Badger Mutual Insurance Company

Review: Long story short is: I had a kitchen drain pipe break, It was dead of winter, I figured the cold cracked it. No damage occurred then, or sense from the break as it is a drain pipe, not a water pipe and I stopped using the faucet so there would be no water issue, hence no damage! (Initially I forgot about my home insurance for help) Then I had a guy from my insurance company come out to see if it was worth a claim. While he was there I in passing, asked him info (as I assumed he had all this repair knowledge) about another pipe in the basement to see if he knew why I would see water by it, as I have a couple times. I see it and then its gone again. Its an "air" pipe. (again no damage but just asked him if he knew what would cause it? (nothing to do with why he was there but just thought he might know.) He goes on to say that its a huge job to repair. (the kitchen pipe, the one I called him out to review) They would have to rip out my counter, sink, the wall and so on and that they would only pay to fix the pipe after they rip up my home and they determined it broke due to freezing. Mind you they would not pay to put my home back together after ripping it up too. My deductible was 1,000.00 So I figured seeing how my finances were not the best I would wait a bit till I could save a little extra money and also get other estimates in the mean time. I did not think the whole house needed ripping apart to fix this.Mind you no money ever came from my insurance company and little did I know that "guy" who came out placed 2 claims on my insurance! Yes 2! How is that possible? Then they canceled my insurance! They are paid by my mortgage company so they have always got their money. There was and is still no damage to my home and they have paid me no money. So how is even one claim yet alone two and why have they canceled me? There is no loss to them? Now no one wants to insure me because of the "two claims listed with them! This is insane! How can they treat people like this?Desired Settlement: I need them to drop/take off the two claims from my record! As there is technically no claims! they haven't paid me anything and there is no damage!-OR- I would be willing to compromise and have them at least drop one of the claims so its not two. (because it never was one, yet alone two) and if that happens and they leave it as one claim, then I expect them to pay me the money from the guys estimate, as then it would actually be a claim!

Business

Response:

Ms. [redacted]

contacted our office on July 29, 2014 and reported that she had a pipe leaking

in the kitchen for about a month and had a pipe in the basement that had been

leaking for over 6 months. As these occurred in different areas and at

different times, she was advised at that time that this would be considered 2

losses.An

independent adjuster was assigned to inspect the losses. A contractor was

contacted to prepare an estimate on the covered damages (see attached).

Coverage is provided to access the pipes, repair the water damage and repair

the area that was torn out. The only item not covered was the cost to repair

the actual leaking pipes, as that is considered wear/tear and not covered by

the insurance contract. The covered damages to the basement fell below Ms.

[redacted]'s $1,000 deductible. After application of the deductible for the kitchen

damage, the loss amounted to $945.85On October 27, 2014, correspondence was sent

to Ms. [redacted] asking if she wished to pursue these claims (see attached). No

response was ever received and as such these files were closed. As Ms. [redacted]

has indicated in her letter to your office that she wishes payment for the

covered damages, we have issued our payment for the kitchen damages in the

amount of $945.85.

Consumer

Response:

I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID [redacted], and have determined that this does not resolve my complaint. For your reference, details of the offer I reviewed appear below.

[To assist us in bringing this matter to a close, we would like to know your view on the matter.]Now they tell me they are closing my claims without payment? What does that mean? I have no idea? What does the close mean? What does without payment mean? So after all this writing back and forth to finally settle this I get this as an answer? So are they telling me to bad so sad we will do nothing despite your "claim" that we will now do nothing about. Way to go. So does the one check that I finally got for my "one claim" is that still mine? or are they taking that back too? I have been waiting for their response so I can take this check out of the cabinet and cash it and this is the response? Oh you don't get the money now too ? What in Gods name is going on? What kind of company is this that they lack such common sense, service and ethics. Hello Better Business please help me with this issue.

Regards,

Review: Badger Mututal insurance company has engaged in what I would call a bad faith dealing with my insurance claim from the beginning by excluding fees that are associated with a vehicle purchase and providing an artificially low fair market vehicle replacement cost that is not at all representative of vehicle replacement cost. The car accident occurred on October 1, 2015 and their insured caused the accident resulting in my vehicle being totaled.

They have routinely delayed responses with me with one being 3 weeks after, in responding to emails in which they say they will not do anything further. The responses are dismissive and engaging in bad faith practices as this is the final offer and that I should take it to my insurance company if I don't like their offer. Their insured caused the loss and they are responsible for it.

They are now threatening me with storage fees for their delays in this process. The company did not even make an offer until 15 days after the accident occured. Related to the storage fees, the adjuster told us in his phone call on approximately October 13 or 14 when he assessed the car as a complete loss, that we only had a couple of days to clear out the car before it was sent out. Now they are claiming this position of my responsibility for storage fees, something that has been otherwise communicated at the onset of the claim to me that the car would be gone in a matter of a few days.

The claims manager has provided in writing their legal definition of a fair market value. I provided real time internet car vehicle fair market pricing substantiated by the seller, make, model , mileage etc along with industry specific fees for car purchases that satisfy and demonstrate that is the hypothetical most probable price that could be obtained for a property by average informed purchasers. To meet that definition, I provided them with facts and figures that is representative of costs associated with vehicle replacement, using their exact definition. They do not want to acknowledge any of these values or fees

They have utilized,what I believe to be stall tactics, with lack of email responses of three weeks by both the VP of claims as well as the claims manger of not responding at all to emails, until I contacted the company president via a voicemail, at which time an email was sent the next day saying their incomplete low offer will not change, and now it is being coupled with the threat of my responsibilty for fees that is their obligation so as to encourage settlement due to their delays and incomplete offer that will not make us financialy whole in this car vehicle replacement settlement..

The widely held belief is that an insurance company is to make a party whole, either your own insurance company or the at fault's party insurance company. It has now been 2 months and I am the harmed party with no compromise and no compensation for my loss due to their excessive amount of time waiting for both the Vice President of Claims and the claim manger to respond to my email inquiries.

Badger Mutual insurance company's behavior with my claim, in my opinion, is sheer bad faith business practices and I am only looking to be made financially whole for my loss caused by their insured and they have stated this is not what they will do. It is a shame when a large WI company with assets over $168 million dollars at December 31, 2014 is trying to take advantage of working families who depend on their vehicles to get to school and work all for $1,279.62 additional claim payout.Desired Settlement: A difference of $1279.62 is what I want to have additionally paid out in addition to their $5207.30 for a total of $6486.92. To have the claim paid out using the real time market values submitted to them that are substantiated by industry car buying sites, edmunds fees and costs associated with a car. The information I submitted to them was:

car value $5561 + tax $311.42+title $69.50 + License $75 +dealer fees $190 + rental car $280 for a grand total of $6,486.92. Their offer excluded fees of $334.50 and provided a car value of $4,666 with the

reduced sales tax on vehicle price.

It is a difference of $1279.62 that I am requesting to be added to their claim amount of $5207.30

Business

Response:

Ms.

[redacted]'s vehicle was damaged when her son was involved in an accident with our

policyholder. In this accident her vehicle sustained extensive damage and was

deemed a total loss.The vehicle

that was involved in the accident was a 2004 Honda Civic with 132,000 miles. We

made an offer of $5,207.30 which represents the value of $4,666 for her car,

plus sales tax (261.30) and loss of use ($280). We have attached the paperwork

to support this offer along with the emails and letter that have been sent

reiterating our position. We are sorry that Ms. [redacted] does not agree with our

offer, but we feel this is fair based upon the age and condition of her

vehicle. In addition, we advised her that she could file this claim with her

own carrier and we would respond to their subrogation demand.Should

you have any questions with regard to this, please feel free to contact me.

Consumer

Response:

[A default letter is provided here which indicates your acceptance of the business's response. If you wish, you may update it before sending it.]

I disagree with Badger Mutual Insurance’s offer of $5,207.30

as it fails to cover the associated costs of replacing my vehicle. It specifically excludes title, license

plates, and dealer fees as well as an unrealistic market replacement value for

a comparable car that was totaled by their insured. Using the information below outlining the replacement cost, I will be forced

to absorb a $1,279.62 loss in order to replace my vehicle that was totaled on

October 1, 2015 by their insured as I can no longer wait for the claim money for the car replacement

My numerous responses to Badger Mutual Insurance provided real time

fair market values , supported by documentation for external car sites , WI DMV fees and Edmunds car buying information on fees that are representative of the current car environment to replace my

vehicle. Using the insurance company’s

definition and basis for loss compensation, the fair market price for my vehicle

is $5,561, plus tax, title, license and dealer fees and rental reimbursement.

Car Value $5,561.00

Tax 311.42

Title 69.50

License 75.00

Dealer Fees 190.00

Car Rental 280

Total Replacement Cost $6,486.92

Difference of

$1,279.62

Each response at every level within Badger Mutual Insurance,

including executive management, has repeatedly ignored the total costs

associated with the purchase of a vehicle in their responses, such as dealer

fees, title and license plates and the fair market value. Their responses have been up to three weeks later

and only when a message is left with the Company President. Badger Mutual Insurance’s responses intentionally fail to

address my submitted information, which details the replacement value of the

car and associated costs, which uses their definition of what constitutes the

use of replacement value as the “hypothetical most probable price that could be

obtained for a property by average, informed purchasers.” Badger Mutual Insurance has exhibited bad faith efforts in

handling this claim, with repeated delays and ignores the facts surrounding it

with their pre-determined offer that is not representative of the cost of replacing

a vehicle. I hope that current and future customers, as well as insurance

brokers, agents and consumers carefully consider the bad faith dealings, delays

and practices that Badger Mutual Insurance has exhibited and repeatedly engaged

in with my claim that seems to seep through every level in their company, when they

evaluate their insurance needs and what they are willing and can financially

loose in the event they need to file a claim with Badger Mutual Insurance. I deal with insurance on a personal and professional level and have never experienced this sub-standard level of

customer service, professionalism and accountability demonstrated by Badger

Mutual Insurance in dealing with my claim.

I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID [redacted], and find that this resolution is satisfactory to me.

Regards,

Business

Response:

We acknowledge your follow up inquiry in our office.Please be advised,

we received the signed title from Ms. [redacted] on December 29, 2015 and have

issued our payment in full for $5,207.30.Please contact us should you have any further questions.

After 18 years with Badger dropped my policy due to an old barn . We had no notice about this , however we had already started taking this barn down . the way I found out my policy will not renew was tiring to change agents . so my money was good enough for 18 years but not any longer .
Very poor customer relations !!

Review: In early April 2015 I noticed that water was leaking in my dining room area. A friend suggested that I contact my homeowner's insurance to see if they can reimburse for repairs. I spoke with a friend who does roofing and he told me that I should have them look for hail damage. I called Badger Mutual to report a claim for the leakage. I specifically asked the claim adjuster named [redacted] to look for hail damage because I knew that my policy covered hail damage. I was told that there was no visible hail damage found by this gentleman and that my problem came from basic wear and tear. It was suggested that I should have a self appointed roofer take a look at the roof aside from the adjuster with Badger Mutual. I reached out to a gentleman named [redacted] who has a roofing co. He came and met with the claim adjuster within a week and the both agreed that there was a large amount of hail damage. I was told that I had to file a separate claim even though my policy states under TIME LIMITATIONS :" You may make claim for any additional payments under your replacement cost coverage within 180 days of the date of loss". My initial date of loss which the last hail storm occurred in Chicago was 4/2014 but the date of filing was 4/2015. I was told that the insurance companies can go as far back as a year for hail damage. On 4/20/15 Badger Mutual issued me a check to cover the water damage inside the house. After speaking with the self appointed roofer and the claim adjuster with Badger Mutual I was issued 2nd check for hail damage on 5/12/2015. Because I was told I had to have two separate claims I had to pay two separate deductibles of $500. Additionally Badger Mutual dropped my policy, which is their right but they have used deceptive practices to over-bill me and reported false information on my records making it very difficult for me to obtain reasonable insurance.Desired Settlement: I would like to see a billing adjustment (only one deductible) Report changed to reflect only one claim according to their settlement form. Repairs performed on the roof to cover hail damage.

Business

Response:

The policy under which the claims have been

presented is a HO-3 Homeowner policy issued to Ms. [redacted]. Ms. [redacted]

reported a roof leak claim to Badger Mutual Insurance Company on April 9, 2015.An inspection was

conducted by an independent adjusting firm, [redacted] on April

13, 2015. The inspection found water leaking in the SW corner of the home where

the 1st story addition ties into the siding/brick. The flashing

along this area has deteriorated and caused water to leak into the home. Hail damage

was not mentioned when the claim was reported nor during the inspection. This

claim amounted to $2,614.75. After applying the $500.00 policy deductible,

payment of $2,114.75 was issued on April 20, 2015.On May 1, 2015, the insured reported another claim advising

that she had a contractor inspect the roof and they advised that she had hail

damage from a storm occurring May 20, 2014. Another inspection was conducted by

[redacted] on May 8, 2015. No damage was found to the roof but hail

impacts were found to the soft metals such as gutters, downspouts, awnings,

roof vents and siding. This claim amounted to $6,111.03. After deduction of

depreciation of $1,839.66 and the policyholders 20% hail deductible ($854.27),

payment was issued to the policyholder for $3,417.10 on May 12, 2015.Since these are two separate

losses, two deductibles would apply. Should you have any questions with regard

to this, please feel free to contact me.

Business

Response:

We acknowledge your follow up inquiry in

our office.The water damage was the result of

deteriorated caulking where the 1st story addition ties into the

siding/brick (see photograph attached). This is not related to hail damage.With regard to the

hail damage, her contractor advised that she had roof damage subsequent to the

water damage inspection. The independent adjuster who inspected the water

damage claim,[redacted] of [redacted]

again inspected the home and found no damage to the roof, but impacts to the

gutters, downspouts, awning and siding (see attached photos). Ms. [redacted]'s

contractor agreed with the damage assessment. As these are two unrelated

incidents, two deductibles would apply.

Consumer

Response:

Review: I have an homeowner's insurance policy through Badger Mutual. They sent us a letter saying they had our home inspected and could no longer cover our home due to the condition of our roof. They dated the letter 7/25/2013 but we did not recieve the letter until 7/29/2013. When I called the business to see if we could get an extension to give us more than 7 days to find new insurance, [redacted] stated they did not have to give us more than 12 days. I told him we recieved the letter on teh 29th of July which only left us 7 business days to find insurance, not 12. He then stated that the letter was written 7-25-13, mailed 7-26-13 so he did not have to grant us any extension and he could not help us at all. When I pointed out that if it was mailed on the 26th we should at least have until the 8th to find new insurance, he then quickly went back and said he must have mispoke and it was mailed on the 25th. I asked to speak with a different department within their company to file a complaint and he said there was none. 7 days is not enough time to find a whole new carrier, this takes time.Desired Settlement: I would like to have an extension on our homeowners policy to give us sufficient amount of time to find new coverage. Because they mailed the letter on a Friday, I did not recieve it until the following Monday which only left me 7 business days to find new insurance, which is not enough time. I also think they should have an internal way to file a complaint about their company.

Business

Response:

August 9, 2013

Revdex.com

RE: Revdex.com Complaint - [redacted]

We acknowledge the receipt of your letter dated August 2,2013, complaint ID [redacted]. This

complaint concerns the application and the subsequent cancellation of Homeowners insurance.

Ms [redacted] applied for insurance though the [redacted] of Eau Claire, Wisconsin.

Her agent bound coverage effective June 14,2013. As part of the underwriting process, an

inspection of the home was conducted. That inspection noted the condition of the dwelling roof.

Due to the condition of the roof, Badger was unable to continue coverage.

In her complaint, Ms [redacted] makes reference to the number of days notice the cancellation

provided, questioning if she was adequately notified.

Timely notice of cancellation is defined by Wisconsin statute WI ST 631.36. This statute

requires the cancellation to be sent by first class mail 10 days before the effective date of the

cancellation. Ms [redacted]'s cancellation was mailed July 26,2013, and was effective August 7,

2013. As such, it was a proper cancellation.

Included is a copy of the cancellation letter and proof of mailing.

If you have any questions, feel free to call me at ###-###-####.

Consumer

Response:

[A default letter is provided here which indicates your acceptance of the business's response. If you wish, you may update it before sending it.]

I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID [redacted]. I have since found other insurance and do not wish to deal with Badger Mutual at all. The man I spoke to said the law gave me 12 days notice, thus the reason I was confused as to the mailing date, recieving date, and cancelation date. Their employee was wrong and rude, but as I stated I do not wish to have any dealings or contact with such a company in the future.

Review: I have a claim filed with them and they will not come to a reasonable agreement they want to offer me $6000.00 for my trailer that costed me over $10,000.00 plus I have loss days of work due to trailer damage and if I want to keep damaged trailer I have to accept $3,000.00 and live with a totaled out trailer I don't think they are very fair at all I gave them quotes from 2 different dealers and they say there price is fair but it is far from fairDesired Settlement: I would like full replacement cost of getting my trailer back to pre wrecked condition or cost of replacing my trailer to new same model trailer cost almost $9000 plus lettering $2000.00 + cost of down time while waiting on new one to get here lettering and time to switch tools this is gonna cost me around $20,000.00and you only want to offer $6,000.00 and give u my trailer that costed almost twice that much

Business

Response:

Mr. [redacted]'s 2011 trailer was damaged by our insured while it was parked on the side of theroadway. Mr. [redacted] supplied us with estimates and photos of the damaged unit on November 5,2014. An inspection of the unit was conducted and the appraisal revealed the cost to repair thetrailer would be in excess ofS7,OOO which exceeds the value of the trailer, deeming it a totalloss.The market valuation report indicated the market value of the vehicle was $5,975.00 (seeattached paperwork). An offer of settlement was made to Mr. [redacted] on November 11,2014which included the market value of the vehicle less salvage ofSl,195.00 (if he opted to retain theunit) plus 10 days of loss of use. Mr. [redacted] disagreed with the market valuation informing us hewas of the opinion he was entitled to a brand new 2014 trailer. We advised Mr. [redacted] our legalobligation is to put him back in the same position he was in prior to the loss. An offer andrelease was sent to Mr. [redacted] on November 17, 2014 outlining our offer of settlement. Uponreceipt of the signed release we will issue payment to Mr. [redacted]. We advised Mr. [redacted] that if hedisagreed with our valuation, he could pursue this through his own carrier but he advises he doesnot have insurance on the trailer.If you have any questions or need any additional information please feel free to call. Sincerely[redacted]

Business

Response:

This file has been resolved. Mr. [redacted] has agreed to a settlement of $7,424. A release hasbeen sent to him and upon receipt, we will issue our payment.If you have any questions regarding this matter please contact me at ###-###-####

Consumer

Response:

I have sent information to get the company to re quote with proper trailer they have not sent the info to there appraisal company and the appraisal company can not change quote without proper documentation and will not allow me to send directly to the appraisal company we just keep going in circles please send all documentation that I have sent to badger over to [redacted] so they can properly quote my trailer with the exact same trailer that was damaged

Review: In May or 2015, I filed a claim on my property for hail damage that impacted a window, some siding, and the roof. A licensed contractor assessed my property and told me the entire roof needed replacement, the siding needed replacement and a window needed to be repaired . 8 neighbors on the same block had their entire roof replaced and some also had siding.

Badger assessed the damage, and would not replace the entire roof or any of the siding. They gave me approx. $1200 ($2200 before my deductible of $1000). I was instructed to "patch parts of the roof and repair the window."

In January of 2016, I received a letter that I was being dropped from Badger insurance company because I "had not replaced my roof and trimmed/removed a tree." They company did not give me nearly enough to replace the entire roof, and coverage for a tree removal was never mentioned on initial assessment.

I contacted Badgar to ask them about the conflicting information between the initial repair instructions and the reasons for cancellation. I was told that initial assessment and repair instructions didn't matter, and in fact were null and void. The correct information about the required repairs was stated in the cancellation letter.

After this, I struggeled to find insurance companies that will cover my property and I have to settle for insurance at a higher rate with a larger deductible. I will also have to pay for an entire roof replacement out of pocket. In the ten years I've owned my property, I have never had a storm damage claim.

If I had an attorney, I could probably take legal action, but I cannot afford one. This is absolutely unacceptable and probably illegal.Desired Settlement: I would like to be paid for the entire roof replacement, window and tree trim/removal. Thereafter, I would like no contact with this company. If anything, I want to put this information out there and draw attention to their fraudulant and dishonest practices. Maybe I can save another person from the hardship. After reading reviews, it appears I'm not alone in my victimization from this company.

Business

Response:

We acknowledge receipt of your inquiry in our office.The policy under which claim has been presented is a homeowners policy. Badger Mutual InsuranceCompany received the claim on May 29, 2015 with the submitted date of loss being May 3, 2015.In order to properly assess the damages being claimed, Badger Mutual hired Syndicate Claims toperform an inspection of the loss location. This inspection took place on June 5, 2015. The inspectionrevealed minor wind damage to the dwelling front roof slope. Areas of hail damage were discovered aswell to the dwelling's soft metal areas including window wraps, metal roof vents, and downspout areas.An agreement was reached with the insured's contractor for the covered damages in the amount of$2,583.32. After application of the $1,000 policy deductible payment was issued to the policyholder for$1,583.32. This amount was issued and mailed to the insured with a letter explaining coverage on June12,2015.With regard to her policy, letters were sent to the policyholder on July 1, 2015 and October 5, 2015requesting that the roof be replaced or the policy would be non-renewed as of April 2, 2016. As oftoday, no documentation has been provided indicating that these repairs were completed.In addition, the adjuster found areas of curling shingles along with signs of extensive wear and tear, age,deterioration and latent/mechanical defect. The policy does not provide coverage for thesemaintenance related issues so we were unable to pay for replacing the entire roof.Sincerely,

Badger Mutual is just horrible. They only appear to be fully on the homeowners' side up until they get their policy payment. After that, it seems it's more about helping themselves and less about helping homeowners that have suffered storm damage. They will look for any reason to deny a claim, even though they look over your property and say everything is in order before taking money for the worthless policy they're trying to sell you. And God forbid, if you actually have to use the policy you're paying for, they'll drop you like a hot potato. Denied hail damage. Repairs + wasted money on worthless insurance policy = $13000+ loss :( Steer clear of Badger Mutual.

THIS COMPANY IS HORRIBLE!!! My car was damaged by some kids. They wont pay for any of the damage. HORRIBLE COMPANY!!!!

Review: I filed a claim due to leaks in my master bathroom both from the bathtub and the shower. I knew the tub was leaking into the downstairs kitchen. I had a licensed Contractor cut into the ceiling and found the shower was leaking too. The contractor gave an estimate that was five times higher that the adjusters estimate. I received a letter from Badger Mutual with a check for 1,000 to actual fix the damage caused by the leaks. The adjuster did not even mention the efforts to get to the leaks, such as taking the tub out of a framed and tiled enclosure and having to remove the whole base of the shower to get to the drain.

There is absolutely no way I could ever cover the damage from the leakage at 1,000. I believe Eagle Adjusters, the company that provided the adjustment may be in cahoots with Badger Mutual and purposely under estimating in order to not cover full costs of the damage. I googled claim reviews for Badger Mutual and found several very bad reviews where Badger underestimated the damages or tried to blame natural occurrences in order not to pay. just ask for a fair market estimate considering all the damage that has already occurred and the damage that will occur to just get to the pipes and the drains. I have grave concerns that Badger Mutual makes it a habit to purposely underestimate damages in order not to pay.Desired Settlement: I want a fair market value estimate with full damages considered, not just consequential damages. I want an INDEPENDENT adjuster who is credible from a credible company and a chance to present the estimate from the licensed contractor and even other licensed contractors so a fair market estimate can really be provided. I want to be able to actually get the damage repaired and NOT have to wait another five months to actually have two working showers in the house again.

Business

Response:

We acknowledge receipt of your inquiry in our office.The policy under which claim has been presented is a homeowner's policy issued to Ms.[redacted] submitted a pipe leak/water damage claim to our office onOctober 22, 2014 with an October 21, 2014 date of loss.~002In order to properly evaluate and assess the damages being claimed, Badger MutualInsurance Co hired [redacted] to perform an inspection of the loss location.Our discussion of the facts of this claim and the information obtained from this inspectionrevealed the shower was leaking in two separate areas from a recent remodel that wasperformed. The insureds new contractor, [redacted], confinned a leak at the valve andthe shower drain.The insured was advised that the policy would not provide coverage for the plumbingrepairs as they were workmanship/installation related. An estimate was prepared for thewater damages resulting from this loss. The agreed scope and estimate of repair for thewater damage totaled $2,104.70. There is a $1,000 policy deductible giving us a netclaim of$1,104.70. A copy of the estimate prepared was sent with the payment onNovember 5, 2014.On November 21, 2014, [redacted] received a phone call from the insured indicatingher contractor is recommending fully removing and replacing the shower/remodeledareas in order to properly repair the area. A re-inspection of the premises with theinsured's contractor is being arranged.Attached is the letter sent to the insured regarding coverage and the re-inspection. Shouldyou have any further questions, please contact me.

Review: In May I was looking around for cheaper homeowners insurance because I thought mine was too high. Through [redacted] I was quoted $608 for a year of homeowners insurance. I thought this was a good deal and switched from my the insurance I had to Badger Mutual and paid for the entire year. So I thought I was good until 5/2014 however I just received a bill for $234.33 to continue my homeowners policy. I am very confused because if I had been quoted $842 I may have stayed with my previous insurance. Also this bill is so random how do I know I won't receive another bill in a couple months wanting more money.Desired Settlement: I paid for a year of homeowners insurance. I do not know where this $234.33 is coming from and I don't feel I owe it.

Business

Response:

September 11,2013

Dear Mr. [redacted],

We acknowledge the receipt of your letter dated September 9,2013 complaint ID

[redacted]. The complaint is in regards to [redacted]'s homeowner policy.

Ms. [redacted]'s homeowner application was received May 21, 2013. The homeowner

program she applied for requires the roof and heating system be replaced within the last

15 years. Proof these updates had been made were requested, via email, from Ms.

[redacted]'s insurance agent on May 22, 2013. The application was to be declined on May

30,2013 because the documentation of the updates had not been received. However, Ms.

[redacted]'s agent requested the policy be issued in a different program until the documents

are received. To date, nothing further has been received. I have enclosed a copy of the

letter that accompanied Ms. [redacted]'s homeowner policy that explained why her policy

had been issued in the more expensive program.

If you have any further questions, feel free to call me at ###-###-#### or

Sincerely,

Review: House fire 06/03/14 @ resident [redacted] did not have an inspection done and open permits on home

Paid [redacted] in Full for incomplete work (filed complaint on contractor 03/25/15)

Did not issue an explanation of charges for personal property, given the run around regarding my inventory list, he submitted my inventory list to an outside co 3 times ([redacted] @ [redacted] ###-###-####) and paid less than half the estimates cost

Badger Mutual did not include my roof in repairs after the fire fighters put hole to end fire, my out of pocket cost were $6000 to [redacted]

Also in May, I had contacted badger insurance regarding hail damages to roof and no claim were filed

03/05/15 Letter received from Badger Mutual Ins to terminate my home insurance effective 05/25/15 @ 12.01am

I can not obtain any home insurance because of open permits on home from unfinished repairs from contractor

[redacted]/Badger Adjustor appears to have an racial problem, didn't return calls, and afraid to meet in personDesired Settlement: Refund for unfinished repairs on home and out of pocket expenses of roof

Submit an inventory list of charges paid for each items of personal property and revaluerate

prices

submit an inventory list of charges paid to Advanced P&C Builders for work performed on home

Re-instate insurance policy until permits are closed and work is completed on home

Business

Response:

We acknowledge receipt of your inquiry in our office. The policy under which claim hasbeen presented is Homeowner's policy issued to [redacted]. The insured'scomplaint is referencing 2 separate claims.Ms. [redacted] reported a fire claim on June 3, 2014 which was handled under ClaimX1080379-FI7. The insured was contacted and an inspection commenced on June 5,2014 with the insured's contractor; [redacted]. Over the course of theclaim proceedings; several payments based upon covered damages sustained. Thepayments were issued as follows:I. June 4, 2014 - issued $1,500 to insured for an initial out of pocket advance.2. June 11,2014 - Issued $20,000 to insured and [redacted] for buildingrepair advance.3. June 10, 2014 - Issued $2,500 to insured for an additional out of pocket advance.4. July 2, 2014 - Issued $2,500 to insured for an additional out of pocket advance.5. July 14,2014 - Issued $2,500 to insured and Julia [redacted] for the 1st monthsrent6. July 17,2014 - Issued $2,500 contents advance7. July 20, 2014 - Issued $70,000 to insured and [redacted] Builders fora 2nd Building repair advance.8. August 17,2014 - Issued $2,965.00 to insured and [redacted]Builders for Emergency services completed.9. August 27, 2014 - Issued $34,165 .10 to insured and [redacted]Builders for Personal property pack-out, storage, cleaning and repair.10. September 4, 2014 - Issued S15,000 to named insured towards the Actual CashValue payment for personal property lost.II. September 28,2014 - Issued $344.75 to named insured for additional personalproperty cleaning.12. October 28,2014 - Issued $436.29 to named insured which represented theActual Cash Value difference minus all advances issued to date.13. October 28, 2014 - Issued $862.67 to named insured which represented the Barrebuild supplement.14. November 2, 2014 - Issued $1,003.04 to named insured and [redacted] for Personal property dry-cleaning supplement.IS. November 2, 2014 - Issued $ 25,402.98 to named insured and [redacted] for the Final building payment.16. November 12,2014 - issued $900.00 to Insured for food expenses17. November 13, 2014 - Issued $10,000 to insured for personal property purchased.18. January 7, 2015 - Issued $1,050.00 to named insured and [redacted]for landscaping.[redacted] completed the pack-out and inventory of both salvageableand unsalvageable personal property. We sent the inventory to [redacted]services in order to verify, confirm and finalize the like, kind and quality items per localpricing. The insured was advised of the process in order to recover the depreciationwithheld and asked to review the inventory for accuracy. The insured had concerns withsome of the personal property replacement cost values and requested increases forselected items.We requested further documentation to help support the increase in replacement costvalues. Neither Badger Mutual Insurance Company nor [redacted] servicesreceived any additional information to help support the insureds request for highervalues. [redacted] services confirmed the like, kind and quality items peraverage local pricing. The insured's hired contractor continues to complete repairs pertheir signed contract with the insured. On April 14, 2015, the contractor advised us thatthe insured has not allowed them in the property to perform the building inspectorinspections.With regard to Ms. [redacted] second concern, she reported a roof damage claim onAugust 27, 2014 with an August 22,2014 date of loss. This loss was handled underClaim #: [redacted]. The loss location was inspected with the insured's contractorpresent, ([redacted]. The inspection did not reveal any hail, windnor storm related damage to the roof, siding, nor other exposed exterior surfaces of thehome or garage. Further, the dwelling and garage roof shingles were found to be heavilydeteriorated and well beyond their useful life. The insured was sent a Denial letter and thefile was closed.With regard to the non-renewal of the policy, prior to offering a homeowner renewal,Badger Mutual reviews all policies. Upon reviewing Ms. [redacted]' policy we becameaware of her recent claim activity. Ms. [redacted]' claims history includes overflow fromsump pump losses on June 7, 2008, July 14,2010 and July 20, 2010 hail losses on May12,2014 and August 22,2014 and a fire loss on June 3, 2014. Because of these claims,we were unable to offer a renewal. As required by Wisconsin insurance statute, enclosedis a copy of the nonrenewal and its proof of mailing.