Crowne Plaza Louisville Airport

We are in receipt of Ms. [redacted]’s rejection of our response regarding the above referenced file. In her complaint, Ms. [redacted] is disputing the processing of the above referenced claims and is requesting additional benefits be applied.As stated in our original response, we have requested records on Ms. [redacted]’s behalf in order to determine if additional benefits apply to the above referenced claims. We received the requested records on October 18, 2016. Our review was completed on October 20, 2016 and found that Murphy was treated primarily for pneumonia on all claims in question. The claims were reprocessed with a primary diagnosis of Pneumonia (code 1447) and secondary benefits were applied as indicated in the records. A letter explaining the outcome of the review was sent to Ms. [redacted] on October 20, 2016. A revised explanation of benefits was sent out for each claim reprocessed.Please note that our review is final unless we receive additional documentation that was previously unsubmitted.Should you require any further assistance in this matter, please contact our [redacted], Patty G[redacted] at ###-###-#### or via email at [redacted].Sincerely,Vincent G[redacted]###-###-####

I would like more information to why the vehicles I provided links to were not considered the same as the vehicles I own. I think the vehicles I provided links to were more in line with my vehicle because unlike the vehicles value scope provided info for, mine was by the same conversion company which makes a big differences. I provided link to Regency Conversion which is what my vehicle is and not what you compared it to. I provided info for a 2002 Regency Coronado LX which is exactly what I have. Why was that comparison not acceptable. And my vehicle was in very good condition before the accident. It  had no dents, no rust and only minor wear to the seats which was in line for it age. It is not fair you judge it in poor condition after it has been wrecked. The conversion package I had applied to the van ," Coronado Regency Lx" is a much better quality and more expensive conversion package than any Value Scope used to compare my vehicle. Even in the comparison there were many options that Value Scope could not even price and left blank on their comparison. And many options they don't even list, because it is not common on a express van and come only with true conversions. For instance "value scope" list my van with body side moldings, I have documented proof that that is $2000.00 and the rear step bumper is $500.00. it is listed on the value scope appraisal, but their was no monetary value added to my vehicle for these options. Are you going to increase the value of my van by $2500.00 for these omissions ? Probably not since you chose not to believe every thing I have stated about the value of my van. I have over and over again put forth a detailed explanation with proof of why the valuescope evaluation is wrong and why I believe my van is worth more, and in return your only response has been no, with no explanations why the info I have provided you is wrong. You mentioned the info I provided you was of VANS that were outliers, The vehicles Valuescope provided were over 800 miles away, how much more of an outlier can you get? I will ask again that you compare my van to a "Regency Coronado LX" Which is exactly what I have. If you can't find any, please use the links I sent you. It is useless to uses the NADA, KBB, or Edmunds Values for conversion vans, because it is not the same. This Van and other "Coronado Regency Lx" has a RV title because it is very different and more expensive than normal vans.  And what happened to my request for a rental car?
Regards,
[redacted]

I disagree if some, if not all of the statements made by [redacted]s message sent on 12/29/2014. And I think your response re-iterates the problem that I have with this claim and the reason I came to the Revdex.com in the first place. You stated that "CCC Valuescope was able to locate similar comparable vehicles which they used in researching the value of the 2002 Chevrolet van". My complaint is that not only did Valus scope go half way accross the country 800 miles away to find a compairable vehicle( which is way out side of industry standards), but the vehicles they found were not compairable, because CCC Valuescope is not adequately setup to value these vans. Like you said before, these vans are "Outliers" by design, CCC Valuescope, Edmunds, KBB, NADA. That is why Edmunds, KBB, NADA all have seperate ways to value RVs, which would be a more accurate to value Conversion Vans. Again I state that this van has a RV title. Does this seem logical to you? Does this make sense?[redacted] This is an example of 2 conversion vans, which valuescope would say has the exact same options, but the MSRP price is  roughly $20,000 dollars different. What is different, is that the first van has a good but generic conversion package , and the second has a higher grade conversion packages. If you look at the website, the southern comfort conversion packages are all 15k to 20k more than the generic. I can provide more websites and provide more than 100 of these examples if needed. I say all this to say, all conversion packages are not the same, and that is why I must insist that you compare my van to other Regency Coronado LX vans. That is the only way to get a accurate valuation. I was able to provide several links to compairable Regency Coronado LX vans. This is not hard to do and there is no reason not to. Yes, these vans are more expensive, and "Outliers". But that is by design and these vans are all outliers when they are sold. Does this seem logical to you? Does this make sense?If you go to Edmunds, KBB or NADA and select every possible option on a 2014 chevy exspree van and you get $39,220. that is $10,000 to $30,000 dollars cheaper than the MSRP of one of these conversion vans new. This is why I am complaining. This is exactly what valuescope is doing, and it works well for %90 percent of the vehicles on the road, but not for conversion vans, and it clearly is not fair.Does this seem logical to you? Does this make sense?When I asked a local Chevy dealer to appraise my van they said they would not and could not give an accurate appraisal because there is no adequate way to do so.Now to directly address some of the statements made in your previous response.Statement 1:"CCC Valuescope was able to locate similar comparable vehicles which they used in researching the value of the 2002 Chevrolet van with the conversion package."--The vans used as compairisons were not Regency Coronado LX conversion, and not an addequate accurate compairson, not to mention over 800 miles away, way out side of the "Local Market".Statement 2:"The value did take into account all of the options that this vehicle had including body side moldings and the rear step bumper. The value add of these options is minimal due to the age of the vehicle but are considered within the overall value."--Every other option listed on the evalualtion had a dollar amount assigned to it, but not these 2. When I asked your claims adjuster about these options he said that thier were some options on the van that the system was not setup to handle. If these options were considered, I would exspect that a dollar amount would of been assigned to it and listed on the report no matter how small. And seeing how the cost to replace these options are thousands of dollars, I can't believe that they would not bother to put some dollar amount with it if they could. I will attached the vehicle evalueation to the complaint. If there was a small value amount added to the evaluation for these options I would love to see the email, or report from valuescope stateing exactly the small amount attached to this complaint. I think this again strenghts my complaint,the fact that valuescope thinks that something that cost $2,500 when new has no value when it is used. Valuescope is not adequately equipped to to evalueate conversion vans.Statement 3:"CCC Valuescope also conducted additional research by obtaining two dealer quotes." --I would like the response from these "Dealers" from NC attached to this complaint. Which dealers were contacted? Do they specialize in conversion vans? I don't know of a single reputable dealer who will give and evaluation appraisale over the phone with out looking at the vehicle. Were they informed that this was a Regency Coronado LX conversion van. I don't see how it is possible that the value they reported was exactly the same as what a standard van with out a conversion with similar options and milage is valued on Edmunds, KBB, NADA. That means either the conversion package to them is worth nothing or that Edmunds, KBB, NADA are all wrong. Statement 4:"To date I don’t see where a rental vehicle has been requested"On "11/25/2014 01:30 PM" I emailed Mr. League the following statement."I had also hoped that we would be able to resolve this before the Thanksgiving holidays, but since that does not seem possible, could I request a rental van until we can come to a consensus."Yes, I would like a rental Van as soon as possible. I rented a van on my own previously, can I be reinbursed for that as well. Also We were a 2 car family now we are down to 1 car which is leased, can I be reinbursed for the extra miles I have put on the leased car at the gong rate, since I was not provided a rental?To date I have not recieve an acceptable reponse to any of the questions I have asked. I would ask that you please address these descepancies with details and facts.1: Have you comapired my vehicle to other Regency Coronado LX vans? If not why not? If so please provide details.2. How much value was added for the side moldings and the rear step bumper? Please provide details of the amount, which you said was small, with proof from Valuescope that it was considered.3. Which other Dealers were contacted about the evaluation of my van, and what details were they provided? Do the specialize or even sell used Conversion Vans? Please provide all details you can. If you can't provide details, this should not be considered.4. How do I get a rental van? And can I be reimbursed for previous expenses incurred from not having a rental van provided, when I asked?
Regards,
[redacted]

Thank you for the opportunity to respond to Mr. [redacted] additional concerns regarding the above referenced auto policy.Please review the summary of the recorded call listed below:April 1, 2017 [redacted]- [redacted]-Hey I was just calling to check status on my policy I guess they were trying to cancel it and wanted to see where they are at with the documents I sent over. [redacted]- Verifies privacy, Bare with me just one second to get caught up on the situation [redacted]- Sure [redacted]-Ok so um what I understand we are trying to figure out how long [redacted] has been out of the country. [redacted]-So the issue is she left out of the country, we are married right she has come back but living at a different location we are separated but are still together, legally married right and uh we are living at 2 different locations she is back in the country now she is not leaving any time maybe a month or 2 beyond the fact I am trying to figure out what we need to do in a way this is frustrating they are making a big deal over something small right. Even if they need to put her on there temporarily so my policy isn’t cancelled it is a $10-$20 increase I could care less I think it is a petty issue to be talking about this right if I had an accident or bad driving it would be different. [redacted]- Well it is a different situation when there is a marriage involved we require having a spouse on the policy from there if you get separated or divorced right we would need a letter from her stating it was ok to remove her from the policy [redacted]- Can you hold on one second. Alright can you hear me better now even though we are not in the same household it is still causing an issue. [redacted]- Yes it is how a married couple gets treated they both are named insured you have equal rights to the policy it is not just one saying the other should be removed because the other one has the equal rights. So that is why we require the letter and proof of insurance to remove the spouse I understand it is a minor issue but um I am trying to see what is the best way to get this taken care of right We don’t have [redacted]’s information right Yeah we do we have a Driver License information. [redacted]- Yeah she even has all the information she has coverage on her vehicle at the different address, [redacted]- I would be able to speak to the Underwriter tell them that until you are able to letter of consent proof of insurance add her would that be ok to keep the policy active. [redacted]- Yeah I just don’t want to be stopped and not have coverage. [redacted] – Let me try to get in touch with an Underwriter I can not promise I will not get in touch with one right now. [redacted]- What do I need to get from her [redacted]- If you get proof of insurance with the different address and a letter of consent to remove The car isn’t titled toher is it [redacted]- No it is titled to just me [redacted]- then the best thing is the proof of insurance[redacted]- This is the first time I had to deal with this [redacted] just asked for an exclusion form[redacted]- Just a letter of consent from her to remove her would work. [redacted]- She was out ofthe country and now she is back and we are separated. Do what you need to, to keep meinsured. [redacted]- If you don’t mind I can put you on a brief hold and try to reach out to themright now. (hold) Got Erica’s UW voicemail but didn’t leave a message Hello [redacted] thanksfor holding I tried reaching out but the UW has already left for the day. I can follow up with youtomorrow what is going on I am not in the office tomorrow but I can have someone follow upwith you tomorrow. [redacted]-Doesn’t my policy cancel tomorrow meaning I am not insured ortomorrow is the last day [redacted]- Tomorrow the policy cancels at 12:01 AM we are going to tryto get this policy brought back tomorrow I am going to send an email and I will have one of mycoworkers follow up with you tomorrow since I am not going to be in the office ok [redacted]- Iwonder if they tried to call me Do you know what the area code is over there? [redacted]-Overwhere [redacted]-where UW would call from [redacted]- UW doesn’t try to call out it would besomeone from the Service Center. [redacted]-what if someone else tried to call would it be an800 number [redacted]- Yeah we would have called from a number like that; I don’t see notes thatanyone tried to call back did you call earlier today [redacted]- Yeah it was like screw it let’s seeif he doesn’t call back and you know cancel that bad boy out. Plan B if I call back apply forinsurance again what is going to be the issue what can we not solve now to keep the policyfrom cancelling [redacted]-The only thing we would have to do to avoid any further issues is listher on the policy instead of excluding her until we can get one of the two things [redacted]- I amlost to why they didn’t just say we are adding when they didn’t have the documents instead ofexcluding her since we didn’t get the document. [redacted]- I wouldn’t be able to explain why[redacted]- I understand I used to be an Underwriter for loans I understand how they work. A lotof them is negligence I didn’t get the documents cancel this out. [redacted]- I hope that wouldn’tbe the case. [redacted]-You would hate we all have daily lives you have so much going on oopsanother policy cancelled they will be calling back. But let’s just hope we can figure this outtomorrow because honestly I think I will be escalating the issue tomorrow if I need to. Um Ithink um I think it is negligence and improper way to handle an insurance claim for someonethat document that was sent for a spouse I think it is a bad way to handle it for a payingcustomer right [redacted]- I Hope we are going to get this taken care of tomorrow if we can just letthe UW know you are willing to list her as a principal driver don’t think we will have an issuefrom there I really don’t [redacted]- We will see tomorrow if we um I mean You have done a lotyou are ok just hopefully the UW I will have to escalate at the UW end you did everything atyour disposal. [redacted]- Ok Anything else I can help you with [redacted]-No I will be calling in firstthing in the morning [redacted]- Let me see who comes in that early that we can call you backfirst. [redacted]- I don’t want to wait all day and the UW be out of the office again [redacted]- I don’tnormally come in until 10:30 in the morning which is still plenty of time to get in touch with anUW [redacted]- OK I can wait until noon but this needs taken care of tomorrow I have beenworking on this since Sunday and they just responded today saying they needed thedocuments [redacted]-we will give you a call tomorrow ok [redacted]-OKNationwide Underwriting approved the reversal of the policy, and rating of Ms. [redacted] as aprincipal driver based on Mr. [redacted] comments above. On April 2, 2015, our Member CareRepresentative contacted Mr. [redacted] 2 times to inform him that his policy had been activated withouta lapse in coverage, and Ms. [redacted] was rated as a principal driver. The Representative wasunable to reach Mr. [redacted] or leave a voicemail as it was full. Another attempt was made to contactMr. [redacted] on April 3, 2015 with the same result.Policy cancelled effective May 18, 2015 for non payment of premium. Collection notice in the amountof $98.45 was mailed to the customer on May 22, 2015.Nationwide is unable to remove the amount due of $98.45 on the policy, as Mr. [redacted] advised he would like to rate her as a principal driver until further information could be provided. Policy was activated and premium was not paid by Mr. [redacted], resulting in the cancellation for non payment of premium.If you have any further questions or concerns, please contact our Customer Relations Coordinator, Lance R[redacted], at ###-###-####, or email at [redacted]Sincerely,Kristin M[redacted]Personal Lines Compliance Specialist

I reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID [redacted] and find the resolution is satisfactory to me.
Regards and Thank you so much for your help! [redacted]

Thank you for your recent inquiry regarding a complaint you received from [redacted]. Below is the information we gathered regarding this case. If I do not provide the information you need for this matter, please do not hesitate to let me know.Our records indicate, on February 14, 2015, Mr. [redacted]...

called the [redacted] Agency to add a 2005 Subaru to his policy. After being quoted several deductible amounts and the corresponding premium increases, Mr. [redacted] advised he could not afford the additional premium to add comprehensive and collision coverage to his policy. He then told his agent he wanted liability only for the Subaru. The vehicle was then added per his request.On May 18, 2015, several weeks after being in an accident, Mr. [redacted] called the [redacted] Agency and spoke with office manager [redacted] about the coverage he had on the Subaru. During this conversation Mr. [redacted] was advised it was their practice when quoting or adding vehicles, to give several options but it is ultimately their choice which coverage they purchase. Also discussed was the coverage on his 2003 Dodge. Mr. [redacted] was offered a $1000 deductible on this vehicle to which he declined advising he had to speak with his wife before making the decision.During our investigation into this matter, no error was found. Lack of the offer of coverages to an insured does not constitute an error. Mr. [redacted] did not request additional quotes for other deductibles for collision and we found the [redacted] Agency followed their normal procedure of discussing the available options with Mr. [redacted]. After being told by Mr. [redacted] he could not afford additional premium and he wanted liability only for the vehicle, the vehicle was added as requested.Thank you for bringing this matter to our attention. We trust this will resolve all pending concerns. If you should have any questions or wish to discuss the matter further, please feel free to call Betsy S[redacted], [redacted] at ###-###-#### or email her at[redacted]Sincerely,Derrick H[redacted]###-###-####

[redacted] 
 
[redacted] 
 
[redacted]                 [redacted]...

[redacted]                       [redacted]                       
This letter is in response to your inquiry on November 10, 2014 regarding the auto policy referenced above. I would like to address [redacted]’s concerns. If I do not provide the information you need for this matter, please do not hesitate to let me know.
 Regarding policy cancellation 
This policy was bound using our online system. It asks if you have current insurance, with what company, current limits and how long you were insured with them. Based on the information provided, a review of the policy revealed a lack of the required six months of continuous coverage prior to the inception date of this policy. We needed continuous coverage from January 17, 2014 to July 14, 2014. There was a lapse of coverage from January 23, 2014 to February 25, 2014. Additionally, there was an undisclosed driver, [redacted], who was not added to or excluded from the policy. Therefore the policy was set to cancel effective October 21, 2014 and notice was sent. 
Regarding communication 
After receiving the cancellation notice [redacted] called to inquire about what was needed to retain the policy and again to verify the information was received. She was advised it would be sent to underwriting for review and that she would receive a return call. Regretfully, [redacted] did not receive appropriate follow up which prompted additional calls; coaching has been provided to those associates.
Regarding refund request 
As the policy was in effect from July 17, 2014 to October 21, 2014 and [redacted] advised the effective date of her new policy is October 31, 2014, we are not able to backdate our cancellation date. This leaves a balance of $52.54 for the time she was insured so we are also unable to provide a refund. However, as a customer service gesture we will remove the balance due of $52.54. 
Thank you for bringing this matter to our attention. We trust this will resolve all pending concerns, however, if you should have any questions or wish to discuss the matter further, please feel free to call me. 
 Sincerely, 
[redacted]
Nationwide Insurance Company
###-###-####
[email protected]

We have reviewed the inquiry from [redacted]. His correspondence was regarding excluding his son, [redacted], from the auto policy. The policy covering [redacted] and [redacted]’s vehicles was written as new business with our Company on March 4, 2015. His concerns are addressed below:After receiving a...

quote from Allied in March, I checked to make sure drivers could be added or removed. I was repeatedly promised and assured that this would not be an issue.The conversation between the Company agent and [redacted] has been reviewed. The insured did inquire about excluding his son on the 2007 Ford Mustang and only rating him on the 2006 Crown Victoria. The agent advised that we are unable to exclude drivers from specific vehicles. Nothing was discussed regarding adding/deleting drivers.On May 1, 2015, I attempted to remove a driver from the policy via the Company’s website but that capability is apparently unavailable.Drivers can be added and removed from our policy if they are no longer members of the household. Our Service Center Representatives are available by phone to assist the insured with these requests.I called Nationwide and was told I can not subtract drivers.[redacted] contacted our Company Service Center on May 1, 2015, to remove [redacted] as a driver on the policy. The Company Representative asked if [redacted] was still a household member and had a valid license. The insured confirmed that he was still a household member and had a valid license but was not allowed to drive due to his grades. He also advised that he was told that he could exclude his son. The Service Representative then sent the exclusion form to the insured to sign and return to us.The Service Representative then obtained information from the underwriter indicating that the driver was not eligible to be excluded on this policy. The underwriter is the third party arbitrator that the insured referenced in his inquiry. Our Company is not able to exclude household members unless their license is suspended or revoked. Because [redacted] has a valid license, he is not eligible to be excluded under the auto policy. We apologize for the error made by the Allied Insurance, [redacted] Company Service Representative in sending out the form to be signed and will follow up with the associate on the additional training regarding this topic.Thank you for the opportunity to explain the policy for [redacted]. Please contact me if there are further questions.Sincerely,[redacted]Allied Insurance, a member of Nationwide Insurance###-###-####[redacted]

On 9/19/2014 I submitted the claim Nationwide, but I never received an appraisal report from Nationwide. A couple days later the claims adjuster phoned to say he would be several days late and I had a black out, and electrical fire. So a contractor was phoned and hired, the repairs were done.
October 2014, a bill was submitted for reimbursement. This was denied by Nationwide.
On 11/5/2014 I was told and I quote by Mr. B. M[redacted] of Nationwide, “What I need to know at this time to move forward with the claim is what damages were and were not paid for by the home warranty company. Once I get this information I can try to move forward with the claim.” I don’t know how this relates, but I couldn’t provide this information because I do not have a home warranty. However, my policy states…
On 11/5/2014 R. H[redacted] of Nationwide stated and I quote, “At this point, we do not disagree on the amount of the claim since the scope of damage has yet to be confirmed. Once the scope of repairs has been confirmed, appraisal could be an option if we can't agree on the amount of the damage” so I agreed to a 3rd party of Nationwide’s choice to assess the repairs. Nationwide picked [redacted] to do the assessment and sent claims associate J. Harris with him.
On 11/20/2014 [redacted] after assessing the damages and repairs, came up with an new estimate of $5,479.72. This estimate/quote was denied for payment by Nationwide as well.
On 12/1/2014 I received an email from Steve C** of Nationwide, stating and I quote, “Your claim has been referred to me for further investigation.” I stated I could speak with him any given Saturday. He never contacted me again.
On 2/16/2015 Nationwide stated and I quote, “In order to move forward with the handling of the claim, we need to confirm your insurable interest in the property covered and resolve questions concerning the [redacted] proposal that you provided to us.” So, I sent Nationwide my deed, and lien release where I completely paid for the home in 2012 all these documents had my name on them. I ask if he could give me the questions concerning [redacted] that are unanswered? I never received an answer.
On 3/2/2015 I was told by Nationwide (R. H[redacted]) and I quote, “. At this time, we still have additional questions which are better discussed in an alternative form of communication other than e-mail.” So I asked Mr. H[redacted] to escalated my claim to the district manager for an impartial, nonbiased, new pair of eyes and possible resolution.
On 3/3/2015 Mr. R. H[redacted] sent me a letter stating Your claim has been reviewed by my direct manager, our investigative department, and our legal department. Until the investigation is completed, there is no matter to escalate[redacted]

I am satisfied with Nationwide's resolution of the dispute.  I said in my previous response that I was satisfied with the offer from Nationwide's claims adjustor but that the Nationwide response on the Revdex.com complaint site was not quite the same as what the adjustor had offered.  Since then, the adjustor has moved forward with the resolution he offered, and I am satisfied.   [redacted]

[redacted]
 
 
 
[redacted]
 
[redacted]   [redacted]
         [redacted]...

[redacted]
         [redacted]        
Thank you for the opportunity to respond to the Revdex.com regarding claim number ##### for [redacted] and to address his concerns about the claim.
 
Victoria Fire & Casualty DBA Titan has addressed the complaint through the State of [redacted] Department of Insurance and has appropriately addressed all concerns on [redacted] diminution claims for damages to his 1999 Volkswagen. 
Sincerely yours,
 
 
 
 
[redacted]
Phone: ###-###-#### October 16, 2014Claim number: [redacted] Claim detailsInsurer: [redacted]Policyholder: [redacted]Claimant: [redacted]Claim number: [redacted]Loss date: August 20, 2014Loss location: [redacted] Dear [redacted], The damage to your 1999 Volkswagon Jetta GLS is all bolt on/bolt off parts. There was not any structural damage and you opted for an appearance allowance of $100.00 on the small dent on the exhaust shield. The estimate also notes the vehicle has scuffs, stains on the hood and a few small dings, which would not place the vehicle in a pre-loss condition of "excellent retail".  As previously stated, this vehicle has been repaired to its pre-accident safe, mechanical and cosmetic condition by the shop of your choice. At this time, the offer of $200 for diminished value stands. Please find the enclosed payment in the amount of $200 as it is the undisputed amount. An alternative is for us to hire an independent appraiser, at our expense, and you to hire an independent appraiser, at your expense, and have the information reviewed by an arbitrator. The arbitrators decision would be final. For more information If you have any questions or concerns, please contact me at ###-###-#### or [redacted]. Sincerely,[redacted]

March
14, 2016
 
*
[redacted]
*
*
[redacted]    [redacted]             [redacted]...

                    [redacted]                   [redacted] ...⇄ [redacted]                 [redacted]                   [redacted]           ...⇄ /> *
 
Dear
[redacted],
 
We regret that you needed to reach out to other sources
beyond Nationwide to request assistance with 2 pending items that are related
to your September 10, 2015 auto loss that occurred in [redacted], PA.
 
As per your communication to the Ohio Revdex.com,
I understand that you are upset with the fact that you have not been
reimbursed, to date for $585.90 in out of pocket rental expenses that you
incurred as a result of requiring a temporary replacement vehicle while your
first party collision claim was processed by Nationwide. In addition, you
indicated that you are also owed for four days of lost earnings as a result of
missing several work days due to injuries you sustained in the accident.
 
As you are aware, Nationwide has issued settlement to you
for the total loss settlement to your vehicle under the 1st party collision
coverage, paid $750 to [redacted] as covered by your 1st party rental and
$1540.87 in 1st party medical payments towards medical providers in which you
received loss related treatment.
 
The outstanding items that you noted in your Revdex.com
communication, lost earnings and outstanding rental expense balance, are both
items that are not reimbursable under any 1st party coverage remaining on your
auto policy. Specifically, any rental expense outstanding, that was above your
rental coverage, would need to be presented to [redacted] as a
third party out of pocket claim. Be advised that Nationwide Insurance has
provided the claim representative, Erika K[redacted], with a copy of the [redacted]
rental invoice and requested numerous times, that they process a reimbursement
to you for this out of pocket expense. Nationwide Recovery Representative, Lisa
W[redacted], as a courtesy, has also attempted several follow up calls to [redacted]
to advise that you are still owed reimbursement for these out of pocket rental
expenses that were above the rental coverage available on your auto policy.
 
In addition, with regards to your lost time from work
after the accident, be advised that during the processing of your 1st party
medical claim that your employer noted that you had missed time from work on
9/10/15 and 9/11/15. The doctor’s disability note had excused you from work
9/10/15 through 9/13/15 with a return to work date of 9/14/15. The wage loss
coverage available on your auto policy has a five day wait period. Therefore,
wage loss is reimbursed beginning with the 6th day lost from work. The first
five days are not compensable under wage loss coverage. In light of this we
could not reimburse you for any lost wages under your 1st party auto coverage.
 
In order for Nationwide to pursue another company for
reimbursement of any benefits that we paid there must exist subrogation
potential. Pennsylvania does not permit these types of claims for Medical and
wage loss claims. Since you had lost no days from work that are compensable
under your wage loss coverage these lost work days would be considered an out
of pocket loss, similar to the out of pocket expenses incurred for a rental
vehicle.
 
These 2 outstanding items, your out of pocket rental and
lost wages, would be part of your claim against the at fault party, insured
through [redacted].
 
We cannot pursue the other carrier to attempt to recover
your out of pocket expenses or loss as this would put us in the position as
your  representative in your claim
against the other party, such as an attorney would do. Know that we are not
permitted to represent you in that fashion.
 
Your outstanding out of pocket items would need to be
processed as a third party action against [redacted] Company.
As previously noted, [redacted] Company previously received a
copy of the [redacted] rental car invoice which highlighted your $585.90 out of
pocket payment. In addition, [redacted] should accept and
process any 3rd party lost wages claim that you present to the claim
representative, Erica K[redacted].
 
Here is additional contact information for [redacted], if needed.
 
[redacted]
(B) ###-###-#### - Erika K[redacted]
 
 
Sincerely,
 
Andrew W[redacted]
Claims Manger
Nationwide
###-###-####
[redacted]

Nationwide received the Revdex.com complaint that was submitted on 11/3/16. Several business units will be involved, in order to resolve this case. Unfortunately, we will be unable to meet the initial deadline date of 11/9/16. Nationwide is asking for a 10 day extension, or November 19, 2016. Please...

confirm by responding to this email that the extension has been granted. The resolution response will be provided earlier, if all issues have been addressed.Enjoy your day.Thank you Barb D[redacted]Customer Advocacy Coordinator W ###-###-#### | F ###-###-#### [redacted]

[redacted]
Thank you for the opportunity to respond to the Revdex.com regarding policy
number ###### for S[redacted] and to address her concerns about the policy.
As stated in my prior response, if check payments were submitted to our company and
have cleared, we would require a copy of the front and back of each check used for
payment to confirm they were issued and were deposited by our representative as no
record exist that these payments were applied to her policy. Any expense that [redacted] would accrue to obtain this information would be her responsibility. The copy of the check back provided to us on 11/4/2014 is for the $36.00 received on 6/4/2013 and applied to [redacted]’s policy effective 6/12/2013. If further check copies can be provided, further research can be completed.
I trust that I have addressed the issues within [redacted]’s complaint. If I can be of
further assistance, please contact me at ###-###-####.
Sincerely,
[redacted]
[redacted]

Thank you for the second follow up inquiry regarding a Revdex.com complaint received from [redacted].  As Material Damage Claims Manager, I would like to address the issues brought forth by Mr. [redacted]. Nationwide has paid for repairs to all proven and related damages to Mr. [redacted]’s vehicle.  Impact to the [redacted] vehicle occurred to the rear of the vehicle.  Relying on his own words, Mr. [redacted]’s dealership of choice advised him the claimed damages to the turbo, could not be related to the loss.  As always, Nationwide would evaluate any new information to support relativity to damages not included and paid in this claim.  Presently, Nationwide considers the repairs for related damage to have been completed.  With regards to the pending diminished value complaint, Nationwide has paid an undisputed amount ($618.00) of diminished value to the owner of the vehicle, [redacted] leasing.  Mr. [redacted], the lessor, believes the value is higher.  If it is understood correctly in his follow up correspondence, Mr. [redacted] has reduced his demand from $3000.00 to $1809.00 and now requests and additional $1191.00 ($1809.00-$618.00=$1191.00).  Nationwide does not agree with Mr. [redacted]'s method of calculating diminished value. As previously promised in an attempt to resolve our impasse, at our expense Nationwide sought the opinion of an outside party to provide the parties with another opinion as to the diminished value of the vehicle.  The appraiser, [redacted] Appraisal Services, has determined the diminished value of the [redacted] to be $1554.00.  In good faith, Nationwide will honor this appraisal and issue a claims payment for an additional $936.00 to resolve this matter ($618.00 plus $936.00 for a total of $1554.00) in exchange for a complete release from Mr. [redacted] and [redacted] Leasing. If you have any additional questions please do not hesitate to contact me.

[redacted]
[redacted]
[redacted]
[redacted]
[redacted]
[redacted]
[redacted]
[redacted] 
This letter is a follow up response to the complaint filed with your agency by [redacted] regarding her auto policy cancellation refund and bank fees incurred.
[redacted] is asking us to reimburse her bank fee for cashing a refund check that a stop payment was placed on. [redacted] was informed not to cash the refund that was issued regular mail to her PO Box. She was informed to cash the UPS refund that she would receive at her home physical address. [redacted] cashed the mailed check causing her to receive the $12.00 service charge because of a stop pay that was placed on that check.
Our records verify the overnight UPS refund of $207.26 has now been cashed by [redacted] on October 17, 2014. However, due to the confusion, we have also issued a refund of the $12.00 for reimbursement of the bank fees.
The $12.00 refund check should reach [redacted] in 7 – 10 business days. We apologize for any inconvenience. If further assistance is needed in this matter, please contact our Customer Relations Coordinator, [redacted], toll-free at ###-###-####, ext. #####, direct at ###-###-####, or by email at [redacted]
Sincerely,
[redacted]
[redacted]
Nationwide Affinity Insurance Company of America

[redacted]  [redacted]
 
[redacted]
[redacted]
[redacted]
[redacted]
[redacted]
 
[redacted]   [redacted]
         [redacted]
         [redacted]  
Thank you for the opportunity to respond to the Revdex.com regarding claim number ###### for [redacted] and to address his concerns about the claim.
 
Victoria Fire & Casualty DBA Titan has already responded to the complaint through the State of [redacted] Department of Insurance and has appropriately addressed all concerns on [redacted] diminution claims for damages to his 1999 Volkswagen.
 
Sincerely yours,
 
 
 
[redacted]
[redacted]
Phone: ###-###-####

Kindly allow this letter to represent the [redacted] Insurance Company (“[redacted]”) response to a complaint dated August 26, 2015 on behalf of [redacted]. We understand you have identified that complaint as Complaint Number 10783102, as captioned above.[redacted] wishes to first inform you...

that it has no knowledge of [redacted] or how precisely Ms. [redacted] may have interest in the loss notice that [redacted] received relative to the incident that took place on the insured premises on October 11, 2014.[redacted] had sold a general liability policy to [redacted] that was in force on October 11, 2014. The policy provides liability insurance coverage for accidents on and about the premises. Mr. [redacted] is in the residential property business doing business in the Eugene, Oregon, area, as “Synthesis”. While Mr. [redacted], as land owner, owes certain legal duties to tenants and their guests, the circumstances surrounding this incident, as explained below, do not suggest that Mr. [redacted] would have liability exposure to either his tenant, [redacted] II (“[redacted]”), or [redacted]’s guest, [redacted] (“[redacted]”). Without such liability, [redacted] would not owe moneys under its liability policy sold to Mr. [redacted].[redacted] received a loss notice relative to the incident and its investigation revealed that [redacted], a tenant at the insured location for over two years, was hosting his girlfriend, [redacted], on the date of the incident. [redacted] and [redacted] had elected to step outside onto the porch having both consumed around 5 to 6 beers that were then chased by around 4 shots of cinnamon whiskey by the both of them, all prior to the incident. During the [redacted] investigation, [redacted] informed the investigator that, while on the outdoor porch, he had fallen off the porch after he and [redacted] had consumed the beer and whiskey. His memory was very limited, likely stemming from the fact that he was inebriated at the time of the incident. Either the fall, or possibly his impairment from intoxication, caused [redacted] to lose consciousness for an unknown period of time. When [redacted] came around some time later, he realized that [redacted], who was presumably also unconscious, was atop him suggesting that she, like [redacted], may have also fallen in a similar fashion. Both [redacted] and [redacted] were then transported to an emergency room with [redacted] having sustained a laceration about the head and a broken toe while [redacted] had sustained fractured ribs, a punctured lung, a fractured clavicle and a concussion.[redacted] advised the [redacted] investigator that both he and [redacted] were very familiar with the outdoor porch from where apparently they both fell as they had on numerous prior times smoked cigarettes while outside on this very same porch. Again, [redacted] had been a tenant with Mr. [redacted] at this location for over two years. There was no evidence that the porch was anything other than stable and completely in tact. Similarly, the property manager for this location also advised the [redacted] investigator that there is no history of individuals falling from the porch in this or any other manner.[redacted], through its independent investigator, made contact with [redacted] but she refused to meet with or provide any information to the investigator.[redacted] later advised the [redacted] investigator that he would not be pursuing a claim against the [redacted] policyholder, Mr. [redacted].As [redacted] never cooperated in the [redacted] investigation causing [redacted] to believe [redacted] was not making claim, and with [redacted] having advised [redacted] that he would not be making claim against Mr. [redacted], [redacted] closed its claim file.[redacted] stands ready to handle any claim that either [redacted] or [redacted] may choose to pursue against Mr. [redacted] however the circumstances surrounding this incident hardly suggest that Mr. [redacted] is liable for the injuries that either [redacted] or [redacted] sustained.Should you require any further assistance in this matter, please contact our Customer Relations Coordinator, Patty Gedd, at ###-###-#### or via email at [redacted]@nationwide.com.

Please accept this letter in response to Mr. [redacted]’s concerns submittedto the Revdex.com regarding the processing time of the fullwithdrawal on his contract. I hope you’ll find this information helpful inaddressing his concerns.Policy detailsComplainant: [redacted]Owner: [redacted]...

[redacted]Policy number: [redacted]NAIC code: 66869Complaint Number: [redacted]What we foundI have enclosed the withdrawal form submitted by [redacted] onJuly 27, 2105 at 2:24 p.m. We processed this on the same day of July27, 2015 in the gross amount of $44,667.70.Mr. [redacted] incurred a Contingent Deferred Sales Charge (CDSC) in theamount of $1500., therefore the net amount equaled $43,167.70. He didacknowledge the CDSC on page three of the withdrawal form before itwas processed.We did listen to the calls referenced in the complaint on July 27, 2015 at9:49 a.m. and 1:49 p.m.. On the 9:49 a.m. call, we stated Mr. [redacted]would get the market value as of close that day if we receive thewithdrawal form by 4:00 pm Eastern. On the call at 1:49 p.m., Mr.[redacted] did state he would get $45,000. minus $1500. in CDSC,however our representative informed him the withdrawal would be basedon the contract value as of the market close that day as opposed to theprevious day’s close.Unfortunately we can’t honor Mr. [redacted]’s request to compensate himfor the market value difference between July 26, 2015 and July 27, 2015in the amount of $845. since we processed this transaction correctly. If you have any further questions or concerns, please feel free to contact ErinM[redacted] via telephone at ###-###-####, option *, extension [redacted] or viaemail at [redacted]Sincerely,Robert W[redacted]

I am writing in response to the above referenced file number.  The member’s premiums are deducted from his paycheck and remitted by his employer.  The member was also sending in checks for partial payments. Our records indicate that we spoke with this member on May 2, 2016 and advised him...

that we would work with his employer and conduct a complete review of his premium payments.  An initial overpayment was identified and a refund in the amount of $29.36 was issued on April 21, 2016.  A subsequent refund was issued in the amount of $92.52 on May 20, 2016.  The member has been refunded the full amount identified in his correspondence.  Our records show that both refund checks have been cashed by the member. If I can be of any further assistance in resolving this matter you may contact me directly at ###-###-####. Sincerely, Tom L[redacted]