Donegal Mutual Insurance Company

Handwritten Resolved letter

November 28, 2014Dear [redacted],
Please allow this to confirm receipt of your November 21, 2014 correspondence and the complaint of [redacted] and [redacted]. In summary, **. and [redacted]’s complaint is that [redacted] Insurance Co. did not process the file in an orderly manner...

and that they were not kept apprised of the status of the claim. In addition, they are upset because the file was sent to arbitration and the arbitrator decided that neither party was able to sustain the burden of proof and awarded no damages to either carrier.This loss occurred on February 26, 2014 and it was reported to us on the same day. The assigned claim examiner called and spoke with our insured, [redacted] and her daughter [redacted] who was the driver of the insured vehicle on February 26, 2014. They reported that [redacted] came up to a four way intersection and was the first car to do so. She stopped at the stop sign and proceeded through the intersection when the vehicle being driven by [redacted] and insured by [redacted] Insurance went through the stop sign on [redacted]’s right and struck the insured vehicle on the passenger side doors. They also indicated that there was no police report filed and there were no independent witnesses to the accident.**. [redacted] indicated that she preferred to go directly through [redacted] Insurance for the damages to her vehicle but we scheduled an inspection of her damages in the event she was not successful in pursuing her claim directly through the adverse carrier.
On March 11, 2014 we received a call from [redacted] who advised us that she would like [redacted] Insurance to issue payment to them (less the applicable deductible of $500) and attempt subrogation against [redacted] Insurance. Payment for the damages was issued to the insured on March 11, 2014.
On March 14, 2014 we spoke with the examiner at [redacted] Insurance Company who indicated that their driver reported to them that she came up to the four way stop sign first, stopped, and proceeded, when our insured driver, went through their respective stop sign causing the accident. The point of impact on the [redacted] vehicle was the driver’s side headlight and fender. They also indicated that they were still investigating liability. On the same day [redacted] called [redacted] and we advised him that [redacted] indicated to us that their liability decision was not complete.
Based on our insured’s statement and the location of the damages to our insured’s vehicle, we determined that our insured driver was not liable for the other vehicle’s damages due to the fact that the damages showed that the insured driver was in control of the intersection when the [redacted] vehicle struck her.
On March 31, 2014 we were advised by [redacted] Insurance that they were placing 100% liability on our insured based on their insured’s statement and they were denying our insured’s claim.
On April 21, 2014 we received a demand package from [redacted] Insurance asking for recovery of their insured’s damages. A liability denial was then sent to [redacted] Insurance.
A referral was subsequently sent to our subrogation department to see if they would be able to pursue the insured vehicle damages against [redacted] Insurance based on the evidence that we obtained.
On June 23, 2014 we received a call from the insured asking for the status of the claim. They were advised that the file was being reviewed by our subrogation department.
On June 24, 2014, our subrogation department indicated that they would pursue the claim against [redacted] Insurance, and the file was referred to them at that time.
The insured [redacted] called the subrogation examiner on June 25, 2014 at which time he was advised of [redacted]’s decision and that the examiner was reviewing to see if the file could be submitted thru Arbitration Forums to resolve the matter.
On July 10, 2014 [redacted] called in asking for status of the file. He was then advised that the decision was that the file would be submitted to Arbitration Forums. He was advised that once a hearing date is obtained he would be contacted.
On September 3, 2014 [redacted] called in asking for status. He was advised by the Subrogation department that all the evidence to support our case has been obtained and the file was being referred to arbitration.
On September 4, 2014 our subrogation department received a call from the insured’s agent regarding the status. He was advised that the file was sent to arbitration and that the expected hearing date was October 22, 2014. [redacted] Insurance also filed arbitration asking for payment of their damages. Our evidence submitted to the arbitrator included our insured driver’s statement, photographs of the intersection, as well as photographs of the damages to the insured’s vehicle pointing out that based on the damages it would appear that our insured was in control of the intersection when the impact occurred.
On November 17, 2014 we received the arbitrator’s decision. The decision was that since there were conflicting statements regarding the accident details, no police report, and no independent witnesses, neither company could sustain the burden of proof and therefore neither company could recover their damages.
On November 17, 2014 the subrogation examiner called and spoke with [redacted] and advised him of the arbitrator’s decision. He was advised that [redacted] Insurance can no longer pursue [redacted] Insurance for the damages because the arbitration decision was binding, but if he chose to he could pursue his deductible against the other driver in District Magistrate Court. The insured then asked for copies of the estimate for his vehicle damages as well as the supporting photographs which were mailed to him on November 20, 2014.
In conclusion, the claim was investigated fully and [redacted] Insurance concluded that our insured was not liable for the loss based on the evidence obtained. [redacted] Insurance also concluded that their insured was not liable based on their driver’s statement. [redacted] Insurance defended our insured and denied [redacted]’s claim. Unfortunately due to the conflicting statements the independent arbitrator decided that neither company could prove liability against the other. The arbitration decision is binding and [redacted] Insurance cannot challenge or appeal the decision. The arbitration is not binding on the insured for any of their out of pocket expenses, in this case the deductible. The insured can attempt to pursue the other driver for these expenses in court as they were advised.
Should you have any questions, or if you wish to discuss the matter further, please contact me at [redacted] Ext. [redacted].
Very Truly
Yours,
Gus G, SCLAClaim Supervisor

Review: First let me state I am filing this complaint on behalf of my 87 year old father **. [redacted]. (owner of the policy). In august 2013, my father had a pressure value pop off hi internal house line causing some flooding in his home which then affect some wiring. this was the result of the city changing the pressure valve system at the street level. We contacted the city and was told any problems inside the home was a matter for the homeowner. At this point we corrected the initial problem and when we tried to file a claim with the insurance company (at that time it was [redacted]) we were told the policy on the house did not cover any of the issues we were dealing with. In fact the policy which my father had paid on for over 47 years with the same company was useless. It covered Volcanic eruptions, planes falling out of the sky, commercial trucks running into the house, and earthquakes. it covered no wind or rain, or hail damage and no flood damage of any sort and there was no personal property loss coverage. I then talked to the agent [redacted] Insurance in [redacted], Va. and requested that the policy coverage be increased. The agent contacted me and told me that they had found coverage for the house through one of their partners Donegal Insurance. I was sent papers listing the coverage and after adding personal lost coverage paid the premium. A few weeks later I was told that and assessor would be out to exam the property. I did not see this as a problem, the day the adjuster arrived I briefly me with her and she began to walk the property. After finishing we spoke again and nothing was said to be about any problems existing. On September 10, 2013 I received a letter from Donegel stating they would be cancelling the insurance based on several problems they listed on September 24, 2013. Several of the issues I was currently addressing (the removal of two sheds in need of much repair). I contacted the agent and spoke to "[redacted]", I stated my concerns about loosing the coverage and asked if the company would give me to the first of October to correct all the issues. she stated she would email the company and get back to me. On September 20, 2013 I received a check form Donegal for the amount of the premium paid, check is dated September 16th. This was 4 days prior to the date quoted to me in the cancellation notice. I contacted the agents office but got no response. Two days later I received a voice mail from "[redacted]" stating that Donegal stated the issues were too extensive and they would be canceling the policy. This cancellation had placed my father in a precarious position. first he currently has no coverage on his property, and secondly it puts him in violation of his mortgage agreement to carry insurance of the property. I have learned from others in the community that this practice of cancelling insurance on the elderly particularly is widespread. they carry insurance on the property with the same company for years and when they attempt to file even a simple claim the company finds a reason to cancel the policy. My major complaint is we were not permitted to show good faith in repairing and replacing all the issues of concern,all of which were superficial and cosmetic in nature. Peeling paint on the foundation walls, a portable window air conditioner not properly braced, a single bracket on a gutter coming loose. The major concerns of the two sheds have been taken care of and in fact was taken care of prior to the 24th. I believe that we should have been given time to correct all issues and following an inspection then cancel if deemed appropriate. To issue a check prior to the state dates shows me they had every intention of cancelling regardless of what corrections were made or attemptedDesired Settlement: I would like the policy to be reinstated, as all issues of concern are being addressed and will be completed by October 1st which was not an unreasonable request given the unexpectedness of the complaint. I believe we should have been granted this opportunity to address their concerns before the policy was cancelled.

Business

Response:

October 1, 2013

Dear **. [redacted]:

In response to your letter dated September 25, 2013, we have reviewed the insured’s complaint and we must respectfully stay our position on the cancellation.

The insured's application for insurance stated the overall condition and maintenance of the dwelling, other structures and premises was good to above average. The physical inspection of the property disclosed the foliow unacceptable issues:

Siding pulling away from the dwelling

Damaged gutters

Low trellis type structure in the front yard increasing liability exposure

Other structures on the property severely damaged and/or in poor condition

Our underwriter standards require all insured property meet our good to above average condition requirement on the effective date of the application. In this case, the property did not meet our requirements and we had to cancel our policy within the allotted timeframe required by the state of VA.

Hopefully this satisfies your inquiry. Please feel free to call me if you have any additional questions.

Sincerely,

Review: On February 26, 2014 my daughter was hit at a four way stop sign. She was almost through the stop sign when another girl hit her. The girls front driver's side hit our passenger door. Which show's she was almost out of the intersection. They did pay to have the car fixed, but we had to pay our deductible. The girl claimed my daughter hit her. So they had to take it to arbitrary. Through this whole process we had to call them to find out what was happening. We not once heard from them unless we called them first. They were to have a hearing on 10/22/2014 with the arbitrary committee. As of 11/17/2014 we did not receive any result's so my husband called our insurance company and told them we wanted to hear from Donegal as to the result of the hearing. They did call back and said the arbitrary committee could not find who was a fault. They said they could not process any further because we ran out of time. As of 11/18/2014 we had switched to another insurance company because we were not happy with the service we had received with them. All we ask was that we be kept informed as to what was happening with the case. We should not have had to keep calling them. They said we could go to a magistrate if we wanted to. What was the point of having insurance if we have to do the work for them. That was a little fender bender what would happen if we had a major accident. We could not chance another outcome like this so we did switch to another insurance company where they are local and we can contact them in our home town. I do still have the picture's of our car and her car. When my daughter called I went to the scene of the accident and took all the information and picture's. There is no way my daughter could have hit her when it was her front driver's side corner and our passenger door. That show's my daughter was almost out of the intersection . We feel that Donegal did not process this in an orderly manner. And did not keep us appraised of what was going on properly.Desired Settlement: We would like to get our deductible back but to this point I would just like people to know that this was not a good experience for us. To think before you use this company.

Business

Response:

November 28, 2014Dear [redacted],Please allow this to confirm receipt of your November 21, 2014 correspondence and the complaint of [redacted] and [redacted]. In summary, **. and [redacted]’s complaint is that [redacted] Insurance Co. did not process the file in an orderly manner and that they were not kept apprised of the status of the claim. In addition, they are upset because the file was sent to arbitration and the arbitrator decided that neither party was able to sustain the burden of proof and awarded no damages to either carrier.This loss occurred on February 26, 2014 and it was reported to us on the same day. The assigned claim examiner called and spoke with our insured, [redacted] and her daughter [redacted] who was the driver of the insured vehicle on February 26, 2014. They reported that [redacted] came up to a four way intersection and was the first car to do so. She stopped at the stop sign and proceeded through the intersection when the vehicle being driven by [redacted] and insured by [redacted] Insurance went through the stop sign on [redacted]’s right and struck the insured vehicle on the passenger side doors. They also indicated that there was no police report filed and there were no independent witnesses to the accident.**. [redacted] indicated that she preferred to go directly through [redacted] Insurance for the damages to her vehicle but we scheduled an inspection of her damages in the event she was not successful in pursuing her claim directly through the adverse carrier.On March 11, 2014 we received a call from [redacted] who advised us that she would like [redacted] Insurance to issue payment to them (less the applicable deductible of $500) and attempt subrogation against [redacted] Insurance. Payment for the damages was issued to the insured on March 11, 2014.On March 14, 2014 we spoke with the examiner at [redacted] Insurance Company who indicated that their driver reported to them that she came up to the four way stop sign first, stopped, and proceeded, when our insured driver, went through their respective stop sign causing the accident. The point of impact on the [redacted] vehicle was the driver’s side headlight and fender. They also indicated that they were still investigating liability. On the same day [redacted] called [redacted] and we advised him that [redacted] indicated to us that their liability decision was not complete.Based on our insured’s statement and the location of the damages to our insured’s vehicle, we determined that our insured driver was not liable for the other vehicle’s damages due to the fact that the damages showed that the insured driver was in control of the intersection when the [redacted] vehicle struck her.On March 31, 2014 we were advised by [redacted] Insurance that they were placing 100% liability on our insured based on their insured’s statement and they were denying our insured’s claim.On April 21, 2014 we received a demand package from [redacted] Insurance asking for recovery of their insured’s damages. A liability denial was then sent to [redacted] Insurance.A referral was subsequently sent to our subrogation department to see if they would be able to pursue the insured vehicle damages against [redacted] Insurance based on the evidence that we obtained.On June 23, 2014 we received a call from the insured asking for the status of the claim. They were advised that the file was being reviewed by our subrogation department.On June 24, 2014, our subrogation department indicated that they would pursue the claim against [redacted] Insurance, and the file was referred to them at that time. The insured [redacted] called the subrogation examiner on June 25, 2014 at which time he was advised of [redacted]’s decision and that the examiner was reviewing to see if the file could be submitted thru Arbitration Forums to resolve the matter.On July 10, 2014 [redacted] called in asking for status of the file. He was then advised that the decision was that the file would be submitted to Arbitration Forums. He was advised that once a hearing date is obtained he would be contacted.On September 3, 2014 [redacted] called in asking for status. He was advised by the Subrogation department that all the evidence to support our case has been obtained and the file was being referred to arbitration.On September 4, 2014 our subrogation department received a call from the insured’s agent regarding the status. He was advised that the file was sent to arbitration and that the expected hearing date was October 22, 2014. [redacted] Insurance also filed arbitration asking for payment of their damages. Our evidence submitted to the arbitrator included our insured driver’s statement, photographs of the intersection, as well as photographs of the damages to the insured’s vehicle pointing out that based on the damages it would appear that our insured was in control of the intersection when the impact occurred.On November 17, 2014 we received the arbitrator’s decision. The decision was that since there were conflicting statements regarding the accident details, no police report, and no independent witnesses, neither company could sustain the burden of proof and therefore neither company could recover their damages.On November 17, 2014 the subrogation examiner called and spoke with [redacted] and advised him of the arbitrator’s decision. He was advised that [redacted] Insurance can no longer pursue [redacted] Insurance for the damages because the arbitration decision was binding, but if he chose to he could pursue his deductible against the other driver in District Magistrate Court. The insured then asked for copies of the estimate for his vehicle damages as well as the supporting photographs which were mailed to him on November 20, 2014.In conclusion, the claim was investigated fully and [redacted] Insurance concluded that our insured was not liable for the loss based on the evidence obtained. [redacted] Insurance also concluded that their insured was not liable based on their driver’s statement. [redacted] Insurance defended our insured and denied [redacted]’s claim. Unfortunately due to the conflicting statements the independent arbitrator decided that neither company could prove liability against the other. The arbitration decision is binding and [redacted] Insurance cannot challenge or appeal the decision. The arbitration is not binding on the insured for any of their out of pocket expenses, in this case the deductible. The insured can attempt to pursue the other driver for these expenses in court as they were advised. Should you have any questions, or if you wish to discuss the matter further, please contact me at [redacted] Ext. [redacted].Very Truly

Yours,Gus G, SCLAClaim Supervisor

Consumer

Response:

[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]

Review: [redacted]

I am rejecting this response because:

Regards,

I did not say I wanted to deal directly with [redacted].

If you notice they say [redacted] called over and over again.

Notice that our passenger door was hit and [redacted]'s front driver's side corner which show's that [redacted] was almost out of the intersection when she was hit.

My understanding was you do not call the police if the car is drivable or no one is hurt.

We also never received a copy of the arbitrator's decision. Also [redacted] had to call Donegal 11/17/14to find out the arbitrator's decision Donegal or [redacted]'s did not contact us.

As to our first complaint our problem was the we were not keep up to date as to where we were in the process. We had to keep calling them to find out.

Business

Response:

December 8, 2014Dear [redacted],Please allow this to confirm receipt of your December 03, 2014 correspondence regarding the above captioned matter.[redacted]’s follow up appears to indicate that she did not say they would prefer to go thru [redacted] for their damages. Rather, it was her husband. Our record is not clear as to which insured indicated that to us.We are in agreement with [redacted] regarding the location of damage and the police being called.Regarding the arbitration decision, it was received in our office on 10/22/14. We agree that they should have been advised of the decision before 11/17/14 and regret that we didn’t advise them in timelier manner. We are unable to supply them with a copy of the decision due to confidentiality agreements with Arbitration Forums. The gist of it is that neither party could prove the liability of the other.We are not pleased with the decision rendered by the arbitrator regarding our subrogation claim. We paid $2,414.19 under the collision and rental coverages that we were anxious to recover. However, we were pleased that they also decided that we did not owe [redacted] for their insured’s collision loss.The [redacted] have a $500 collision deductible. They are free to pursue recovery of that deductible from the other party involved in the accident. Deductibles are not governed by the arbitration decision.Should you have any questions, or if you wish to discuss the matter further, please contact me at ###-###-#### Ext. [redacted].Very Truly

Yours,Gus G, SCLAClaim Supervisor

Consumer

Response:

[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]

Review: [redacted]

I am rejecting this response because:

Regards,

[redacted] They admitted they should have notified us and didn't. As of yet they have did nothing to solve

Donegal refused to pay me for covered losses on my property when I had damage. I would not recommend this company to ANYBODY...not even my worst enemy. I paid my premiums for homeowners, auto, umbrella insurance for over ten years and never made a claim. During the 11th year, I made a claim and they refused to properly cover my damages. It's hell dealing with this company. THey're glad to take your premium, but they refuse to properly pay damages. BUYER BEWARE.

Review: My daughter hit a deer with her car on the evening of May 15th while I was away camping. She sent me a text stating that she "creamed a deer" on the back road not far from our home. I contacted my local insurance agent on Monday the 19th when I returned home and was contacted by Donegal the following day and given a claim #. There had been some previous damage to the plastic bumper cover on the front of the car from a previous collision that we did not file a collision claim and replaced the damaged hood and had the body shop re-attach the damaged bumper cover at my expense. I instructed my daughter to be very clear with the estimator to show him what was damaged by the deer which consisted of damage only to the hood, a broken headlight assembly and right front fender and what had been previously damaged. In other words the partially torn and somewhat loose bumper cover on the front was from previous damage and not from the deer. An estimator came shortly thereafter and looked at the car and provided an estimate of approx. 700.00 to repair the headlight, hood and fender damage. I made numerous calls over the next couple weeks to try and ascertain the status of the claim, some of which were retuned in a reasonable amount of time and some that were unanswered. A form or some sort of affidavit was sent in the mail for my daughter to fill out as they stated the damage was not consistent with being deer damage, which she promptly completed and returned. Finally, approx. three weeks later on 6/17/14 I was contacted by an "investigator" who wanted to come and "take photos" of the car and to interview my daughter and was assured this was "no big deal and was routine". I complained to him at the time about the time involved and lack of response to which he replied "they should call me back in a timely manner and he would talk to her. On Wednesday 7/2/14 I logged onto the Donegal website and asked for some resolution to this matter and as of this morning 7/9/14 have received no response. Yesterday on 7/8/14 I again called and again got a voice message. A couple hours later I got a phone call from a different agent who said nothing but, "just wanted to make sure we returned your call" and could offer no update or time frame for resolution. At that time I asked for her supervisor and was told she was "on another line" and would call me back, which she has yet to do.Desired Settlement: Pay the deer damage claim

Business

Response:

July 17, 2014Dear [redacted]:This will acknowledge receipt of your correspondence dated My 09,2014 and serve as our response to our insured’s complaint.Our insured reported an auto loss to us on May 20, 2014. At this time our investigation in to this loss is ongoing and we are working with the PA Insurance Department on the matter.If you have any questions or concerns, or I f we can be of any further assistance, please feel free to contact the undersigned at ###-###-####, ext. [redacted].Very truly yours,DONEGAL INSURANCE GROUP

Review: I have never been late with my payments. I have never had a insurance claim filed against me for negligence or anything. There was an insurance inspector that came out to inspect my business property, where my equipment was stored and was inventoried and sent to the insurance company before the policy was even started. I received a notice of cancellation. The notice of cancellation reads,

Addenum to notice of cancellation, non-renewal or change in policy/coverage.

Insured: [redacted]

D/B/A [redacted] Policy Number: [redacted] REASON: Factor material to the insurability has become known during the policy period. The Donegal insurance group is not a market for hot dog carts.

They knew it was a hot dog cart and catering business from the start. They received a report from the insurance adjuster that came out prior to insuring my business.Desired Settlement: I want my premium returned due to there contract breach. I did nothing wrong, now I have to go find other insurance, I have to have insurance to do business. With no insurance I will lose a lot of money.

Business

Response:

Please see attached response.

DONT GIVE THIS COMPANY YOUR BUSINESS!
one month youy get a bill for $20 and the next month its $2,000. I cancelled my policies with them in 2/3/15 at least that's what I thought. come to find out the didn't actually cancel it until 3/8/15. I received a bill on 2/11/15 stating that the policies was going to cancel on 2/18/15 if I didnt pay the $1156 I owed them. I disregarded the bill because I thought it was already cancelled after I signed and sent my agent the cancellation forms on 2/3/15. Then I get another cancellation letter on 3/1/15 saying I owe $4,002. I have been trying to figure out for the last 6 months how it went from the $1156 to $4,002 and they still cant tell me how much I supposedly owe. These people are the biggest crooks I have ever done business with. They even owe me $3,334 from a Work Comp Audit and added it to my balance of $4,002 they say I owe them. I guess they think I must pay for the full term of the policies when I canceled half way through the term. the total work comp policy was $7,097 and I had already paid $3300 to the time that I cancelled. Stay away from them! Terrible Terrible Insurance Company. All this after I paid on time every time for 2 years and never made a claim.

Review: We obtained homeowners insurance from Donegal Insurance Group. Initially the premium matched the actual valuation of 2716 sq feet and $298,000.00. Later they increased our premium in error because they increase sq ft to apprx. 3022sq ft (this was told to us when we inquired). This is incorrect and we asked them to send someone else out but they informed us that who they sent out was reliable. I do not understand this as My property and tax assessment show 2716 sq ft. This home was built for us in 2010 we know the square footage. They also increased the outside storage value to $38,000 when we only paid $10,000.00 for the storage unit.Desired Settlement: I am requesting that they reassess the property to its actual square footage value. I believe they have counted the garage area and porch in with the living area which is not acceptable nor customary.

Business

Response:

September 24, 2014Dear [redacted],This is in response to your letter of September 23, 2014, regarding homeowner insurance for Charles S[redacted] of [redacted], Georgia.When we issue coverage, our procedure includes having an independent third party inspect and measure the home, to verify that we have properly insured the home to replacement cost. We do not rely on tax records as each county or jurisdiction measures and taxes on varying square footage calculations. This could be heated space, interior square footage or exterior square footage. Insurance company measurements contemplate all Square footage for the structure, as we use it to calculate the replacement cost of the entire structure. This is different from calculating the interior living space Square footage, commonly cited in residential real estate transactions. It is common for insureds to not understand this difference when purchasing insurance for their home. By employing an inspection service, we can be assured that homes will be measured on exterior square footage 100% of the time.Based on the results of the inspection on this home, we found the exterior square footage to be 3,211, with an adjustment made for the built in garage. We corresponded with the insured’s agent ([redacted] Insurance) to verify that the correct home was inspected and measured. Hearing no response, we increased coverage on the home, resulting in an increased premium adjustment.We will comply with Mr. S[redacted]’s request to have the inspection reviewed and verified.If you need additional information, please let me know.Sincerely,Karen RUnderwriting Manager

Consumer

Response:

Review: [redacted]

I am rejecting this response because:

Handwritten attachment.

Regards,

Business

Response:

October 23, 2014Dear [redacted],This is in response to your letter of October 21, 2014, regarding homeowner insurance for [redacted] of [redacted], Georgia.Since our response to you on September 24th, we asked our inspection company to verify their initial inspection results. Based on these results, we can affirm the exterior square footage to be 3,211, with an adjustment made for the built-in garage, bringing the total finished living square footage area down to 2,728 sq. ft., which is very close to the 2,716 sq. ft. that she quotes. The 20x20 screened in porch is not included in those measurements. The inspection company did revise some of the features that they used in the [redacted] replacement cost estimating tool, and arrived at a new estimated replacement cost of $320,000. We communicated these changes with the [redacted] insurance agent, [redacted] of [redacted] Insurance, who authorized a decrease in coverage. This was completed on October 13th.We would encourage the [redacted] to reach out to their agent so that they can meet face to face to resolve any lingering questions or concerns. [redacted] can be reached at ###-###-####, ext. [redacted].Sincerely,Karen R

Consumer

Response:

Handwritten Resolved letter