuity.

Business

Response:

We appreciate your feedback. We have reviewed the matter and determined that the policy was cancelled correctly in accordance with the policy provisions. However, due to special circumstances related to this case, we have decided to work with the customer and not pursue the additional amount due. We have reached out directly to the customer to explain our position and trust that the issue has been resolved.