Sign in

Crowne Plaza Louisville Airport

Sharing is caring! Have something to share about Crowne Plaza Louisville Airport? Use RevDex to write a review
Reviews Crowne Plaza Louisville Airport

Crowne Plaza Louisville Airport Reviews (609)

Thank you for the opportunity to respond to the concerns of [redacted] regarding the above referenced policy withNationwide Mutual Fire Insurance Company. The home/car discount was removed from Ms. [redacted]’s policy as herstandard auto policy with Nationwide was cancelled.Ms. [redacted] was offered and...

accepted a policy with our non-standard company, Titan Insurance. Once her standard autopolicy cancelled, the homeowner policy was no longer eligible for the home/car discount. Nationwide does not offer ahome/car discount for Titan policies at this time.We appreciate the opportunity to review Ms. [redacted]’s business, and hope that this information will satisfy her concerns.If you require further assistance, please contact our [redacted], Cathy D[redacted], at ###-###-#### orby email at [redacted]Sincerely,Patricia J[redacted]

[redacted]
 
[redacted]
 
[redacted]             
[redacted] 
 
Please see the below response to [redacted] rebuttal of the original correspondence to your office:
 
We have gone through extensive review of the billing activities and an overall policy review since the policy was written originally.  The Nationwide agent office of [redacted] quotes directly from the computer screen and anything that would have been communicated to [redacted] would have been reflecting that. Agent [redacted]’s office informed [redacted] that it was an estimate and usually the quoted price provided to the member does come back the same or really close.  Once the quote is released, the agents have no control over what the premium comes back as. The reason [redacted] balance is so high is due to the fact that there were no premiums paid for adding the youthful driver.  When [redacted]’s daughter was added, the premium went up $628.81 for the remainder of the six months. Then a vehicle was added with liability only and the premium did decreased by $115.89 for the remainder of the 6 months.  There were no premium payments on this addition from February 10, 2014 until the policy canceled for non-payment on April 6, 2014.  As far as removing the youthful driver off the policy, it is Nationwide’s policy to inform everyone that we require proof of other insurance, provide proof that the person in question resides somewhere else and no longer drives the vehicle or has turned their license in to the DMV.  We continually strive to provide our members prompt, accurate and courteous service as we have over the past many years.
 
            Sincerely,
 
 [redacted]
###-###-####
[redacted]

This letter is in regards to the Property Damage claim for one 2012 Toyota Corolla belonging to Ms. [redacted].  The 2012 Toyota Corolla involved in the loss has a salvage branded title. This loss occurred on August 8, 2015. Field Claims Associate Michael B[redacted] was able to...

inspect the vehicle on August 11, 2015 and deemed the vehicle a total loss on August 12, 2015. This was a 5 day time period and within the 7 day time period as allowed by the ** state appraisers act. Nationwide has an obligation to perform an investigation into the facts of the loss, once this investigation was completed on August 12, 2015, a rental vehicle was authorized for the [redacted]'s. If a rental vehicle was obtained before this date, Nationwide would happily reimburse them for these charges. However, we would not authorize a direct bill prior to establishing our liability and coverage for the loss.
 
Based upon our inspection of the vehicle, the estimate amount was $7,980.51. The value of the vehicle was determined to be $9,697.88, less the anticipated salvage value of $4,463.23, which equals $5,234.65. This amount is less then the estimate amount of $7,980.51, therefore, the vehicle is declared a total loss as per the ** State Appraisers act.
 
Coverage for the loss was verified, and contact was made by the Total Loss representative [redacted] on August 14, 2015. Subsequent contact attempts were made with no more than 5 days passing before contact was achieved by either the Total Loss Specialist or a member of the Management staff.  Discussions began between Ms. [redacted] and management staff regarding a dispute in the value of the vehicle on August 24, 2015.  Ms. [redacted] conveyed that she was upset that they cannot find a replacement vehicle for the amount we have offered.  Ms. [redacted] wanted Nationwide to either purchase a replacement vehicle for her or to give her money to purchase a similar vehicle in the area of $13,500 that Ms. [redacted] has found.  Nationwide management attempted to convey to Ms. [redacted], that Nationwide does not have the capability of purchasing a replacement vehicle and delivering it to her, nor is Nationwide obligated to do so. Nationwide advised Ms. [redacted] that we owe the Actual Cash Value of the vehicle she was driving at the time of the loss, which would be a 2012 Toyota Corolla with a salvage branded title, and that the local market comparables she had viewed have a clean title. It was conveyed Ms. [redacted] that there is a difference in value between a vehicle with a clean title and that with a salvage/branded title. Nationwide determined the actual cash value of the vehicle using the methodology explained below. The initial settlement was presented to the claimant on August 19, 2015.
 
Nationwide utilized CCC Valuation to evaluate the vehicle at a fair market value as a branded vehicle. 
 
Nationwide has conducted an appraisal of the 2012 Toyota Corolla LE 4 door Sedan located in [redacted]. The appraisal information was then used to conduct research in your market to determine the local market value of the vehicle. This CCC Valuescope Market Report details the results of that search.
 
When Nationwide requests a valuation report, they provide CCC with the configuration of the vehicle in the loss, including model, hours or mileage, optional features, any accessories, the condition of the vehicle as well as the VIN/HIN/PIN (vehicle/hull/product identification number) of the vehicle. That identification number is analyzed to verify basic information provided on the vehicle.
 
Significant differences between the vehicle and any other comparable units are documented and are used to define a verifiable market value for the vehicle in the loss. If no comparable units are located, the valuation expert will conduct a local market survey to gather the expert opinion of knowledgeable retailers in order to determine the local market value. This was the case for the 2012 Toyota Corolla with the salvage branded title. 
 
31 Pa. Code 62.3(e) (1)(iii). 
            “Motor Vehicle Physical Damage Appraisers; Applicable Standards for Appraisal:
(1)   Under this subsection, replacement value under the policy provisions covering the total loss of a motor vehicle including an unrecovered motor vehicle shall be determined by one of the following methods:”
“(iii) Dealer quotation method. The appraiser shall consult with dealers or other persons knowledgeable in the field to secure quotations as to the value of the motor vehicle being appraised. At least two quotations shall be secured. The figures thus secured shall be averaged.”  
 
Nationwide’s valuation of the salvage branded 2012 Toyota Corolla is in accordance with Laws and regulations of the State of Pennsylvania, specifically relating to the vehicle being a total loss. 31 Pa. Code 62.3(e) (1)(iii). 
 
Additional correspondence took place between the Total Loss Specialist and Mr. [redacted] via email and phone on August 27, 2015 and August 28, 2015.  During this time the specialist discussed the Unrelated Prior Damage on the roof of the vehicle and determined that this damage would be minimal on a salvage branded vehicle based on the year, make, model and condition of the vehicle. The reduction for Unrelated Prior Damage was removed from the settlement figures.
 
The Actual Cash Value of the 2012 Toyota Corolla with a salvage branded title with Nationwide retaining the vehicle is outlined as follows:
 
Actual Cash Value (ACV) = $9,500.00 Subtotal ACV = $9,500.00 Unrelated Prior Damage Applied - $0.00 Total ACV = $9,500.00 Tax + $665.00  Total Settlement = $10,165.00
This information was provided to the customer on August 28, 2015, and was agreed upon by Mr.Nosa [redacted]. 
 
Nationwide provided the customer with a rental vehicle from August 13, 2015 through September 1, 2015 for a total of 20 days at $25.50 per day.
 
 
If you require further assistance, please contact [redacted], Jane G[redacted] at ###-###-####, or by email at [redacted]between the hours of 8:00 AM and 4:15 PM. 
 
Regards,
 
Craig C[redacted]
[redacted]
 ###-###-####

Please allow this letter to serve as a response to the above captioned Revdex.com complaint filed by Mr. [redacted]. Mr. [redacted] states that Nationwide Insurance paid to repair the left doors and quarter panel of his vehicle instead of replacing these parts.The left doors and...

quarter panel were deemed repairable by Mr. [redacted], a New York State licensed adjuster, during the time of inspection. Upon review, any licensed repair facility would be able to repair Mr. [redacted]'s vehicle without any issue. Replacing these parts would reflect a repair methodology that goes beyond what is needed to restore the vehicle to pre-accident condition. However, an inspection will also take place by Mr. [redacted]'s repair facility prior to repair. If any additional damages are discovered, Nationwide Insurance will be contacted by the repair facility in order to conduct a supplemental inspection and address the damages accordingly.If you require further assistance, please contact our [redacted], Jose L[redacted], at ###-###-#### or by email at [redacted].Sincerely,Alan S[redacted]

I am writing in response to Ms. [redacted]’s complaint regarding her requests for a Loan Modification regarding the property referenced in her complaint. [redacted].Per the attached response provided by Nationwide Advantage Mortgage Company dated march 29, 2016, the...

property in question is not eligible for Loan Modification in part because the  mortgage loan is secured by a property that does not serve as her principal residence. According to FHA guidelines, only an owner occupied residence may be considered eligible for Loan Modification. Additionally, the response offers information regarding the Right to Appeal, but requires that the appeal be delivered in writing to:  Nationwide Advantage Mortgage Company, [redacted] not later than April 12, 2016. To this date, a formal appeal has not been received and the right to appeal has therefore expired. I am very sorry that I am unable to offer further assistance in this matter. Sincerely,Anne C[redacted]

[redacted] Insurance Company received a Depertment of Insurance complaint regarding the sameconcerns. The issues have been addressed and resolved.Enclosed is a copy of the letter sent for your records.If you require further assistance in this matter, please contact our Customer Relations...

Coordinator, GerrieH[redacted], toll-free at ###-###-####, Ext. [redacted] or by email at [redacted]@nationwide.com.

[To assist us in bringing this matter to a close, you must give us a reason why you are rejecting the response. If no reason is received your complaint will be closed Administratively Resolved]
Complaint: [redacted]In reference to the comments [redacted] has stated to the Revdex.com, I refute the information in which she states, they reached out to me immediately when they discovered the problem. I am who immediately after going through a major embarrassment trying to use my debit card attached to the account in which Nationwide's checks were returned, called Nationwide and demanded rectification of the bad checks.  I have received the replacement check funds and the returned check fees, however, there are two $37 each fees caused by my bank paying out on pre-authorized payments. But because of Nationwide's check error, there were no funds available at the time. I have enclosed copy of my bank transactions detailing the two $37 fees after the Nationwide's checks were returned. One was on 07/22/16Service ChargeFEE-NSF PAID ACH T[redacted] PAY$-37.00$-278.14 the second one was on07/25/16Service ChargeFEE-NSF PAID ACH [redacted] STRSCHG PYMT$-37.00$1,435.82for a check paid out on 07/22/2016.
Regards,
[redacted]

Dear Ms. McLaughlin:
This letter is in response to the concerns filed by [redacted] regarding the returned item fee on his Nationwide Auto policy.
On January 18, 2016, Nationwide member, [redacted], was advised that we would accept a running bank statement as evidence of the...

funds being available on the payment date. We received that running bank statement on January 19, 2016, and have waived the fee. The matter has been corrected per Mr. [redacted]’s request.

the dates are still not correct on the policy. The 2003 Chevy Impala change date suppose to have be November 28, 2015 not January 27, 2015. Also like I stated in my complaint as the outcome I will not be paying for coverage that my car didn't have. I rode around for 2 months without insurance and 3 weeks without a tag. I was finally able to get me tag on January 25, 2016 so that's the date the 2015 Nissan Altima is considered registered with insurance by the state of Georgia. Nationwide will not get a dollar out of me until the dates match what I just sent back as my reason for rejecting Nationwide effort thus far.
Regards, [redacted]

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,
[redacted]

This letter is in response to the inquiry received from your office on December 14, 2016. We have spoken to the customer extensively and addressed his concerns.  We have delivered feedback to the appropriate associates and to the repair facility management.  The customer has been placed in...

a rental vehicle for the duration of the repairs at the expense of the repair facility.  Additionally, the repair facility has acknowledged the service concerns the customer had, and has offered him a discount on the repairs. At this time, the customer has indicated his current concerns are resolved and is satisfied with being offered a discount and rental vehicle.  His vehicle should be delivered back to him on or before December 19, 2016 and he will contact us with any additional concerns he has. If you require further assistance in this matter, please contact our Customer Advocacy Coordinator, Gerrie H[redacted], toll-free at ###-###-####, Ext. [redacted] or by email at [redacted]@nationwide.com.

[redacted]
[redacted] There is no documentation other than pure fact that anyone in this world would not pay for something at what its valued and then turn around and pay the exact same amount for that same something after its been damaged. Nationwide has still not responded to my original complaint regarding the diminished value after the Carfax report has been compromised. At the very least Nationwide should be compensating me at least half the value of my vehicle because the damages exceeded a little over half the value of my car, which I believe was stated on [redacted]' response. I'm at a loss right now and I don't know what to do anymore. This is a lot of anxiety for me to deal with...I just hope that someone from Nationwide understands how the $200 simply does not make me whole in this situation. I just want to be made whole.

Thank you for the opportunity to respond to the Revdex.com regarding policy number [redacted] for [redacted] and to address her concerns about the policy.On 10/03/2016, Mrs. [redacted] purchased a six-month insurance policy from the [redacted] agency with a bill plan of 20%...

down and five installments.On 10/04/2016, underwriting reviewed the policy and determined that Mr. [redacted] was ineligible to be a rated driver as his motor vehicle report indicated his license had been surrendered. A memo was sent to both Mrs. [redacted] and the [redacted] agency advising a valid license was needed for Mr. [redacted] or the policy would be set up for cancellation.On 10/05/2016, the member service center was contacted by the agency to see if Mr. [redacted] could be excluded from coverage with a signed exclusion form, which they provided the same day. The Member Care Representative changed Mr. [redacted] from a rated driver to an excluded driver effective 10/05/2016. At no point was Mr. [redacted] ever removed from Mrs. [redacted]’s policy. In addition, the 2005 GMC Sierra (VIN 1GTEK19T3YE300665) on the policy since inception was replaced on 10/05/2016 with a 2013 Volkswagen Jetta (VIN [redacted]).Mr. [redacted] had advised the agency that the issue with his driver’s license happens frequently as there is another [redacted] with a similar license number that differs by one digit, and that the information coming back is for this other [redacted]. On 10/19/2016, the agency contacted the member service center to rate Mr. [redacted] as a driver as well as re-add the original 2000 GMC Sierra (VIN [redacted]) to the policy. A declarations page reflecting Mr. [redacted] as a rated driver was sent to Mrs. [redacted] on 10/20/2016.On 11/09/2016, a signed request for cancellation effective 11/04/2016 was received in the member service center, and the requested cancellation was processed. The request was signed by Mr. [redacted] and listed both Mr. and Mrs. [redacted]. Once cancelled, an outstanding balance for days of coverage for Mr. [redacted] and the 2000 GMC Sierra remained on the policy. A notice of the $93.27 outstanding balance was mailed to Mrs. [redacted] on 12/19/2016 when payment was not received, indicating that if payment was not made by 01/03/2017 the amount could be turned over to the collections department.On 03/24/2017, Mrs. [redacted] contacted the member service center and was advised by the Member Care Representative that Mr. [redacted] could be removed from the policy once proof of other coverage for the dates he was on our policy was received. With proof of other insurance for Mr. [redacted] and the 2000 GMC Sierra, we could go ahead and back date remove both, correcting the outstanding balance.If you require further assistance, please contact our [redacted] Lance R[redacted], at ###-###-#### or by email at [redacted]
Sincerely,Jillian J[redacted]

Mr. [redacted] applied for a Home Equity Line of Credit (HELOC) with Nationwide Bank. The information he cites from www.bankrate.com is correct. The 4.4% rate shown, however, is dependent upon a maximum Loan to Value (LTV) ratio of 80%. When Mr. [redacted] applied for the Line of Credit, he agreed to...

Terms and Conditions, including, but not limited to, “All loans are subject to approval and rates vary based on your credit history and loan to value ratio.” Nationwide requested a drive-by appraisal of the home, which was completed on April 13, 2016. That appraisal provided a property value of $309,000.00. With that, the amount of the first mortgage, combined with the requested HELOC loan, determined a LTV in excess of the minimum of 80%. The appraisal was provided to Nationwide Bank and to Mr. [redacted]. Mr. [redacted] disputed the validity of appraisal. Upon receipt of the dispute, the appraisal was reviewed, considering the information included in the dispute. A new appraisal was completed on April 19, 2016. The appraised amount remained the same, and included an addendum responding to the concerns Mr. [redacted] raised in his dispute. The new appraisal was provided to Nationwide Bank and to Mr. [redacted] again. The HELOC application has not been closed. Mr. [redacted] is welcome to continue with his existing request, but at a higher interest rate and a lower maximum loan amount, determined by the LTV. Sincerely, Ann C[redacted] Sr. Analyst, Customer Advocacy Nationwide Bank

Dear Mr. [redacted]I am writing in response to your concerns surrounding your direct checking account with Nationwide Bank.First, please allow me to apologize for the unsatisfactory experience you have had with your new account.Nationwide Bank has proactively chosen to monitor account activity. Your...

account was opened on August 18,2015 and the check that was submitted far deposit was processed on Augus124,2015. Because your accountwas under 30 days old it was considered a new account. For this reason, new accounts are subject to closerscrutiny. I thank you for providing the requested documentation to our Customer Resolution team as well as ourLoss Control team. Upon review, that did allow us to remove the restriction on your account.Again, I apologize for any inconvenience or frustration this caused for you. Please feel free to reach out to me ifthere is anything further I may do for you.Sara H[redacted]Nationwide Bank###-###-####

Thank you for your recent inquiry regarding a complaint you received from Ms. [redacted]. I have reviewed this claim file and would like to address her concerns.The concern regarding the poor time serviceThis claim was filed on June 23, 2015, for a theft that occurred at the residence with all...

entries of the home sustaining damage from a break in. The handling adjuster made contact on June 25th when the claim was assigned to him to gather the facts of the loss. On June 27, 2015, the adjuster received pictures of the damages to the home and on July 2nd, received an estimate from Lowe’s. (The adjuster was also investigating the personal property that was stolen.) Once this was completed, he prepared an estimate for repairs on July 15, 2015. The adjuster, at this point, had not yet received the Power of Attorney to be able to speak with the relatives of our insured regarding the loss; this was received on August 5th. The additional information for the Lowe’s estimate was received on August 31st, and a message was left with the insured at that time.The first payment was issued on September 3, 2015.The concern regarding the unsatisfactory estimate…The estimate for the damages sustained in this loss was prepared based on the prices that were current in the area at the time of the loss. The estimated cost for the materials was in line, but there was a difference in labor cost. We did offer to have one of our preferred contractors in the area to come out, which they agreed to, but later cancelled. However, this claim has since been paid out on and is moving forward to conclusion with communication with the insured’s family.We hope 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,Christopher K[redacted]

This letter is in response to the concerns filed by Mr. [redacted] regarding the amount owed on his Nationwide Auto policy.
On May 28, 2015, the renewal for June 22, 2015 generated with a premium of $1,068.40 (attached). On June 17, 2015, Mr. [redacted] went online to Nationwide.com and removed Roadside...

Assistance from his policy, as well as removing rental coverage from the 2010 Nissan Murano. This resulted in a decrease in the renewal premium to $1,048.10, and a new declaration page was issued showing this amount (attached). Mr. [redacted]’s policy was set up with document delivery preferences as e-mail, so on June 17, 2015, an e-mail was sent to inform a new declaration page was available for his review.
From the change he made effective June 17, 2015, there was a prior term credit of $2.30, which reduced the balance of the policy to $1045.80. On June 19, 2015, Mr. [redacted] made a payment of $1,045.80, clearing the balance for the renewal term. However, on the same day, Mr. [redacted] went online again to change his Uninsured Motorist Bodily Injury coverage. The coverage was changed from $100,000 per person and $300,000 per incident to $250,000 per person and $500,000 per incident. This resulted in an increase in the renewal of $6.30, plus a prior term increase of $.20, totaling an increase of $6.50. Once again, a revised declaration page was generated (attached), and on June 22, 2015, an e-mail was sent to Mr. [redacted] to advise that a new declaration page was available for his review.
Nationwide does not bill anything under $10.00, so we added that amount to the renewal bill for December 22, 2015. On December 18, 2015, Mr. [redacted] called in to the Service department to request cancel of his policies effective the December 22, 2015 renewal. The Service Representative did send him the cancellation forms, but did not advise of the prior term amount on the Auto policy. On December 29, 2015, Mr. [redacted] called to make sure everything had been processed correctly, and while we had the forms on file for his cancellation request, the policies were not actually cancelled. The Service associate processed the cancellations on the spot, but once again did not inform of the prior term balance. That should have occurred in both cases, and we sincerely apologize that it did not. We have provided feedback to the direct leaders of both associates with whom Mr. [redacted] spoke.
In addition, due to the policies not being processed for cancellation when we originally received the forms, it resulted in a late fee of $10.00, taking the balance to $16.50. On January 4, 2016, we mailed the final bill for $16.50 (attached).
After review of the case, we have waived the late fee as Mr. [redacted] requested cancellation prior to his bill being due. That leaves a balance of $6.50 for the increase in the Uninsured Motorist Bodily Injury from June 19, 2015 through December 22, 2015. Due to the error of our Service associates not informing of this balance at the time of cancellation, we are waiving the remaining $6.50.

I am in receipt of the Proof of Insurance provided by [redacted].
 
Unfortunately, we are unable to accept the [redacted] information provided by Ms. [redacted] as we are unable to determine whether the policy remained active during the July 29, 2014 to January 29, 2015, policy term. 
 
If Ms. [redacted] wishes to pursue the possibility of adjusting the cancellation date of policy [redacted], we will need to receive a Letter of Experience from [redacted].  The letter will need to be on [redacted] letterhead and include a current date.  The letter will need to state that continuous coverage was provided from July 29, 2014 to January 29, 2015, with no lapses in coverage.  Once a satisfactory Letter of Experience is received, we will be happy to adjust the cancellation date accordingly and provide a refund for any unearned premium.
 
If you have any further questions, please do not hesitate to contact me, at ###-###-####, ext. [redacted]
 
Sincerely, 
 
Christina L[redacted]
[redacted]
Nationwide
###-###-####, ext. [redacted]
[redacted]

sorry, yes it was received earlier this week, don't know the date.  amount was $731.thanks for helping to get them moving.

there are several points Nationwide
tries to make that are false and extraordinarily misleading.
Let me outline some
confusing things that Nationwide sets forth in their purposefully confusing
explanation.  This is clearly an effort to make this issue go away.
 Since I won't permit them to defraud other consumers, let me take a
moment to highlight some obvious problems with their explanation.
Webster's dictionary defines the word 'processed' as "to subject to or handle through an established, usually routine set
of procedures (process insurance
claims) that lead to a result[i]"

By this widely accepted definition from a trusted
source, the "processing of a claim" means that the claim
follows a series of steps or procedures that lead to a result of either
being paid or denied.

Nationwide claims that they received and processed the
claim in 3 days.  How is that possible since the claim was not denied
until July 21?  The claim that they processed the claim in three days
is completely FALSE.  They take a small bit of information and manipulate
it to look how they want it to look. If the claim was  in fact,
"processed" in three days, how is it that the claim was still
active and being worked on right through May, June, and July?  And
even after CLAIMING that they processed this claim in three days, they go
on to say that they hadn't actually issued a decision on the claim until
July 21 and outline the dates that things happened.  They claim they
did the right thing in one breath, and tell you that they did not do the
right thing in the next breath.  This is an ongoing theme with
Nationwide.  I have only been a customer since April 17 and I already
know this. 
What is this May 24 date they speak of?  I was
never told anything about an additional waiting period for DENTAL.
 No one ever mentioned that DENTAL and MEDICAL were separated and
never referred to the two separately.  There is no separation in the
policy for dental and the premiums I paid were for MEDICAL.  This was
inclusive of DENTAL and there was no additional waiting period.  So
how is the date of May 24 even significant?  The rep I spoke to on
the phone on July 22 did not know what the date of May 24 meant or why it
was mentioned.  She had to put me on hold and ask a supervisor.
 She had no explanation for the May 24 date or what it meant.
 Where did it come from?  What does it mean? 
 They claim that "Because a dental cleaning
had been done, future claims may be eligible after May 24, 2016."
 I again ask, why May 24?  What does that mean?  And anyone
can tell you that they will DENY any claim relating to her teeth now that
they termed her periodontitis as preexisting.  What they really mean
to say here is, "Future claims can be sumitted after May 24, but will
be DENIED and NEVER PAID, because we said she has preexisting disease.
The claim that Nationwide never delayed a claim is
FALSE.  Clearly, as I outlined in my initial complaint, the claim was
left to sit until I made contact and started asking questions as to why it
was still pending.  The only actions that took place came after I either
called in or made email contact asking about the status of the claim.
 How many coincidences should be believed?  Every time I asked
about the claim, the very next day, some action was taken on it.  And
then it was left to sit longer....
The fact is that the claim was submitted on May 10,
2016 and was not finalized as denied for payment until July 22.
 There is no defense for the timeline.  The claim was not
processed in 3 days, it was PENDED for decision in 3 days and Nationwide
proceeded to delay making a decision made to pay or not pay for a total of
72 days with a series of delaying tactics that are total nonsense.
 When I called in on June 14 to as(k why no decision had been made
after the medical records had been in the hands of Nationwide for three
weeks, I was told that the department was "backed up and has not been
able to review the records as quickly as usual."  Really?
 There were four doctor visits in my pet's voluminous records.
 It takes five minutes to look the few pages over and figure out
whats going on. Of course, when you are trying to delay payments and are
looking for reasons to deny claims, I understand completely why it would
take longer.  Amazingly, as usual, the day after my phone call, a
letter stating an additional 30 days would be needed to review the claim.
 So I am surprised that Nationwide would LIE and say that they
processed the claim in 30 days, after they issued a letter, 35 days into
the claim process (May 10 to June 15=35 days), saying that ANOTHER 30 days
would be needed.  So much for the 30 day claim of Nationwide's.
Further, the Vet did not diagnose her with
gastroenteritis (a viral stomach disorder that causes vomiting) or an
upper respiratory DISEASE.  Nationwide DIAGNOSED my animal with these
illnesses for purposes of intentional exclusion if I were ever to bring my
animal in for treatment of these, or ANY OTHER illnesses.  My cat did
NOT have GREEN DISCHARGE requiring medical treatment, did not have
VOMITING requiring medical treatment.  Nationwide is taking ANY WORDS
in the medical record and making them exclusions- whether or not they
actually exist or were a problem.  But then according to them, they
can confabulate, invent, or claim ANY ILLNESS was preexisting within the
UNETHICAL and IMMORAL wording of their policy.  They state that
"a preexisting condition means ANY condition that began, was
contracted, manifested, or incurred within TWELVE MONTHS of the effective
date of this policy or during any waiting period, WHETHER OR NOT THE
CONDITION WAS DISCOVERED, DIAGNOSED, OR TREATED..."  Under this
definition, ANY ILLNESS will be excluded by Nationwide as preexisting. The
only things Nationwide will pay are injuries that occur to a part of the
body that has never had anything wrong with it, because otherwise they
will claim it was part of a preexisting weakness or injury that occurred
and is PREEXISTING.  This type of policy is FRAUDULENT and MISLEADING
to the consumer.  Anything to not pay a claim.  Anything,
whether immoral, already outlawed in treatment to humans, or misleading to
the customer.   Along these same lines, Nationwide would say that
words in the medical record such as "the feline was breathing
heavy" would mean that she has a respiratory disease.  Or
"feline was fearful of staff" would mean that the cat has some
kind of preexisting psychiatric problem or organic brain disorder or
disease.  Or "feline sneezed" (once) would mean that the cat now has a preexisting allergy or preexisting respiratory disease- from a single sneeze.  .Nationwide looks to take words in medical records out of
context and turn the into any kind of possible diagnosis that they can
count as a preexisting condition that they can exclude.In the 1980's and 1990's, in the infancy of human HMO's, insurance companies tried the same thing that Nationwide is doing with its pet insurance.  Finding any sneeze and calling it preexisting respiratory disease.  A day where a child vomited twice and calling it preexisting gastroenteritis.  A doctor who asks "how is the baby doing overall," and when the mother says, "sometimes she has a stuffy nose," the insurance company says there is preexisting respiratory disease.  This is exactly what Nationwide has done with pet insurance.  Take note that the HMO's attempts to make anything outside of breathing preexisting was met with legislation that outlawed the practice.  Obviously, we need tighter laws surrounding the pet insurance industry, because Nationwide is doing the same thing.  Shame on you Nationwide.  I will make sure that I pass along my experience with Nationwide to all pet owners I know.
Take some free marketing advice, Nationwide should change their catch phrase to:  Any preexisting condition.  Any word, anywhere, about anything. We can and will find it. Anything to not pay a claim. That's our Nationwide promise. Truth in advertising, right?
Nationwide
continues to lie and deny.
Regards,
[redacted]

Check fields!

Write a review of Crowne Plaza Louisville Airport

Satisfaction rating
 
 
 
 
 
Upload here Increase visibility and credibility of your review by
adding a photo
Submit your review

Crowne Plaza Louisville Airport Rating

Overall satisfaction rating

Add contact information for Crowne Plaza Louisville Airport

Add new contacts
A | B | C | D | E | F | G | H | I | J | K | L | M | N | O | P | Q | R | S | T | U | V | W | X | Y | Z | New | Updated