2/20/18Revdex.comComplaint ID #[redacted]BIG AL'S SPECIAL TV MOVERS, INC.16707 NE 101h Ave Ridgefield WA 98642Office: 360-576-1988 Cell: 360-635-8321Web site: www.bigalsmovers.comE-mail: [email protected] have received [redacted] letter of complaint regarding her move to Austin Texas. Thank you...
forallowing us the opportunity to respond.To begin with, Big Al's was hired to load her hired ABF truck. When she called us to schedule the movewe carefully explained to her that we most certainly can do the move, however from experience on thosetypes of moves we must have a release of liability waiver signed before we can begin the move.Especially when working with ABF since they do not have tie downs on their trucks to secure items intransit. On move day [redacted] was given the waiver, she read it, agreed to it and signed it, see attached.Our waiver explains that liability begins when we first touch her goods and ends when the truck door isclosed. Also, she chose Option 1 for liability which provides 60 cents per pound for that period that we aremoving her belongings only.No moving company can be responsible for what happens to goods once they leave their possession.They have no idea who is driving or how, what roads may be taken, what the weather might be, whattraffic hazards of any type might occur, or how long it may be in transit. This is not an attempt to shiftblame, it is simply policy. ABF would not accept responsibility if she had hired another company tounload her goods from their truck and they damaged something. This is why her claim is denied. Big Al'swas not the company driving her goods to Austin Texas.It is unfortunate that this damage occurred and we understand her disappointment and frustration.Sincerely,Rhonda B[redacted]Owner
Currently, the consumer wants to keep the damaged merchandise, as well as receive the insurance money for the replacement value of the items. I have explained this to him from the beginning that he can not do that. Additionally, we have not contacted the consumer, or Revdex.com, as our insurance company does not want us directly involved because they are handling it.
Complaint: [redacted]I am rejecting this response because:
The business sold to me protection coverage for damage to my personal...
possessions up to $200,000. I paid the business directly $1,700 for this coverage (see bills of lading attached). The business--and the business alone--is responsible to me for reimbursement. The corporate liability insurance carrier of the business is not a party to the agreement documented in the bills of lading. The business accepted a risk not to exceed $200,000 in exchange for payment of $1,700. The business is attempting to assign its freely accepted risk to its corporate liability insurance carrier, and keep the $1,700 I paid for coverage.
Under this scheme, the business in fact is not only attempting to shift the risk to its liability insurance carrier, but make a $1,700 profit in the transaction. It's a great idea: sell the consumer protection coverage that is not insurance, collect $1,700 from the consumer for the assumption the specified risk, then transfer the risk to the liability insurance carrier, and make a guaranteed $1,700 profit in the bargain!
The problem here is that the business is attempting unilaterally to bind the consumer to reimbursement by its corporate liability insurance carrier, which is not a party to the terms specified in the bills of lading. The business must reimburse the consumer for losses under the coverage purchased by the consumer directly from the business. If the business wishes to submit a claim to its insurance company, subsequent to reimbursing the consumer, that is matter between those parties.This coverage provides reimbursement for the full retail value of any losses. I opted for no deductible. In this case, the objects are unique, signed sculptures of Inuit art made of serpentine stone. They cannot be replaced or repaired to their original condition.
To obtain reimbursement, the business requires timely submission of its completed claim form. I did so (see attachment). Subsequent to its review of the claim, the business requested submission of a formal appraisal of the objects to be performed at the consumer's expense. I did so (see attachments). The appraiser, “Images of the North” Inuit art gallery in San Francisco has been in the Inuit art business for several decades, is the sole remaining Inuit art gallery in [redacted], and is certified by the US Internal Revenue Service to appraise Inuit works of art for their tax deduction fair market value.
When the business did not reimburse for the appraised losses, I sent a demand letter by certified mail (see attached). After receiving the demand letter, the business referred me to its corporate liability insurance company, Liberty Mutual, to obtain reimbursement.
I chose, at my option, to attempt to obtain reimbursement for my professionally appraised losses from the insurance carrier to expedite closure of this dispute. The business's insurance carrier refused to reimburse for the full appraised losses, offering a lower amount as settlement. Since I am not bound by the agreement between me and the business to accept the insurance carrier's settlement offer, I have ceased negotiations with the insurance carrier. The obligation to provide full reimbursement remains with the business.
The business--and the business alone--assumed the risk of my losses. The business cannot use its insurance carrier as a shield to avoid direct reimbursement. If I had purchased no additional coverage from the business, its liability for my losses would be limited to $0.50 per pound (see attached bills of lading). At the consumer's option, however, the consumer may purchase from the business coverage for the full retail value of losses with no deductible. I paid the business $1,700 for that additional full value coverage up to $200,000.
The business accepted $1,700 for the coverage and assumed the risk documented in the bills of lading. Now, in the face of losses documented in the manner requested by the business, the business refuses to reimburse, and, instead, attempts to use its corporate liability insurance carrier, as a shield against the risk it freely assumed in exchange for $1,700.
Sincerely,[redacted]
2/20/18Revdex.comComplaint ID #[redacted]BIG AL'S SPECIAL TV MOVERS, INC.16707 NE 101h Ave Ridgefield WA 98642Office: 360-576-1988 Cell: 360-635-8321Web site: www.bigalsmovers.comE-mail: [email protected] have received [redacted] letter of complaint regarding her move to Austin Texas. Thank you...
forallowing us the opportunity to respond.To begin with, Big Al's was hired to load her hired ABF truck. When she called us to schedule the movewe carefully explained to her that we most certainly can do the move, however from experience on thosetypes of moves we must have a release of liability waiver signed before we can begin the move.Especially when working with ABF since they do not have tie downs on their trucks to secure items intransit. On move day [redacted] was given the waiver, she read it, agreed to it and signed it, see attached.Our waiver explains that liability begins when we first touch her goods and ends when the truck door isclosed. Also, she chose Option 1 for liability which provides 60 cents per pound for that period that we aremoving her belongings only.No moving company can be responsible for what happens to goods once they leave their possession.They have no idea who is driving or how, what roads may be taken, what the weather might be, whattraffic hazards of any type might occur, or how long it may be in transit. This is not an attempt to shiftblame, it is simply policy. ABF would not accept responsibility if she had hired another company tounload her goods from their truck and they damaged something. This is why her claim is denied. Big Al'swas not the company driving her goods to Austin Texas.It is unfortunate that this damage occurred and we understand her disappointment and frustration.Sincerely,Rhonda B[redacted]Owner
Currently, the consumer wants to keep the damaged merchandise, as well as receive the insurance money for the replacement value of the items. I have explained this to him from the beginning that he can not do that. Additionally, we have not contacted the consumer, or Revdex.com, as our insurance company does not want us directly involved because they are handling it.
Complaint: [redacted]I am rejecting this response because:
The business sold to me protection coverage for damage to my personal...
possessions up to $200,000. I paid the business directly $1,700 for this coverage (see bills of lading attached). The business--and the business alone--is responsible to me for reimbursement. The corporate liability insurance carrier of the business is not a party to the agreement documented in the bills of lading. The business accepted a risk not to exceed $200,000 in exchange for payment of $1,700. The business is attempting to assign its freely accepted risk to its corporate liability insurance carrier, and keep the $1,700 I paid for coverage.
Under this scheme, the business in fact is not only attempting to shift the risk to its liability insurance carrier, but make a $1,700 profit in the transaction. It's a great idea: sell the consumer protection coverage that is not insurance, collect $1,700 from the consumer for the assumption the specified risk, then transfer the risk to the liability insurance carrier, and make a guaranteed $1,700 profit in the bargain!
The problem here is that the business is attempting unilaterally to bind the consumer to reimbursement by its corporate liability insurance carrier, which is not a party to the terms specified in the bills of lading. The business must reimburse the consumer for losses under the coverage purchased by the consumer directly from the business. If the business wishes to submit a claim to its insurance company, subsequent to reimbursing the consumer, that is matter between those parties.This coverage provides reimbursement for the full retail value of any losses. I opted for no deductible. In this case, the objects are unique, signed sculptures of Inuit art made of serpentine stone. They cannot be replaced or repaired to their original condition.
To obtain reimbursement, the business requires timely submission of its completed claim form. I did so (see attachment). Subsequent to its review of the claim, the business requested submission of a formal appraisal of the objects to be performed at the consumer's expense. I did so (see attachments). The appraiser, “Images of the North” Inuit art gallery in San Francisco has been in the Inuit art business for several decades, is the sole remaining Inuit art gallery in [redacted], and is certified by the US Internal Revenue Service to appraise Inuit works of art for their tax deduction fair market value.
When the business did not reimburse for the appraised losses, I sent a demand letter by certified mail (see attached). After receiving the demand letter, the business referred me to its corporate liability insurance company, Liberty Mutual, to obtain reimbursement.
I chose, at my option, to attempt to obtain reimbursement for my professionally appraised losses from the insurance carrier to expedite closure of this dispute. The business's insurance carrier refused to reimburse for the full appraised losses, offering a lower amount as settlement. Since I am not bound by the agreement between me and the business to accept the insurance carrier's settlement offer, I have ceased negotiations with the insurance carrier. The obligation to provide full reimbursement remains with the business.
The business--and the business alone--assumed the risk of my losses. The business cannot use its insurance carrier as a shield to avoid direct reimbursement. If I had purchased no additional coverage from the business, its liability for my losses would be limited to $0.50 per pound (see attached bills of lading). At the consumer's option, however, the consumer may purchase from the business coverage for the full retail value of losses with no deductible. I paid the business $1,700 for that additional full value coverage up to $200,000.
The business accepted $1,700 for the coverage and assumed the risk documented in the bills of lading. Now, in the face of losses documented in the manner requested by the business, the business refuses to reimburse, and, instead, attempts to use its corporate liability insurance carrier, as a shield against the risk it freely assumed in exchange for $1,700.
Sincerely,[redacted]