CareWest Citrus Care

Complaint[redacted]
I am rejecting this response because:
I already called the Traveler's Insurance contact...

back and left a  voice message for them to contact me through email correspondence. I haven't heard anything further from Traveler's Insurance.
Sincerely,
[redacted]

A response was sent 11/10/2015.....
It is our understanding that
this claim has now been resolved to his satisfaction and there are no
outstanding issues.

Travelers position has not changed since our November 17, 2015 Department of Insurance response.  Therefore a response will not be going out to [redacted]

A response was sent to Mr. [redacted] on 6/18/2015:The response letter included a timeline back to 2012.     "Since your rating, we have had multiple emails from you and responded back and tried to resolve this
case with you for $8000 which significantly exceeds the rating you were...

given by the treating physician.
We never received any report from any physician you may have obtained a second opinion with. We
also never received any correspondence from an attorney indicating you are represented by them yet
many of your emails do refer that you were being advised by attorneys.
We have made multiple efforts to resolve this case with you for more than the value of the rating given
by the treating physician and ultimately the statute of limitations has now run and we are not able to pay
anyhing out on this claim. You were notified many times of our offer as well as the statute of limitation dates".

A response was sent 4/12/2018 with explanation of payments related to guarantee funds process.

Complaint: [redacted]
I am rejecting this response because:
here is how I see the story.I go to a restaurant, and really feel like eating Hawaiian pizza. according to the menu, Large Hawaiian Pizza is $10, so I order one. I start eating it, right around I'm about half way done with the pizza, the server comes and apologetically informs me that there has been a "system processing error", and infarct the price of Large Hawaiian pizza is $22, so the difference in price will be added to my bill.  I'm not happy with the way that has been handled, so I get up and leave the restaurant.  A month latter the restaurant manager sends me a bill for $1, according to him I ate half of a pizza that's worth $22, and the price of the half pizza I ate then is $11. I only paid $10, so unless I pay the $1 difference, he would send me to collection.well, with that story I'm not a happy customer.  I'm not a happy customer with how I was billed from Travelers either. IT IS NOT THE CUSTOMER RESPONSIBILITIES TO PAY FOR THE PROVIDERS MISTAKES(SYSTEM PROCESSING ERROR)! The error was not done by me, nor in my system. And no, you don't need to explain me the difference between pizza and car insurance coverage.The Facts:#1- I'm not happy with how the "system processing error" billing was handled.#2- I don't really care about $127, that amount of money won't really break my bank, that's just a numerical representation of Travelers mistake.The Questions:#1- Does Travelers care if I'm a happy customer?#2- Does Travelers care about $127?So unless Travelers would like to change how I feel, they really don't need to further respond.
Sincerely,
[redacted]

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

Complaint: [redacted]
I am rejecting this response because:I will accept that the claim has been resolved once the reinspection has been completed and a satisfactory resolution has been met regarding the diminished value claim.
Sincerely,
[redacted]

A response was sent to Mr. [redacted] on 7/2/2015 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 fire. We received the claim on March
22, 2015, at 2:41 pm and contact was made on March 22, 2015, at 3:15 pm...

to
discuss the facts surrounding the loss. Due 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 place. The adjuster set an inspection
time with you for March 23, 2015 at 1:30 pm. At the time of the inspection, Mr.
[redacted] chose to stay in the home while the rest of the family stayed at the
hotel. The 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 odor. The
adjuster also approved an additional 2 weeks of Additional Living Expense for your
family to remain at the hotel until this work could be completed. The
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, 2015.  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 habitable. On 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 fireplace. The 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 smoke. The 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 fireplace. The
firm concluded that the fireplace and chimney were structurally unaffected as a
result of the fire. The 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 up. The chimney was improperly
constructed against current residential code as it did not provide the minimum
2” clearance from any combustible materials. The 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 costs. The 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 back. The 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 up. When 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 enforcement. The adjuster updated the claim and the estimate to
include these additional costs and submitted this information to you on June
24, 2015. 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 concerns. The 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 part. In 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 contractor. Furthermore, 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 work. If
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
contractor. Finally, 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 commencing. If 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. "

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

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

me.
Sincerely,
[redacted] Yes, I received my refund the day after I filed my complaint with the Revdex.com.  I am happy with this outcome.Thank you!

A response was sent to Mr. [redacted] 12/30/2015.
The premium in dispute is actually from the audit for the 2014 policy term.  When the Audit Department does not receive a response for audit information they issue an estimated audit.  The estimated audit for the 2014 policy term was $553.00.  Enclosed with the response is a copy of the estimated audit for Mr. [redacted] records.
The renewal for the 2015 policy term was cancelled flat.  Enclosed with the response is a copy of the cancellation notice.  There is no premium due for the 2015 policy term.
Mr. [redacted] can either pay the estimated audit or contact the Audit Department (contact info provided) and provide them with the information needed to process an actual audit.

Complaint: [redacted]
I am rejecting this response because: Traveler did not act with due diligence. Travelers did properly inspect our roof and did not attempt to reinspect anything. These people are a fraud and are only concerned about collecting premiums and not honoring customers policies. I want to be reimbursed in full for the costof our roof repair which is approximately $7,000.00 .  
Sincerely,
[redacted]

An additional response was sent to [redacted] on April 13, 2018 from Troy L[redacted] Business Center.  The response explained that an additional assessment of the policy file was completed and the out come remains the same.  The Company position will stand.

A response was sent 9/21/2016...
"I am writing in response to your secondary inquiry to the Revdex.com. This letter is to acknowledge that your vehicle was damaged in a collision with our policyholder’s vehicle and that you have ongoing concerns regarding the level of customer service as well as diminished value. I am responding on behalf of Travelers Property Casualty Company of America (herein referred to as Travelers). I am hopeful that my email response to the questions you posed on September 16 th has provided the needed clarification and understanding as it relates to the concerns you have outlined. If you would like to discuss further, please reach out to me by email or phone at your convenience."
Contact information was provided in this response letter.

Travelers claim has made several attempts to contact [redacted] however, there has not been any return calls to Travelers to discuss her complaint.

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

Complaint: 11000546
I am rejecting...

this response because:
Sincerely,
[redacted] My business name is [redacted]    [redacted]         [redacted]           My policy number        [redacted]This is the information you requested

A response was sent to [redacted] on 9/4/2015....
A review of our policy
records shows that we have received all required coverage selection forms from
you.  In light of this, we have adjusted
our records to remove the additional charge. 
Your policy is currently paid in full for...

the term from June 16, 2015 to
June 16, 2016.
We apologize for any inconvenience and thank you
for allowing us to protect what matters most to you.

A response was sent to [redacted] Roofing, Attn: [redacted] on February 28, 2017 from [redacted], Claim Manager, [redacted] Claim Office.  Ms. Bibko explained that the Xactimate pricing system used has been deemed appropriate by contractors and the insurance industry for the type of work...

in question.  The unit costs that are used in our estmiates for roof replacement are reasonable and customary; Travelers therefore cannot amend our estimate.