American Alternative Insurance Corporation

We regret that *** *** has been unhappy with the claims process; however his allegations are mostly unfounded, as we have honored and serviced his claim completely within the fair claims practice guidelines for *** *** has never "intentionally underestimated the repair of his vehicle"We
initially used an independent appraisal company to appraise his damages which were limited to a sideswipe impact to the driver’s side of his *** *** We further explained the "supplement" process which is the insurance industry standard for payment of damages unseen until a teardown of a vehicleWe promptly paid for the original estimate and (2) additional supplements submitted by his body shop of choiceWe received an email from him dated December 24, 2014, which stated, "We got our vehicle back this morning and returned the rental carThe shop did a good job repairing our car; however, there is minor damage still that has not been repaired"Our question is why would *** *** accept his vehicle from the shop with unrepaired damage? We immediately communicated that he should take his concerns back to the shop, who will then contact our appraiser should additional work and or a third supplement be necessaryIn a one hour conversation with *** *** on April 10, 2015, he indicated that he is going live with this unrepaired damage, specifically a crease in the pillarI believe that *** *** finally understands the fact that the quality of the repair of his vehicle has nothing to do with *** as *** did not choose the repair facility or repair his vehicleIt is further acknowledged that our appraiser agreed to all supplemental repairs submitted by *** ***'s body shop, including a 4-wheel alignment that was not recommended but paid for at *** ***'s insistenceWe have spent hours and hours speaking to *** *** regarding his claims and have always done so with the utmost courtesy and respectHe has accused us of forcing lowball labor rates, which is also unfounded and immaterial to the repair quality of his vehicleAdditionally we have paid all rental bills submitted to dateHis allegation in this complaint that we have refused to pay his rental expense is again unfounded. The biggest issue *** *** has raised is his claim for diminished value to his *** A claim for diminished value is not common and is somewhat subjectiveOne argument is that an individual has not incurred "any" diminished value until they actually sell their vehicle and incur a loss of value*** has been advised by counsel that the formula for determining diminished value is a court case from the state of GeorgiaWe previously made a good faith offer to *** *** based on the formula used from this caseThis offer was not accepted and we requested written support for his demand which was almost times greater than our offerHe provided us with telephone numbers for places he communicated with to provide estimates of diminished valueWe were able to contact one of the parties that recall *** ***'s inquiry*** *** did not take his vehicle to this facility and no formal reports were createdKent P***, owner of *** *** *** of ***, had many notes available when we spoke to himHe stated he gave *** *** a verbal quote of $3,based on hours structural repair to his vehicle, whereas the actual estimate was only hours of structural repairKent indicated that his estimate of Diminished Value would be less based on the revised structural repair timesIn the interest of resolving this claim, we have offered *** *** the full $3,today, which he promptly rejected as he is demanding $5,The total repair cost for his vehicle was $5,to bring it back to its pre-accident conditionWe believe our offer of $3,is very generous considering our conversation with MrP***We sincerely hope *** *** accepts our generous offer to resolve this matter

Complaint: ***
I am rejecting this response because:
I am disappointed that American Alternative InsuranceCorporation keeps its dishonesty and continue lies in their responseIt isshame that they use ***, a notorious and shady company which has receivedRevdex.com 's F rating with numerous consumer complaints, as shield and hiding placeto avoid their liability and responsibility.The fact is that *** contracted it service to apathetic appraisal company, who consequently subcontracted to another shabbycompany to perform the appraisal taskBoth of them are engaged in conspiracyto conceal the damages, underestimate the cost in order to help *** inthe scam of not to pay the claim in every possible wayWhen I brought theissues to them for discussion, both the owner of one company and the manager ofother company used profane language towards to me, refused to talk, and hung upthe phoneIt is obvious that *** engages those cheap and nasty people tomake the claim process so difficult and create an hostile atmosphere to detertheir claimant from pursue his/her legitimate rights.Although the shop is the one does the repair work, ***had great influence on how the work being performed and the quality of the workdelivered simply because it is the payer for the work***, by flexingtheir muscle, forced the shop to accept its ridiculous well below market rate.The rate *** paid was even far below what *** ***, *** ***etc's pays to the shopAlthough these big insurance companies do much morebusiness with the shop and have negotiated deep discount rateShop does notwant to loss businessMeanwhile they have to maintain certain margin tosurviveAt the end, the shop cut the corner and deployed inexperienced andcheap apprentice to work on our carThat resulted in substandard quality ofrepair workOur car has not been restored to its good condition prior to theaccidentIt is unfair that *** points the finger to the shop and denyits own responsibilityAs to why I still brought the car back even though I foundthe car had not been fully repaired at the time of pickup, this is due to thefact that part of repair was omitted (I believe it is intentional) on ***initial estimation, not on the consequent supplements, albeit that the damagewas identified and known to their adjuster from day oneI need to bring theissue to *** for approval and authorization of additional car rental.Otherwise *** would have good excuse not to reimburse the expense.Regarding to the unpaid car rental expense, both Larry W***and Kathy H*** called me after they received my complaint from Revdex.com, gave memany excuses and explained to me why it was not paidThey finally sent checkto me afterwardsHowever they keep lying by stating in their response that"Additionally we have paid all rental bills submitted to dateHisallegation in this complaint that we have refused to pay his rental expense isagain unfounded." With regard to Diminished Value claim, I am glad that*** realizes that their game play tactics are too naive and hard to foolpeople, therefore raise their offer from $to $It is big stepforwardHowever, I feel *** still bargain in bad faith and unwilling tosettle this matter fairly*** tries to apply Georgia’s 17c formula to calculatethe diminished value of my vehicle, where my accident occurred in *** not inGeorgiaFurthermore, Georgia’s 17c formula has been proved to be grossly underassess loss in value on all claims and to be unfair to consumersMany honestand responsible insurance companies stop using this flaw formula in theircalculation.In addition, Georgia’s Insurance Commissioner, JohnO***, issued a directive to all auto insurance companies doing business inGeorgia informing them that his office does not endorse or support the use ofthe 17c formula.MrO*** further ordered all insurance companies to stoptelling policyholders that the 17c formula is the last word in thedetermination of DIMINISHED VALUE.I sent *** several contacts of the licensed adjusterwho told me what my diminished value claim should be according to industry recognizedformulaThe values they gave are varied in the range of $to $5000.*** initially refused to contact these professionals to get their opinionof the fair valueThen reluctantly contacted some of them after they receivedmy complain from Revdex.com Then ***chose one of the lowest number from the adjusters they called and tried to manipulatethe number down furtherThey claimed that MrP*** said the my DM value is$or underI called MrP*** to confirm and he totally denied that heever told *** that DM value as *** claimed to beAs the matter ofthe fact, MrP*** told *** that they are wrong in using 17c formula.MrP*** said he calculated preliminary DM value of $just based on the damagesappeared on the repair billHe has not factor in the fact that (1) Our car isdisqualified for the *** Used Car Certification, thus lost big chunk ofresale market value(2) Our vehicle was only years old and had less than20,odometer when the accident happenedIt is common sense that newer carsuffers greater diminished value(3) Our car has frame damage and structuredamage, and has not been restored to its pristine conditionAfter take thesefactors into consideration, our diminished value should be adjusted upwardtowards the number that is consistent with others, MrP*** contends
Regards,
*** ***

Review: Your client hit me and my daughter in an accident she was at fault and know that they know that it is taking them forever to solve the problem. Told me to release the vehicle from the tow yard so it can get looked at by an appraiser which I did and they picked it up on Friday 12/27/13 and the accident happened on 12/20/13 and it is now 12/30/13 and I still don't know what is going on with my vehicle I had to go without a car for Christmas now it seems that I am going without a car for new years which I find is unfair considering your client hit me and was at fault. This has totally ruined my life completely I'm stressed out have no car have to bum rides to work and the customer service claims department is taking there precious time is feeding me lies that I'm believing but which is turning out not to be true. All I want is some answers regarding my vehicle that's all I want and it seems that I can't even gat that it really cannot be that hard for an answer.Desired Settlement: All I want is an answer regarding my vehicle

Business

Response:

Response:

On behalf of American Alternative Insurance Corp. we acknowledge receipt of the complaint by [redacted] The claim was handled by our third party administrator, [redacted] and they have provided the following response: In response to the complainant, we assure you that the complainant has been apprised of the status of her claim since the date we received notice of her accident and her claim has been handled in complete compliance with the [redacted] Fair Claims Regulations. She was driving her boyfriends vehicle at the time it was involved in a significant accident on December 20, 2013. It was not drivable, towed from scene, and was accruing “storage charges” in tow yard. We requested that her boyfriend, the registered owner of the vehicle, provide authority to release the vehicle from the tow yard on December 23, 2013, so it could be taken to a storage free lot and inspected by our appraiser. There was resistance by the complainant until they finally notified the tow yard on 12/27/2013 to do the release. There were multiple conversations with the complainant and her boyfriend on 12/23/2013, 12/24/2013, 12/26/2013, 12/27/2013 and 12/30/2013. At the same time we were investigating liability and dealing with our policyholders vehicle, obtaining statements, the police report, and performing our due diligence to make sure our policyholder was negligent for their damages. After having the vehicle moved again to a body shop, the vehicle was ultimately deemed a total loss. The owner was paid $1747 on January 7, 2013. We also paid for all of the tow and storage charges. Paperwork was sent to the owner to return with the title to his vehicle. Those documents were received today, January 28, 2014, and the balance of their claim of $881.97, has been requested. The claims manager spoke to the complainant on January 24, 2014 and she was satisfied with the handling of her claim. This claim has been resolved.

Sent on: 1/29/2014 9:53:02 AM

Review: We had an accident on Nov 15,2014 in which our vehicle was hit by person who is insured by American Alternative Insurance Corporation. That other party was 100% at fault and shall be held liable and responsible for the damages and losses caused to us. We filed claim with American Alternative Insurance Corporation and our claim has been handled by [redacted]. The claim number is [redacted]

Dealing with [redacted] is nightmare and we are extremely disappointed with the way how [redacted] conducts its business. They are totally unprofessional, dishonest, lack of integrity. Their adjuster and management are rude, unresponsive. Seems that they are only in the business to collect premium, but try to avoid liability when accident happens that require them to pay out.

Here are the issues:

1) They are being dishonest, intentionally underestimated the repair cost that they are liable. Underpay the fair market rate for the repair work. Thus the repair work was done substandard and our car has not been restored to the same condition it was in before the accident. This is in violation of insurance rules and regulations.

2) They refuse to pay our out of pocket car rental expense that they have authorized.

3) They refuse to pay the fair amount for our diminished value claim. Rather than pay the fair value of $3500-$5000. They gave us runaround and asked us to accept $391.27

4) Their customer service is non-exist. Their adjuster is rude. They, including the president of [redacted] - their claim administrator, are always gave false promises and unresponsive to the our inquiry.Desired Settlement: 1) Handle our claim in professional manner

2) Reimburse our car rental expense.

3) Pay the fair amount of Diminish Value, rather than artificially absurd low amount.

Business

Response:

We regret that [redacted] has been unhappy with the claims process; however his allegations are mostly unfounded, as we have honored and serviced his claim completely within the fair claims practice guidelines for [redacted] has never "intentionally underestimated the repair of his vehicle". We initially used an independent appraisal company to appraise his damages which were limited to a sideswipe impact to the driver’s side of his 2012 [redacted] We further explained the "supplement" process which is the insurance industry standard for payment of damages unseen until a teardown of a vehicle. We promptly paid for the original estimate and (2) additional supplements submitted by his body shop of choice. We received an email from him dated December 24, 2014, which stated, "We got our vehicle back this morning and returned the rental car. The shop did a good job repairing our car; however, there is minor damage still that has not been repaired". Our question is why would [redacted] accept his vehicle from the shop with unrepaired damage? We immediately communicated that he should take his concerns back to the shop, who will then contact our appraiser should additional work and or a third supplement be necessary. In a one hour conversation with [redacted] on April 10, 2015, he indicated that he is going live with this unrepaired damage, specifically a crease in the pillar. I believe that [redacted] finally understands the fact that the quality of the repair of his vehicle has nothing to do with [redacted] as [redacted] did not choose the repair facility or repair his vehicle. It is further acknowledged that our appraiser agreed to all supplemental repairs submitted by [redacted]'s body shop, including a 4-wheel alignment that was not recommended but paid for at [redacted]'s insistence. We have spent hours and hours speaking to [redacted] regarding his claims and have always done so with the utmost courtesy and respect. He has accused us of forcing lowball labor rates, which is also unfounded and immaterial to the repair quality of his vehicle. Additionally we have paid all rental bills submitted to date. His allegation in this complaint that we have refused to pay his rental expense is again unfounded. The biggest issue [redacted] has raised is his claim for diminished value to his [redacted] A claim for diminished value is not common and is somewhat subjective. One argument is that an individual has not incurred "any" diminished value until they actually sell their vehicle and incur a loss of value. [redacted] has been advised by counsel that the formula for determining diminished value is a court case from the state of Georgia. We previously made a good faith offer to [redacted] based on the formula used from this case. This offer was not accepted and we requested written support for his demand which was almost 10 times greater than our offer. He provided us with telephone numbers for places he communicated with to provide estimates of diminished value. We were able to contact one of the parties that recall [redacted]'s inquiry. [redacted] did not take his vehicle to this facility and no formal reports were created. Kent P[redacted], owner of [redacted] of [redacted], had many notes available when we spoke to him. He stated he gave [redacted] a verbal quote of $3,000 based on 7 hours structural repair to his vehicle, whereas the actual estimate was only 3.5 hours of structural repair. Kent indicated that his estimate of Diminished Value would be less based on the revised structural repair times. In the interest of resolving this claim, we have offered [redacted] the full $3,000 today, which he promptly rejected as he is demanding $5,000. The total repair cost for his vehicle was $5,106 to bring it back to its pre-accident condition. We believe our offer of $3,000 is very generous considering our conversation with Mr. P[redacted]. We sincerely hope [redacted] accepts our generous offer to resolve this matter.

Consumer

Response:

Review: [redacted]

I am rejecting this response because:

I am disappointed that American Alternative InsuranceCorporation keeps its dishonesty and continue lies in their response. It isshame that they use [redacted], a notorious and shady company which has receivedRevdex.com 's F rating with numerous consumer complaints, as shield and hiding placeto avoid their liability and responsibility.The fact is that [redacted] contracted it service to apathetic appraisal company, who consequently subcontracted to another shabbycompany to perform the appraisal task. Both of them are engaged in conspiracyto conceal the damages, underestimate the cost in order to help [redacted] inthe scam of not to pay the claim in every possible way. When I brought theissues to them for discussion, both the owner of one company and the manager ofother company used profane language towards to me, refused to talk, and hung upthe phone. It is obvious that [redacted] engages those cheap and nasty people tomake the claim process so difficult and create an hostile atmosphere to detertheir claimant from pursue his/her legitimate rights.Although the shop is the one does the repair work, [redacted]had great influence on how the work being performed and the quality of the workdelivered simply because it is the payer for the work. [redacted], by flexingtheir muscle, forced the shop to accept its ridiculous well below market rate.The rate [redacted] paid was even far below what [redacted]etc's pays to the shop. Although these big insurance companies do much morebusiness with the shop and have negotiated deep discount rate. Shop does notwant to loss business. Meanwhile they have to maintain certain margin tosurvive. At the end, the shop cut the corner and deployed inexperienced andcheap apprentice to work on our car. That resulted in substandard quality ofrepair work. Our car has not been restored to its good condition prior to theaccident. It is unfair that [redacted] points the finger to the shop and denyits own responsibility. As to why I still brought the car back even though I foundthe car had not been fully repaired at the time of pickup, this is due to thefact that part of repair was omitted (I believe it is intentional) on [redacted]initial estimation, not on the consequent supplements, albeit that the damagewas identified and known to their adjuster from day one. I need to bring theissue to [redacted] for approval and authorization of additional car rental.Otherwise [redacted] would have good excuse not to reimburse the expense.Regarding to the unpaid car rental expense, both Larry W[redacted]and Kathy H[redacted] called me after they received my complaint from Revdex.com, gave memany excuses and explained to me why it was not paid. They finally sent checkto me afterwards. However they keep lying by stating in their response that"Additionally we have paid all rental bills submitted to date. Hisallegation in this complaint that we have refused to pay his rental expense isagain unfounded." With regard to Diminished Value claim, I am glad that[redacted] realizes that their game play tactics are too naive and hard to foolpeople, therefore raise their offer from $391.27 to $3000. It is big stepforward. However, I feel [redacted] still bargain in bad faith and unwilling tosettle this matter fairly. [redacted] tries to apply Georgia’s 17c formula to calculatethe diminished value of my vehicle, where my accident occurred in [redacted] not inGeorgia. Furthermore, Georgia’s 17c formula has been proved to be grossly underassess loss in value on all claims and to be unfair to consumers. Many honestand responsible insurance companies stop using this flaw formula in theircalculation.In addition, Georgia’s Insurance Commissioner, JohnO[redacted], issued a directive to all auto insurance companies doing business inGeorgia informing them that his office does not endorse or support the use ofthe 17c formula.Mr. O[redacted] further ordered all insurance companies to stoptelling policyholders that the 17c formula is the last word in thedetermination of DIMINISHED VALUE.I sent [redacted] several contacts of the licensed adjusterwho told me what my diminished value claim should be according to industry recognizedformula. The values they gave are varied in the range of $3500 to $5000.[redacted] initially refused to contact these professionals to get their opinionof the fair value. Then reluctantly contacted some of them after they receivedmy complain from Revdex.com. Then [redacted]chose one of the lowest number from the adjusters they called and tried to manipulatethe number down further. They claimed that Mr. P[redacted] said the my DM value is$3000 or under. I called Mr. P[redacted] to confirm and he totally denied that heever told [redacted] that DM value as [redacted] claimed to be. As the matter ofthe fact, Mr. P[redacted] told [redacted] that they are wrong in using 17c formula.Mr. P[redacted] said he calculated preliminary DM value of $3500 just based on the damagesappeared on the repair bill. He has not factor in the fact that (1) Our car isdisqualified for the [redacted] Used Car Certification, thus lost big chunk ofresale market value. (2) Our vehicle was only 2 years old and had less than20,000 odometer when the accident happened. It is common sense that newer carsuffers greater diminished value. (3) Our car has frame damage and structuredamage, and has not been restored to its pristine condition. After take thesefactors into consideration, our diminished value should be adjusted upwardtowards the number that is consistent with others, Mr. P[redacted] contends.

Regards,