Thank you for bringing this issue to our attention, and thank you for notifying us of the unsatisfactory service Ms. [redacted] received during the claims process. We have taken the appropriate actions and have spoken to the Nationwide claims representative who provide the poor claims service...
to [redacted]. We have also reviewed the discrepancy in the amount paid to Ms. [redacted] and the balance has now been paid in full.If you require further assistance, please contact our Customer Advocacy Coordinator Joey Lopez, at ###-###-#### or by email at [redacted]@nationwide.com.Sincerely,Christopher H[redacted]Claims ManagerNationwide ###-###-#### [redacted]@nationwide.com
This letter is in response to the concerns filed by [redacted] regarding the collection amount owed on his Nationwide Auto policy after cancellation.On October 8, 2015, the previous Nationwide Auto policy [redacted] was cancelled as a transfer, and was replaced by the Auto policy [redacted]....
This occurred because the former policy was written under Nationwide Mutual Insurance Company, which was discontinued in the state of Illinois. All policies written under Nationwide Mutual were being transferred over at their renewal to Nationwide Insurance Company of America. On September 30, 2015, the new policy renewal declaration was mailed to Mr. [redacted], informing of the change in his premium at the October 8, 2015 renewal (attached). On October 21, 2015, Mr. [redacted] contacted the Service Center to request cancellation of the policy. A cancellation request form was mailed per Mr. [redacted]’s request.On November 6, 2015, as neither a payment or the cancellation request form was received from Mr. [redacted], a Notice of Cancellation was mailed (attached). This notice stated that payment must be received by November 18, 2015 to maintain the policy. On November 19, 2015, the policy was cancelled for non payment. On November 24, 2015, a final bill was issued in the amount of $107.30, which was due by December 13, 2015 (attached). As that final bill went unpaid, on January 12, 2016, that amount was sent to the collections company CCS.On February 5, 2016, Nationwide received proof of other coverage for Mr. [redacted] which began on October 22, 2015 (attached). The cancellation date was adjusted to October 22, 2015, resulting in a credit of $73.40 to be applied to the remaining balance. There is still a remaining balance of $33.90 for the coverage between October 8, 2015 and the cancellation date of October 22, 2015. As coverage was provided by Nationwide for this period, the premium for that time is still due.If anything additional is needed, please contact Sharon W[redacted] at [redacted]@nationwide.com or via phone at ###-###-####.Sincerely,
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]
Our records indicate the Nationwide Mutual Auto policy cancelled for nonpayment of premium on October 14, 2012. At the time of the cancellation a balance of $81.16 was due for coverage provided. A payment of $128.73 was received and paid the balance due and left a credit of...
$47.57 which was refunded back to the member. The credit was not enough to reactive the policy. On October 27, 2012, a payment of $124.80 was received which reactived the Auto policy with a lapse in coverage.
A bill was sent for $39.04 due November 27, 2012. There was no payment received and a Notice of Cancellation was sent for $49.04 (included a $10.00 late fee) due December 20, 2012 or the policy would cancel effective December 21, 2012. A balance of $125.10 remained for coverage provided up to the cancellation date. A Balance Due bill was sent on December 27, 2012, to the member which indicated a balance was due on the cancelled policy. There was no payment made to reactive the policy. There was a more than 30 day lapse when the member called in to inquire on the Auto policy.
On April 1, 2013, Ms. [redacted] purchased a six month Victoria Fire & Casualty Auto policy from the [redacted] Agency, with a bill plan of 16.5% down and 5 installments. Ms. [redacted]’s policy last renewed into the term beginning October 1, 2014 when the renewal offer was accepted with the renewal down payment in the amount of $256.00 paid on October 1, 2014.
The Auto policy initially cancelled on December 19,2014 for nonpayment as the installment due on December 1, 2014 was not paid. There was an outstanding balance of $166.77.
On March 3, 2015, Ms. [redacted] provided proof of duplicate coverage as well as a signed cancellation request for an effective cancellation date of November 12, 2014. The cancellation date was corrected and a refund in the amount of $137.23 was mailed on March 26, 2015. The credit collections agency was notified that Ms. [redacted] did not owe any money on this policy and the balance was cleared.
Thank you for allowing me the opportunity to assist you and if you have any questions regarding the information I have provided you may contact me at ###-###-####, Ext. [redacted] or my email address is[redacted]
If you require further assistance in this matter, please contact our Customer Relations Coordinator, Charity W[redacted] ########or by email at [redacted]
Sincerely,
Erica D[redacted]
[redacted]
I reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID [redacted], and find the resolution is satisfactory to me.
Regards, [redacted]
This letter is in response to the inquiry received from your office on February 12, 2015.
Our insured indicates we advised him that his rates would not be impacted, as the total damages were under $1,000. Unfortunately, we cannot speak to the details of how that conversation took place. However, it is our practice to inform our insureds if the total known damages pierce the [redacted] statutory threshold, their rates may be impacted. After the car was torn down, additional damage was identified and accounted for by the shop. We completely understand [redacted]’s concern; however, our adjuster could not speak to the final damage assessment until the car was torn down and all the damages were assessed. We regret that it was his understanding that he would not be surcharged; however, our process was compliant with [redacted] regulation.
A follow-up conversation took place with our insured on November 18, 2014, and it was during that conversation we spoke to the change in the expected claim payout. At this time, our insured was informed the total damages caused as a result of the loss were in fact over $1,000, which would result in notification of the statutory threshold being pierced. Although our insured initially was told the damages were under $1,000, this changed after additional inspection of the other party’s vehicle. Therefore, his rates will likely be impacted. As stated previously, pursuant to [redacted] statute, our insured was notified in writing that this loss was considered an at-fault accident resulting in property damage in excess of $1,000. The at-fault determination was made based on the [redacted] Code of Regulations Section 2632.13 that took effect on December 11, 2011.
Since the total known damages are over $1,000, our insured driver was found to be principally at fault for the loss as outlined in the [redacted] regulations. Again, we regret our insured’s experience was not what he expected.
Please refer to the [redacted] Code of Regulations Section 2632.13, which states in part:
§ 2632.13. Determination of "Principally At-Fault." Accidents
a) This section sets forth the procedures an insurer shall follow to whether an insured driver or a driver listed on an insurance application (hereinafter referred to as "driver") may be considered to be principally at-fault for an accidents for the purposes of:
(1)Determining the driver's driving safety record (First Mandatory Factor) pursuant to section 2632.5,and(2) Determining the driver's eligibility for the Good Driver Discount policy pursuant to Insurance Code Section 1861.025 and Section 2632.13.1.
(b)An insurer shall not make a determination that a driver is principally at-fault for an accident unless the driver's actions or omissions were at least 51 percent of the legal cause of the accident, subject to the presumptions set forth in Subsections (c) and (d), and either the accident resulted in bodily injury or death or, for an accident that resulted only in damage to property, the total loss or damage caused by the accident exceeded $1000. No determination made in accordance with the prior version of this regulation is affected by the 2011 amendment to this regulation.
(c) It shall be rebuttably presumed as provided in Evidence Code Section 603 that a driver is not principally at-fault for an accident under any of the following circumstances: (1) The vehicle was lawfully parked at the time of the accident. A vehicle rolling from a parked position shall not be considered to be lawfully parked, but shall be considered as in the operation of the last operator; (2) The vehicle was struck in the rear by another vehicle, and the driver has not been convicted of a moving traffic violation in connection with the accident; (3) The driver was not convicted of a moving traffic violation and the operator of another vehicle involved in the accident was convicted of a moving traffic violation; (4) The driver's vehicle was damaged as a result of contact with a vehicle operated by a "hit and run" operator of another vehicle and the accident was reported to legal authorities within a reasonable time after the accident; (5) The accident resulted from contact with animals, birds, or falling objects; (6) The accident was a solo vehicle accident that was principally caused by a hazardous condition of which a driver, in the exercise of reasonable care, would not have noticed (for example, "black ice") or in the exercise of reasonable care could not have avoided (for example, avoiding a child running into the street).
(d) It shall be conclusively presumed that a driver is not principally at-fault for an accident if the provisions of Insurance Code Section 488.5 apply.
(e) An insurer providing insurance coverage at the time of an accident shall not make a determination that a driver was principally at-fault for an accident, unless the insurer first conducts an investigation. In conducting an investigation and determining whether the driver is principally at-fault for an accident, the insurer shall diligently pursue a thorough, fair and objective investigation and shall maintain records detailing the investigation.
(1) The insurer shall provide written notice to the insured of the result of such investigation, including any determination that the driver was principally at-fault. The notice shall specify the basis of any determination that a driver was principally at-fault, including the basis of any determination that the accident resulted in bodily injury or death. The notice shall advise the insured of the right to reconsideration of the determination of fault as set forth in Subsection (e)(2).
§ 2632.13.1. Eligibility to Purchase Good Driver Discount Policy
(3) For accidents, the insurer shall do the following to determine eligibility for the Good Driver Discount policy:
(A) Assign one violation point for each accident that a driver has been involved in during the previous three years for which he or she was principally at-fault that resulted only in damage to property pursuant to section 2632.13(b), or (B) Determine that the driver is ineligible to purchase a Good Driver Discount policy if, during the previous three years, the driver has been involved in an accident for which he or she was principally at-fault that resulted in a death or bodily injury.
We are aware our insured has filed a complaint with the [redacted] Department of Insurance regarding his experience, and we have responded to that complaint as well. We suggest he contact them if he has any additional questions regarding [redacted] regulations.
If you require further assistance in this matter, please contact our Customer Relations Coordinator, [redacted], toll-free at ###-###-####, Ext. [redacted] or by email at [redacted].
Sincerely,
[redacted]
Western Claims Zone
Nationwide Insurance Company of America
Phone: ###-###-####
Email Address: [redacted]
I was not notified at the time that there would be additional charges and no legally they are not required to rate or exclude every person in the household if they are of driving age because I spoke to several insurance companies and the one I switched to didn't rate him or exclude him until he actually had his license. They are back charging me without notice. They didn't send notice until 8/13. Had I been notified at the time I wouldn't have changed the policy.
I have filed a complaint with the department of insurance and attorney general's office. I am not paying for something when I wasn't advised that there was a charge. They wait 2 weeks until the policy was canceled to say, oh we should have charged you. That's not ethical.
Regards,
[redacted]
Thank you for your additional inquiry. Nationwide Mutual Fire Insurance Company is dealing with the customer in a professional and courteous manner. I have reached out to Ms. [redacted] directly and answered all her questions to the best of my ability given the information we have at this time. The claim is still under investigation. Ms. [redacted] tentatively agreed to meet on the rescheduled date of Saturday April 18, 2015 so that we can complete our investigation.Additionally, we have requested an inspection by a local expert which we are attempting to reschedule with Ms. [redacted] as well. At this time, we have made payment for all covered damages that have been confirmed. No additional payments can be made until our investigation is completed. We are requesting documentation in accordance with the terms and conditions of the insured’s policy. We hope this will resolve all pending concerns. However, if you have any further questions feel free to contact me directly. Sincerely, Andrea B[redacted] Nationwide Mutual Fire Insurance Company ###-###-#### [redacted]
There was no new damages to the 2013 Toyota Prius, This was poor workmanship from [redacted] Auto Body. There hasn't been any sufficient proof to this claim, the Nationwide Claims manager showed up to [redacted] Auto after the car was taking apart and didn't witness any new damages. The Nationwide manager does not have proof of the claims made to this being new damages. I've requested several times for a representative of Nationwide to be present during the taking off of the bumper however they always show up afterwards the next day after the body shop has had the vehicle in their possession for 24 hours to hide evidence of their poor work and make it appear to be new damages. I've notified Nationwide several times that [redacted] Auto Body continues to try to repair the car and I receive it in poor workmanship. The damages from the auto accident should have totaled the car out yet [redacted] Auto Body tried to repair it and the car can't be repaired properly because of the severe impact.[redacted] Auto repaired the bumper and trunk lining which Nationwide agreed that the trunk lining was repaired in poor workman ship but failed to make note of this. The bumper is still not repaired in factory quality. Oscar at Nationwide was notified and no one from Nationwide has come out to see the final repairs. I was told by Oscar to turn the car into Toyota and let Toyota contact Nationwide with any concerns. I am not satisfied with the dishonesty from [redacted] Auto Body and the non-factual statements from Nationwide. I was spoken to very poorly by the body shop with an aggressive manner until I filed and Revdex.com report. Everyone has been nice to me since filing an complaint through the Revdex.com however the truth has not been told and the bumper remains to be not repaired properly. [redacted] Auto Body has repaired the bumper 3 times already they claim this was an new accident a
[redacted] [redacted]
[redacted] [r...⇄ Thank you for your additional inquiry regarding a complaint you received from [redacted]. I would like to address [redacted]’s additional concerns. If I do not provide the information you need for this matter, please do not hesitate to let me know. I will attempt to add clarification to our initial response of November 6, 2014, regarding the three issues that [redacted] brought up in his rejection: “Not all of my personal belongings were forwarded.” As stated previously, when [redacted] notified us that he did not remove his personal items before giving us permission to move the vehicle, we made arrangements for Copart to retrieve all personal items from the vehicle and ship the items to him at our expense. If there are items that he did not receive back, he can make a claim under a homeowner’s or renter’s policy. There is no coverage for lost personal property under his auto policy. “The refurbishment that was made on my property was $7000.” Our initial response indicated we have offered settlement based on a market valuation report from CCC Information Services, which determined the fair market value of his vehicle based on comparable vehicles in his area, with adjustments made for options, condition, prior damage, and the refurbishments that he mentioned. We submitted to CCC the receipts that [redacted] provided to us for consideration in vehicle -- $6,774.37 for a refurbished engine installed 12/3/2012. Based on CCC’s market survey, we increased our offer by $1050. (Vehicle value does not increase by the full cost of vehicle maintenance.) “Nationwide stopped my rental reimbursement.” [redacted]’s policy allows for a maximum coverage of 30 days, and we have paid for the full benefit under the policy, 30 days. Since we last corresponded on November 6, 2014, [redacted] has accepted our offer through his attorney, and we have issued payment in full for the settlement agreement. Our settlement is as follows: Actual Cash Value �...⇄ $9,937 Additional Considerations/refurbishments $1,015.00 Unrelated Prior Damage Identified $470.40 Unrelated Prior Damage Applied -$250.00 Subtotal ...⇄ $10,702.00 Tax Amount based on Rate 2.875% $307.68 Title fee �...⇄ $18.00 Registration Fee �...⇄ $23.00 Less Deductible ...⇄ -$500.00 Settlement offered $10,550.68. Based on my review, this claim was properly handled and settled. Based on our exchange with [redacted]’s attorney, we believe that we have reached an amicable settlement with [redacted]. If you should have any questions or wish to discuss the matter further, please feel free to call me. Sincerely, [redacted]
[redacted] Nationwide Property & Casualty Insurance Company ###-###-#### [redacted]
Dear Ms. [redacted]:This is in response to the complaint received from Ms. [redacted] regarding her auto policy.The policy was written with an inception date of July 16, 2016 and a full-term premium of $2,597.06. The policy effective dates were from July 16, 2016 to July 16, 2017. The billing account...
was setup for the bills to be sent by e-mail electronically per Ms. [redacted]’s request, using the e-mail address of [email protected], instead of being sent by mail.Nationwide Personal Lines Services (Service) was contacted by Ms. [redacted] on August 15, 2016 due to a bill not being received. No bill was sent for an August due date. The first bill was sent via e-mail, to the address provided, on August 23, 2016 for the September 16, 2016 due date with a minimum due of $243.90. Service was contacted again on September 15, 2016, and Ms. [redacted] had advised that she had not received the bill. The Customer Service Representative verified the e-mail address on file was correct, and Ms. [redacted] advised that she did not have anything in her spam/junk e-mail folder. A payment was received for $243.90 on September 17, 2016 to pay that invoice.On September 22, 2016, Ms. [redacted] spoke to a representative from Nationwide’s Escalations department. Ms. [redacted] had again advised that no bills had been received via e-mail. The Escalations representative again verified that the e-mail on file was correct and submitted a request to Nationwide’s Information Technology (IT) department to investigate the issue and an e-mail was sent to confirm this was done. An e-mail was received from Ms. [redacted] by the Escalations representative later on September 22, 2016, stating that she did receive the October bill via e-mail. The response from IT was that the bills were sent to the e-mail on file for September and October as designed, but they could not determine why Ms. [redacted] may not have received the bill for September.On October 8, 2016, Ms. [redacted] called Service and requested to cancel the auto policy and homeowner policy HNC [redacted]4. The Customer Service Representative provided the cancellation requirements and sent cancellation forms to Ms. [redacted] via e-mail. Both policies were cancelled effective October 7, 2016 per the signed written requests received. When the cancellations were processed on October 10 (auto) and October 11 (homeowner), this resulted in a credit of $148.99 for the homeowner policy and a balance owed of $143.55 for the auto policy, based upon the prior payments received compared to the balance owed for coverage provided on each policy.The request to have the credit for the homeowner policy applied to cover the balance owed on the auto policy was not completed prior to the refund being mailed for the homeowner policy. This resulted in a final bill and subsequent payment collection notice being sent for the auto policy for $143.55, since a payment was not received to pay the balance owed. The company acknowledges that the homeowner credit was not applied as requested, and due to the refund of $148.99 for the homeowner policy being cashed as of October 24, 2016, the refund could no longer be stopped and applied to cover the balance owed for the auto policy. Since this was premium owed for actual coverage provided for the auto policy, the remaining balance could not be waived. The balance for the auto policy remained due for $143.55 for coverage provided from July 16, 2016 to October 7, 2016, which was a total balance owed of $611.48, including installment fees, compared to total payments received for $467.93. This needed to be paid by December 4, 2016 to prevent the balance from being referred to Credit Collection Services (CCS).On December 6, 2016, since payment was not received, the balance of $143.55 was referred to CCS for additional collection activity. On December 22, 2016, CCS contacted the company to advise that Ms. [redacted] disputed the collection owed and advised the company that it had closed the collection account for the auto policy. Based upon the information received from CCS, the amount has been removed from collection status. If Ms. [redacted] does decide come back to Nationwide in the future, the amount would need to be paid, but there will be no further collection attempts.If you require further assistance, please contact our Customer Advocacy Coordinator, Janice Kleinhans, at ###-###-#### or by email at [email protected],Joel F[redacted]Sr. AnalystCustomer Response and Resolution###-###-####[redacted]@nationwide.com
I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID #####, and find that this resolution is satisfactory to me.
Regards,
[redacted]
Our records indicate a billing notice was sent for $137.29, which indicated a payment would be deducted from
the insured’s bank account on or after February 2, 2013.
On February 1, 2013, [redacted] contacted our Service Center and requested the draft for
February 2, 2013 be stopped...
so she could make a payment manually. The February draft was stopped,
however, a payment was not received.
A Notice of Cancellation was sent for $137.29 due February 24, 2013 or the policy would cancel effective
February 25, 2013. There was no payment received and the policy cancelled for non payment of premium.
The policy renewal date was September 2, 2012 and the policy cancelled February 25, 2013. During this time
period a total of $884.70 was charged. A total of $770.11 was received during the above time frame. The
$884.70 total charged minus the $770.11 total received in payments equals $114.59 balance due bill.
On March 8, 2013 the balance due bill for $114.59 was sent to the insured stating that this amount was due by
March 27, 2013. It was explained on this bill that the balance was for coverage provided from September 2, 2012
to the cancellation date of February 25, 2013.
The following documents have been attached for your review:
Policy Declarations
Bill
Notice of Cancellation
Proof of Mailing
Balance Due Bill
If you require further assistance, please contact Customer Relations Coordinator, Jane G[redacted] at ###-###-####,
or by email at [redacted] between the hours of 8:00 AM and 4:15 PM.
Sincerely,
Erica D[redacted]
[redacted]
At this time, we are in discussion with Mr. [redacted] concerning the next steps in his claim. We made him 2 different offers to settle prior to being notified that he was continuing to seek additional treatment. Since Mr. [redacted] is still seeking treatment for injuries he is relating to the accident, we have advised him that at this point we do not have an option that we can use to settle his claim today while leaving it open for him to seek additional treatment in the future. We have advised Mr. [redacted] that we will continue to follow-up with him and once he has finished treatment we will be able to complete a full evaluation and make him an offer to settle his claim. We want to be sure we are able to consider all treatment he would like to present as a part of his claim. We have offered to request all bills and records for medical treatment incurred as a result of the accident and to inform Mr. [redacted] of the need to secure past medical records should the need arise. Adam T[redacted], AIC.Casualty Claims Manager
Dear Mr. [redacted] This is in response to the inquiry received for the above policyholder and her recreational vehicle policy. Ms. [redacted] list concerns regarding her agent and the handling of her new business recreational...
vehicle policy. On January 16, 2017, the primary agent received an email from our customer service department regarding Ms. [redacted] request to quote her new recreational vehicle. This was the first recorded contact the agency received regarding Ms. [redacted] need for a quote. When the agency spoke with Ms. [redacted], it appeared the dealership was contacting the agency when it was closed on the weekend or after business hours during the week. No messages were left on the agency’s messaging system by Ms. [redacted] or the dealership. The agency did apologize for any confusion and was able to write a recreational vehicle policy for Ms. [redacted] with an effective date of February 1, 2017. On February 15, 2017, a letter was mailed to Ms. [redacted] and to the agency stating since no sales receipt had been received for the 2017 Forest River the Total Loss Replacement Cost was changed to Actual Cash Value. This change was done on the same day the letter was mailed with an effective date of February 1, 2017. Ms. [redacted] received the notice regarding the coverage reduction and emailed her agent on February 22, 2017. The agent was unavailable on February 22, however she emailed Ms. [redacted] on February 23, 2017 apologizing for not asking for the bill of sale as it was a new underwriting rule that she inadvertently overlooked when binding the policy. On February 27, 2017, Ms. [redacted] received her refund of $28.30 and contacted our customer service department. The change to remove the coverages was done the same day as the letter was mailed and the refund was issued on February 19, 2017 in our system. Ms. [redacted] was able to provide the bill of sale to the customer service representative as the agency had not yet submitted it to the underwriting department. The coverages were restored to the Total Loss Replacement Cost effective February 1, 2017. We do sincerely apologize to Ms. [redacted] and assure her that feedback has been given to the agency in regards to obtaining the bill of sale for recreational vehicles prior to binding a new business policy. If Ms. [redacted] would like her policies transferred to a different agency, our customer service department can assist her with this request. If you require further assistance, please contact our Customer Relations Coordinator, Phillis H[redacted], at ###-###-#### or by email at [redacted] Sincerely, Bridget D[redacted]
Thank you for the opportunity to respond to the Revdex.com regarding policy number [redacted] for Ms. [redacted] and to address her concerns about the policy.
On 02/24/2015, Ms. [redacted]...
purchased a six month insurance policy with a bill plan of 20% down and 5 installments with an electronic funds transfer (EFT) automatic withdrawal.
On 02/26/2015, an underwriting memo was issued to Ms. [redacted] requesting her Uninsured Motorist/Underinsured Motorist (UM/UIM) Coverage selection form be signed and returned. The memo stated that if the forms were not received coverage would be added to the policy.
On 04/06/2015, no UM/UIM forms were received, stacked UM/UIM coverage was added and Ms. [redacted]’s premium increased $179.00. Ms. [redacted]’s installment payments increased from $64.85 to $109.60 to reflect the change in coverage.
On 05/20/2015, Ms. [redacted] contacted the service center to inquire as to the reason her premium increased and was informed that we never received her signed UM/UIM forms. The service center associate erroneously stated that the forms were recently received but had not been processed yet. Ms. [redacted] had requested to stop her EFT withdrawals as she was considered cancelling her policy. The service center associate should have informed Ms. [redacted] that the forms were received but were not valid as she had signed in conflicting sections, opting to elect and reject the coverage. The UM/UIM forms would need to be correctly signed in order to remove the stacked UM/UIM coverage.
On 06/02/2015, Ms. [redacted]’s policy cancelled for non-payment as her 05/27/2015 installment bill was not paid and her EFT withdrawals had been stopped at her request.
On 06/05/2015, Ms. [redacted] contacted the service center to discuss the billing on her policy. She was advised that her policy had cancelled on 06/02/2015 due to non-payment and that she could reinstate the policy no lapse in coverage with a verbal statement of no loss and a payment in the amount of $129.60. The reinstatement amount included the premium for the 05/27/2015 installment as well as a $20.00 reinstatement fee. Ms. [redacted] declined to make the payment.
We are happy to assist Ms. [redacted] reinstate her policy without the lapse in coverage but would need to collect the payment of $129.60. Once the policy is reinstated, Ms. [redacted] can submit new UM/UIM forms that are properly completed and her future installments would decrease to reflect the removal of coverage.
I trust that I have addressed the issues within Ms. [redacted]’s complaint. If I can be of further assistance, please contact me at ###-###-####.
Dear: Ms. [redacted] "Thank you for the opportunity to respond to this complaint. We received notice of a Medical Payments claim by Ms. [redacted] on September 9, 2016. After a review of the claim, the Nationwide Claims Associate issued payment to Ms. [redacted] on October 6,...
2016 for the coverage limit of $2,000.00. On or about October 13, the Nationwide Claims Associate put a "stop payment" on the check based on a mistaken belief that there was an outstanding [redacted] lien against any Medical Payments coverage available to Ms. [redacted] for the loss. The Nationwide Claims Associate also contacted Ms. [redacted] and asked if she had cashed the $2,000.00 check yet. Ms. [redacted] said she had not. The Nationwide Claims Associate was not aware, at that time, that Ms. [redacted] had actually cashed the check a few days prior. The "stop payment" of the $2,000.00 check caused Ms. [redacted]' account to be overdrawn. Nationwide found out about the overdrawn account on Oct 17, 2016. Thereafter, Nationwide Claims Manager Bill P[redacted] reviewed the file and determined that there was no outstanding [redacted] lien on the Medical Payments coverage available to Ms. [redacted] for the loss. Based on this determination, Nationwide tried to deposit the $2000 payment directly into Ms. [redacted]' account on October 17, 2016, but Ms. [redacted] instead requested that Nationwide overnight a check to her. Nationwide overnighted a $2,000.00 check to Ms. [redacted] on October 18, 2016. The check was delivered to Ms [redacted] at approximately 11:30 am on October 19, 2016. Ms. [redacted] claims to have incurred a $75.00 overdraft charge. Nationwide is willing to reimburse Ms. [redacted] the $75.00 charge upon proof of loss being submitted by Ms. [redacted]. Nationwide has requested the proof of loss on October 18th , 20th and 27th. As of the writing of this letter Nationwide has not received any proof that this $75.00 charge exsists. Nationwide maintains the position that it will be happy to reimburse Ms. [redacted] once she submits proof of the $75.00 loss. If you require further assistance, please contact our Customer Relations Coordinator, Yvette S[redacted] , at ###-###-#### or by email at [redacted] Sincerely, William J P[redacted]
[redacted]
This letter is in response to the inquiry received from your office on March 4, 2015. On March 2, 2015, Revdex.com of Columbus Ohio (Revdex.com), determined the response from Nationwide Insurance addressed Mr. [redacted]s complaint. I would like to reiterate that Mr.[redacted] is not a member of our company or its affiliates.
Mr. [redacted] rejected your response and you asked Mr. [redacted] for additional information. Mr.[redacted] did advise you he did not go to an Emergency Room after the accident, he provided you with medical bills and records from his chiropractor Dr.[redacted], to include a letter from Dr. [redacted] providing his medical opinion.
We have reviewed the medical records provided to us by Dr. [redacted] regarding the treatment for Mr.[redacted] following this very minor impact with our member. Based on the review of the medical bills, medical records, and Dr.[redacted]’s opinion, combined with other parts of our investigation, we feel that the offer of $2,500.00 to settle Mr. [redacted]s bodily injury claim in full is fair and reasonable based on the information we have to date.
Please be aware that Mr. [redacted] sent us an email on March 2, 2015, at 1.15 p.m. PST accepting our offer of $2,500.00 as a full and final settlement of his bodily injury claim. A copy of his email can be provided to you upon your request. We have sent a bodily injury release to Mr. [redacted] for his signature. Once we receive his signed release, we shall issue payment to his home address and close our file.
If you require further assistance in this matter, please contact our Customer Relations Coordinator, Gerrie H[redacted] toll-free at ###-###-####, Ext. [redacted] or by email at [redacted]
Thank you for bringing this issue to our attention, and thank you for notifying us of the unsatisfactory service Ms. [redacted] received during the claims process. We have taken the appropriate actions and have spoken to the Nationwide claims representative who provide the poor claims service...
to [redacted]. We have also reviewed the discrepancy in the amount paid to Ms. [redacted] and the balance has now been paid in full.If you require further assistance, please contact our Customer Advocacy Coordinator Joey Lopez, at ###-###-#### or by email at [redacted]@nationwide.com.Sincerely,Christopher H[redacted]Claims ManagerNationwide ###-###-#### [redacted]@nationwide.com
This letter is in response to the concerns filed by [redacted] regarding the collection amount owed on his Nationwide Auto policy after cancellation.On October 8, 2015, the previous Nationwide Auto policy [redacted] was cancelled as a transfer, and was replaced by the Auto policy [redacted]....
This occurred because the former policy was written under Nationwide Mutual Insurance Company, which was discontinued in the state of Illinois. All policies written under Nationwide Mutual were being transferred over at their renewal to Nationwide Insurance Company of America. On September 30, 2015, the new policy renewal declaration was mailed to Mr. [redacted], informing of the change in his premium at the October 8, 2015 renewal (attached). On October 21, 2015, Mr. [redacted] contacted the Service Center to request cancellation of the policy. A cancellation request form was mailed per Mr. [redacted]’s request.On November 6, 2015, as neither a payment or the cancellation request form was received from Mr. [redacted], a Notice of Cancellation was mailed (attached). This notice stated that payment must be received by November 18, 2015 to maintain the policy. On November 19, 2015, the policy was cancelled for non payment. On November 24, 2015, a final bill was issued in the amount of $107.30, which was due by December 13, 2015 (attached). As that final bill went unpaid, on January 12, 2016, that amount was sent to the collections company CCS.On February 5, 2016, Nationwide received proof of other coverage for Mr. [redacted] which began on October 22, 2015 (attached). The cancellation date was adjusted to October 22, 2015, resulting in a credit of $73.40 to be applied to the remaining balance. There is still a remaining balance of $33.90 for the coverage between October 8, 2015 and the cancellation date of October 22, 2015. As coverage was provided by Nationwide for this period, the premium for that time is still due.If anything additional is needed, please contact Sharon W[redacted] at [redacted]@nationwide.com or via phone at ###-###-####.Sincerely,
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]
Our records indicate the Nationwide Mutual Auto policy cancelled for nonpayment of premium on October 14, 2012. At the time of the cancellation a balance of $81.16 was due for coverage provided. A payment of $128.73 was received and paid the balance due and left a credit of...
$47.57 which was refunded back to the member. The credit was not enough to reactive the policy. On October 27, 2012, a payment of $124.80 was received which reactived the Auto policy with a lapse in coverage.
A bill was sent for $39.04 due November 27, 2012. There was no payment received and a Notice of Cancellation was sent for $49.04 (included a $10.00 late fee) due December 20, 2012 or the policy would cancel effective December 21, 2012. A balance of $125.10 remained for coverage provided up to the cancellation date. A Balance Due bill was sent on December 27, 2012, to the member which indicated a balance was due on the cancelled policy. There was no payment made to reactive the policy. There was a more than 30 day lapse when the member called in to inquire on the Auto policy.
On April 1, 2013, Ms. [redacted] purchased a six month Victoria Fire & Casualty Auto policy from the [redacted] Agency, with a bill plan of 16.5% down and 5 installments. Ms. [redacted]’s policy last renewed into the term beginning October 1, 2014 when the renewal offer was accepted with the renewal down payment in the amount of $256.00 paid on October 1, 2014.
The Auto policy initially cancelled on December 19,2014 for nonpayment as the installment due on December 1, 2014 was not paid. There was an outstanding balance of $166.77.
On March 3, 2015, Ms. [redacted] provided proof of duplicate coverage as well as a signed cancellation request for an effective cancellation date of November 12, 2014. The cancellation date was corrected and a refund in the amount of $137.23 was mailed on March 26, 2015. The credit collections agency was notified that Ms. [redacted] did not owe any money on this policy and the balance was cleared.
Thank you for allowing me the opportunity to assist you and if you have any questions regarding the information I have provided you may contact me at ###-###-####, Ext. [redacted] or my email address is[redacted]
If you require further assistance in this matter, please contact our Customer Relations Coordinator, Charity W[redacted] ########or by email at [redacted]
Sincerely,
Erica D[redacted]
[redacted]
I reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID [redacted], and find the resolution is satisfactory to me.
Regards, [redacted]
Dear [redacted]
This letter is in response to the inquiry received from your office on February 12, 2015.
Our insured indicates we advised him that his rates would not be impacted, as the total damages were under $1,000. Unfortunately, we cannot speak to the details of how that conversation took place. However, it is our practice to inform our insureds if the total known damages pierce the [redacted] statutory threshold, their rates may be impacted. After the car was torn down, additional damage was identified and accounted for by the shop. We completely understand [redacted]’s concern; however, our adjuster could not speak to the final damage assessment until the car was torn down and all the damages were assessed. We regret that it was his understanding that he would not be surcharged; however, our process was compliant with [redacted] regulation.
A follow-up conversation took place with our insured on November 18, 2014, and it was during that conversation we spoke to the change in the expected claim payout. At this time, our insured was informed the total damages caused as a result of the loss were in fact over $1,000, which would result in notification of the statutory threshold being pierced. Although our insured initially was told the damages were under $1,000, this changed after additional inspection of the other party’s vehicle. Therefore, his rates will likely be impacted. As stated previously, pursuant to [redacted] statute, our insured was notified in writing that this loss was considered an at-fault accident resulting in property damage in excess of $1,000. The at-fault determination was made based on the [redacted] Code of Regulations Section 2632.13 that took effect on December 11, 2011.
Since the total known damages are over $1,000, our insured driver was found to be principally at fault for the loss as outlined in the [redacted] regulations. Again, we regret our insured’s experience was not what he expected.
Please refer to the [redacted] Code of Regulations Section 2632.13, which states in part:
§ 2632.13. Determination of "Principally At-Fault." Accidents
a) This section sets forth the procedures an insurer shall follow to whether an insured driver or a driver listed on an insurance application (hereinafter referred to as "driver") may be considered to be principally at-fault for an accidents for the purposes of:
(1)Determining the driver's driving safety record (First Mandatory Factor) pursuant to section 2632.5,and(2) Determining the driver's eligibility for the Good Driver Discount policy pursuant to Insurance Code Section 1861.025 and Section 2632.13.1.
(b)An insurer shall not make a determination that a driver is principally at-fault for an accident unless the driver's actions or omissions were at least 51 percent of the legal cause of the accident, subject to the presumptions set forth in Subsections (c) and (d), and either the accident resulted in bodily injury or death or, for an accident that resulted only in damage to property, the total loss or damage caused by the accident exceeded $1000. No determination made in accordance with the prior version of this regulation is affected by the 2011 amendment to this regulation.
(c) It shall be rebuttably presumed as provided in Evidence Code Section 603 that a driver is not principally at-fault for an accident under any of the following circumstances: (1) The vehicle was lawfully parked at the time of the accident. A vehicle rolling from a parked position shall not be considered to be lawfully parked, but shall be considered as in the operation of the last operator; (2) The vehicle was struck in the rear by another vehicle, and the driver has not been convicted of a moving traffic violation in connection with the accident; (3) The driver was not convicted of a moving traffic violation and the operator of another vehicle involved in the accident was convicted of a moving traffic violation; (4) The driver's vehicle was damaged as a result of contact with a vehicle operated by a "hit and run" operator of another vehicle and the accident was reported to legal authorities within a reasonable time after the accident; (5) The accident resulted from contact with animals, birds, or falling objects; (6) The accident was a solo vehicle accident that was principally caused by a hazardous condition of which a driver, in the exercise of reasonable care, would not have noticed (for example, "black ice") or in the exercise of reasonable care could not have avoided (for example, avoiding a child running into the street).
(d) It shall be conclusively presumed that a driver is not principally at-fault for an accident if the provisions of Insurance Code Section 488.5 apply.
(e) An insurer providing insurance coverage at the time of an accident shall not make a determination that a driver was principally at-fault for an accident, unless the insurer first conducts an investigation. In conducting an investigation and determining whether the driver is principally at-fault for an accident, the insurer shall diligently pursue a thorough, fair and objective investigation and shall maintain records detailing the investigation.
(1) The insurer shall provide written notice to the insured of the result of such investigation, including any determination that the driver was principally at-fault. The notice shall specify the basis of any determination that a driver was principally at-fault, including the basis of any determination that the accident resulted in bodily injury or death. The notice shall advise the insured of the right to reconsideration of the determination of fault as set forth in Subsection (e)(2).
§ 2632.13.1. Eligibility to Purchase Good Driver Discount Policy
(3) For accidents, the insurer shall do the following to determine eligibility for the Good Driver Discount policy:
(A) Assign one violation point for each accident that a driver has been involved in during the previous three years for which he or she was principally at-fault that resulted only in damage to property pursuant to section 2632.13(b), or (B) Determine that the driver is ineligible to purchase a Good Driver Discount policy if, during the previous three years, the driver has been involved in an accident for which he or she was principally at-fault that resulted in a death or bodily injury.
We are aware our insured has filed a complaint with the [redacted] Department of Insurance regarding his experience, and we have responded to that complaint as well. We suggest he contact them if he has any additional questions regarding [redacted] regulations.
If you require further assistance in this matter, please contact our Customer Relations Coordinator, [redacted], toll-free at ###-###-####, Ext. [redacted] or by email at [redacted].
Sincerely,
[redacted]
Western Claims Zone
Nationwide Insurance Company of America
Phone: ###-###-####
Email Address: [redacted]
I was not notified at the time that there would be additional charges and no legally they are not required to rate or exclude every person in the household if they are of driving age because I spoke to several insurance companies and the one I switched to didn't rate him or exclude him until he actually had his license. They are back charging me without notice. They didn't send notice until 8/13. Had I been notified at the time I wouldn't have changed the policy.
I have filed a complaint with the department of insurance and attorney general's office. I am not paying for something when I wasn't advised that there was a charge. They wait 2 weeks until the policy was canceled to say, oh we should have charged you. That's not ethical.
Regards,
[redacted]
Thank you for your additional inquiry. Nationwide Mutual Fire Insurance Company is dealing with the customer in a professional and courteous manner. I have reached out to Ms. [redacted] directly and answered all her questions to the best of my ability given the information we have at this time. The claim is still under investigation. Ms. [redacted] tentatively agreed to meet on the rescheduled date of Saturday April 18, 2015 so that we can complete our investigation.Additionally, we have requested an inspection by a local expert which we are attempting to reschedule with Ms. [redacted] as well. At this time, we have made payment for all covered damages that have been confirmed. No additional payments can be made until our investigation is completed. We are requesting documentation in accordance with the terms and conditions of the insured’s policy. We hope this will resolve all pending concerns. However, if you have any further questions feel free to contact me directly. Sincerely, Andrea B[redacted] Nationwide Mutual Fire Insurance Company ###-###-#### [redacted]
There was no new damages to the 2013 Toyota Prius, This was poor workmanship from [redacted] Auto Body. There hasn't been any sufficient proof to this claim, the Nationwide Claims manager showed up to [redacted] Auto after the car was taking apart and didn't witness any new damages. The Nationwide manager does not have proof of the claims made to this being new damages. I've requested several times for a representative of Nationwide to be present during the taking off of the bumper however they always show up afterwards the next day after the body shop has had the vehicle in their possession for 24 hours to hide evidence of their poor work and make it appear to be new damages. I've notified Nationwide several times that [redacted] Auto Body continues to try to repair the car and I receive it in poor workmanship. The damages from the auto accident should have totaled the car out yet [redacted] Auto Body tried to repair it and the car can't be repaired properly because of the severe impact.[redacted] Auto repaired the bumper and trunk lining which Nationwide agreed that the trunk lining was repaired in poor workman ship but failed to make note of this. The bumper is still not repaired in factory quality. Oscar at Nationwide was notified and no one from Nationwide has come out to see the final repairs. I was told by Oscar to turn the car into Toyota and let Toyota contact Nationwide with any concerns. I am not satisfied with the dishonesty from [redacted] Auto Body and the non-factual statements from Nationwide. I was spoken to very poorly by the body shop with an aggressive manner until I filed and Revdex.com report. Everyone has been nice to me since filing an complaint through the Revdex.com however the truth has not been told and the bumper remains to be not repaired properly. [redacted] Auto Body has repaired the bumper 3 times already they claim this was an new accident a
[redacted]
[redacted]
[redacted]
[redacted]
[redacted]
[redacted] [redacted]
[redacted] [r...⇄ Thank you for your additional inquiry regarding a complaint you received from [redacted]. I would like to address [redacted]’s additional concerns. If I do not provide the information you need for this matter, please do not hesitate to let me know. I will attempt to add clarification to our initial response of November 6, 2014, regarding the three issues that [redacted] brought up in his rejection: “Not all of my personal belongings were forwarded.” As stated previously, when [redacted] notified us that he did not remove his personal items before giving us permission to move the vehicle, we made arrangements for Copart to retrieve all personal items from the vehicle and ship the items to him at our expense. If there are items that he did not receive back, he can make a claim under a homeowner’s or renter’s policy. There is no coverage for lost personal property under his auto policy. “The refurbishment that was made on my property was $7000.” Our initial response indicated we have offered settlement based on a market valuation report from CCC Information Services, which determined the fair market value of his vehicle based on comparable vehicles in his area, with adjustments made for options, condition, prior damage, and the refurbishments that he mentioned. We submitted to CCC the receipts that [redacted] provided to us for consideration in vehicle -- $6,774.37 for a refurbished engine installed 12/3/2012. Based on CCC’s market survey, we increased our offer by $1050. (Vehicle value does not increase by the full cost of vehicle maintenance.) “Nationwide stopped my rental reimbursement.” [redacted]’s policy allows for a maximum coverage of 30 days, and we have paid for the full benefit under the policy, 30 days. Since we last corresponded on November 6, 2014, [redacted] has accepted our offer through his attorney, and we have issued payment in full for the settlement agreement. Our settlement is as follows: Actual Cash Value �...⇄ $9,937 Additional Considerations/refurbishments $1,015.00 Unrelated Prior Damage Identified $470.40 Unrelated Prior Damage Applied -$250.00 Subtotal ...⇄ $10,702.00 Tax Amount based on Rate 2.875% $307.68 Title fee �...⇄ $18.00 Registration Fee �...⇄ $23.00 Less Deductible ...⇄ -$500.00 Settlement offered $10,550.68. Based on my review, this claim was properly handled and settled. Based on our exchange with [redacted]’s attorney, we believe that we have reached an amicable settlement with [redacted]. If you should have any questions or wish to discuss the matter further, please feel free to call me. Sincerely, [redacted]
[redacted] Nationwide Property & Casualty Insurance Company ###-###-#### [redacted]
Dear Ms. [redacted]:This is in response to the complaint received from Ms. [redacted] regarding her auto policy.The policy was written with an inception date of July 16, 2016 and a full-term premium of $2,597.06. The policy effective dates were from July 16, 2016 to July 16, 2017. The billing account...
was setup for the bills to be sent by e-mail electronically per Ms. [redacted]’s request, using the e-mail address of [email protected], instead of being sent by mail.Nationwide Personal Lines Services (Service) was contacted by Ms. [redacted] on August 15, 2016 due to a bill not being received. No bill was sent for an August due date. The first bill was sent via e-mail, to the address provided, on August 23, 2016 for the September 16, 2016 due date with a minimum due of $243.90. Service was contacted again on September 15, 2016, and Ms. [redacted] had advised that she had not received the bill. The Customer Service Representative verified the e-mail address on file was correct, and Ms. [redacted] advised that she did not have anything in her spam/junk e-mail folder. A payment was received for $243.90 on September 17, 2016 to pay that invoice.On September 22, 2016, Ms. [redacted] spoke to a representative from Nationwide’s Escalations department. Ms. [redacted] had again advised that no bills had been received via e-mail. The Escalations representative again verified that the e-mail on file was correct and submitted a request to Nationwide’s Information Technology (IT) department to investigate the issue and an e-mail was sent to confirm this was done. An e-mail was received from Ms. [redacted] by the Escalations representative later on September 22, 2016, stating that she did receive the October bill via e-mail. The response from IT was that the bills were sent to the e-mail on file for September and October as designed, but they could not determine why Ms. [redacted] may not have received the bill for September.On October 8, 2016, Ms. [redacted] called Service and requested to cancel the auto policy and homeowner policy HNC [redacted]4. The Customer Service Representative provided the cancellation requirements and sent cancellation forms to Ms. [redacted] via e-mail. Both policies were cancelled effective October 7, 2016 per the signed written requests received. When the cancellations were processed on October 10 (auto) and October 11 (homeowner), this resulted in a credit of $148.99 for the homeowner policy and a balance owed of $143.55 for the auto policy, based upon the prior payments received compared to the balance owed for coverage provided on each policy.The request to have the credit for the homeowner policy applied to cover the balance owed on the auto policy was not completed prior to the refund being mailed for the homeowner policy. This resulted in a final bill and subsequent payment collection notice being sent for the auto policy for $143.55, since a payment was not received to pay the balance owed. The company acknowledges that the homeowner credit was not applied as requested, and due to the refund of $148.99 for the homeowner policy being cashed as of October 24, 2016, the refund could no longer be stopped and applied to cover the balance owed for the auto policy. Since this was premium owed for actual coverage provided for the auto policy, the remaining balance could not be waived. The balance for the auto policy remained due for $143.55 for coverage provided from July 16, 2016 to October 7, 2016, which was a total balance owed of $611.48, including installment fees, compared to total payments received for $467.93. This needed to be paid by December 4, 2016 to prevent the balance from being referred to Credit Collection Services (CCS).On December 6, 2016, since payment was not received, the balance of $143.55 was referred to CCS for additional collection activity. On December 22, 2016, CCS contacted the company to advise that Ms. [redacted] disputed the collection owed and advised the company that it had closed the collection account for the auto policy. Based upon the information received from CCS, the amount has been removed from collection status. If Ms. [redacted] does decide come back to Nationwide in the future, the amount would need to be paid, but there will be no further collection attempts.If you require further assistance, please contact our Customer Advocacy Coordinator, Janice Kleinhans, at ###-###-#### or by email at [email protected],Joel F[redacted]Sr. AnalystCustomer Response and Resolution###-###-####[redacted]@nationwide.com
I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID #####, and find that this resolution is satisfactory to me.
Regards,
[redacted]
Our records indicate a billing notice was sent for $137.29, which indicated a payment would be deducted from
the insured’s bank account on or after February 2, 2013.
On February 1, 2013, [redacted] contacted our Service Center and requested the draft for
February 2, 2013 be stopped...
so she could make a payment manually. The February draft was stopped,
however, a payment was not received.
A Notice of Cancellation was sent for $137.29 due February 24, 2013 or the policy would cancel effective
February 25, 2013. There was no payment received and the policy cancelled for non payment of premium.
The policy renewal date was September 2, 2012 and the policy cancelled February 25, 2013. During this time
period a total of $884.70 was charged. A total of $770.11 was received during the above time frame. The
$884.70 total charged minus the $770.11 total received in payments equals $114.59 balance due bill.
On March 8, 2013 the balance due bill for $114.59 was sent to the insured stating that this amount was due by
March 27, 2013. It was explained on this bill that the balance was for coverage provided from September 2, 2012
to the cancellation date of February 25, 2013.
The following documents have been attached for your review:
Policy Declarations
Bill
Notice of Cancellation
Proof of Mailing
Balance Due Bill
If you require further assistance, please contact Customer Relations Coordinator, Jane G[redacted] at ###-###-####,
or by email at [redacted] between the hours of 8:00 AM and 4:15 PM.
Sincerely,
Erica D[redacted]
[redacted]
At this time, we are in discussion with Mr. [redacted] concerning the next steps in his claim. We made him 2 different offers to settle prior to being notified that he was continuing to seek additional treatment. Since Mr. [redacted] is still seeking treatment for injuries he is relating to the accident, we have advised him that at this point we do not have an option that we can use to settle his claim today while leaving it open for him to seek additional treatment in the future. We have advised Mr. [redacted] that we will continue to follow-up with him and once he has finished treatment we will be able to complete a full evaluation and make him an offer to settle his claim. We want to be sure we are able to consider all treatment he would like to present as a part of his claim. We have offered to request all bills and records for medical treatment incurred as a result of the accident and to inform Mr. [redacted] of the need to secure past medical records should the need arise. Adam T[redacted], AIC.Casualty Claims Manager
No its not resolved I didnt know you needed any more info from me
Dear Mr. [redacted] This is in response to the inquiry received for the above policyholder and her recreational vehicle policy. Ms. [redacted] list concerns regarding her agent and the handling of her new business recreational...
vehicle policy. On January 16, 2017, the primary agent received an email from our customer service department regarding Ms. [redacted] request to quote her new recreational vehicle. This was the first recorded contact the agency received regarding Ms. [redacted] need for a quote. When the agency spoke with Ms. [redacted], it appeared the dealership was contacting the agency when it was closed on the weekend or after business hours during the week. No messages were left on the agency’s messaging system by Ms. [redacted] or the dealership. The agency did apologize for any confusion and was able to write a recreational vehicle policy for Ms. [redacted] with an effective date of February 1, 2017. On February 15, 2017, a letter was mailed to Ms. [redacted] and to the agency stating since no sales receipt had been received for the 2017 Forest River the Total Loss Replacement Cost was changed to Actual Cash Value. This change was done on the same day the letter was mailed with an effective date of February 1, 2017. Ms. [redacted] received the notice regarding the coverage reduction and emailed her agent on February 22, 2017. The agent was unavailable on February 22, however she emailed Ms. [redacted] on February 23, 2017 apologizing for not asking for the bill of sale as it was a new underwriting rule that she inadvertently overlooked when binding the policy. On February 27, 2017, Ms. [redacted] received her refund of $28.30 and contacted our customer service department. The change to remove the coverages was done the same day as the letter was mailed and the refund was issued on February 19, 2017 in our system. Ms. [redacted] was able to provide the bill of sale to the customer service representative as the agency had not yet submitted it to the underwriting department. The coverages were restored to the Total Loss Replacement Cost effective February 1, 2017. We do sincerely apologize to Ms. [redacted] and assure her that feedback has been given to the agency in regards to obtaining the bill of sale for recreational vehicles prior to binding a new business policy. If Ms. [redacted] would like her policies transferred to a different agency, our customer service department can assist her with this request. If you require further assistance, please contact our Customer Relations Coordinator, Phillis H[redacted], at ###-###-#### or by email at [redacted] Sincerely, Bridget D[redacted]
Dear [redacted]
Thank you for the opportunity to respond to the Revdex.com regarding policy number [redacted] for Ms. [redacted] and to address her concerns about the policy.
On 02/24/2015, Ms. [redacted]...
purchased a six month insurance policy with a bill plan of 20% down and 5 installments with an electronic funds transfer (EFT) automatic withdrawal.
On 02/26/2015, an underwriting memo was issued to Ms. [redacted] requesting her Uninsured Motorist/Underinsured Motorist (UM/UIM) Coverage selection form be signed and returned. The memo stated that if the forms were not received coverage would be added to the policy.
On 04/06/2015, no UM/UIM forms were received, stacked UM/UIM coverage was added and Ms. [redacted]’s premium increased $179.00. Ms. [redacted]’s installment payments increased from $64.85 to $109.60 to reflect the change in coverage.
On 05/20/2015, Ms. [redacted] contacted the service center to inquire as to the reason her premium increased and was informed that we never received her signed UM/UIM forms. The service center associate erroneously stated that the forms were recently received but had not been processed yet. Ms. [redacted] had requested to stop her EFT withdrawals as she was considered cancelling her policy. The service center associate should have informed Ms. [redacted] that the forms were received but were not valid as she had signed in conflicting sections, opting to elect and reject the coverage. The UM/UIM forms would need to be correctly signed in order to remove the stacked UM/UIM coverage.
On 06/02/2015, Ms. [redacted]’s policy cancelled for non-payment as her 05/27/2015 installment bill was not paid and her EFT withdrawals had been stopped at her request.
On 06/05/2015, Ms. [redacted] contacted the service center to discuss the billing on her policy. She was advised that her policy had cancelled on 06/02/2015 due to non-payment and that she could reinstate the policy no lapse in coverage with a verbal statement of no loss and a payment in the amount of $129.60. The reinstatement amount included the premium for the 05/27/2015 installment as well as a $20.00 reinstatement fee. Ms. [redacted] declined to make the payment.
We are happy to assist Ms. [redacted] reinstate her policy without the lapse in coverage but would need to collect the payment of $129.60. Once the policy is reinstated, Ms. [redacted] can submit new UM/UIM forms that are properly completed and her future installments would decrease to reflect the removal of coverage.
I trust that I have addressed the issues within Ms. [redacted]’s complaint. If I can be of further assistance, please contact me at ###-###-####.
Sincerely,
[redacted]
[redacted]
Dear: Ms. [redacted] "Thank you for the opportunity to respond to this complaint. We received notice of a Medical Payments claim by Ms. [redacted] on September 9, 2016. After a review of the claim, the Nationwide Claims Associate issued payment to Ms. [redacted] on October 6,...
2016 for the coverage limit of $2,000.00. On or about October 13, the Nationwide Claims Associate put a "stop payment" on the check based on a mistaken belief that there was an outstanding [redacted] lien against any Medical Payments coverage available to Ms. [redacted] for the loss. The Nationwide Claims Associate also contacted Ms. [redacted] and asked if she had cashed the $2,000.00 check yet. Ms. [redacted] said she had not. The Nationwide Claims Associate was not aware, at that time, that Ms. [redacted] had actually cashed the check a few days prior. The "stop payment" of the $2,000.00 check caused Ms. [redacted]' account to be overdrawn. Nationwide found out about the overdrawn account on Oct 17, 2016. Thereafter, Nationwide Claims Manager Bill P[redacted] reviewed the file and determined that there was no outstanding [redacted] lien on the Medical Payments coverage available to Ms. [redacted] for the loss. Based on this determination, Nationwide tried to deposit the $2000 payment directly into Ms. [redacted]' account on October 17, 2016, but Ms. [redacted] instead requested that Nationwide overnight a check to her. Nationwide overnighted a $2,000.00 check to Ms. [redacted] on October 18, 2016. The check was delivered to Ms [redacted] at approximately 11:30 am on October 19, 2016. Ms. [redacted] claims to have incurred a $75.00 overdraft charge. Nationwide is willing to reimburse Ms. [redacted] the $75.00 charge upon proof of loss being submitted by Ms. [redacted]. Nationwide has requested the proof of loss on October 18th , 20th and 27th. As of the writing of this letter Nationwide has not received any proof that this $75.00 charge exsists. Nationwide maintains the position that it will be happy to reimburse Ms. [redacted] once she submits proof of the $75.00 loss. If you require further assistance, please contact our Customer Relations Coordinator, Yvette S[redacted] , at ###-###-#### or by email at [redacted] Sincerely, William J P[redacted]
[redacted]
This letter is in response to the inquiry received from your office on March 4, 2015. On March 2, 2015, Revdex.com of Columbus Ohio (Revdex.com), determined the response from Nationwide Insurance addressed Mr. [redacted]s complaint. I would like to reiterate that Mr.[redacted] is not a member of our company or its affiliates.
Mr. [redacted] rejected your response and you asked Mr. [redacted] for additional information. Mr.[redacted] did advise you he did not go to an Emergency Room after the accident, he provided you with medical bills and records from his chiropractor Dr.[redacted], to include a letter from Dr. [redacted] providing his medical opinion.
We have reviewed the medical records provided to us by Dr. [redacted] regarding the treatment for Mr.[redacted] following this very minor impact with our member. Based on the review of the medical bills, medical records, and Dr.[redacted]’s opinion, combined with other parts of our investigation, we feel that the offer of $2,500.00 to settle Mr. [redacted]s bodily injury claim in full is fair and reasonable based on the information we have to date.
Please be aware that Mr. [redacted] sent us an email on March 2, 2015, at 1.15 p.m. PST accepting our offer of $2,500.00 as a full and final settlement of his bodily injury claim. A copy of his email can be provided to you upon your request. We have sent a bodily injury release to Mr. [redacted] for his signature. Once we receive his signed release, we shall issue payment to his home address and close our file.
If you require further assistance in this matter, please contact our Customer Relations Coordinator, Gerrie H[redacted] toll-free at ###-###-####, Ext. [redacted] or by email at [redacted]
Sincerely,
Lovre B[redacted]
###-###-####
[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.