Erie Insurance

Thank you for your letter dated November 13, 2015, received in our office on November 25, You request ERIE review and respond to the [redacted] concerns regarding the claim for the accident occurring September 25, Specifically, the [redacted] question if new or used car parts were used to make repairs, and that they were not satisfied with the quality of workmanship for repairs performed on their vehicleIn review of our claim file, the following chain of events occurred: · ERIE contacted [redacted] on November 16, 2015, and explained that repairs to the insured vehicle were completed with all new OEM componentsERIE advised that since repairs were completed at an ERIE Insurance Direct Repair Shop, that the repairs would be covered under a lifetime warranty for workmanshipBecause [redacted] was unhappy with the work performed by this repair shop, she communicated her desire to have the vehicle serviced at a different repair shop of her choice, [redacted] ERIE agreed and informed her we would contact [redacted] to make necessary arrangements for a follinspection to determine any current damages and address any further repairs needed· ERIE contacted [redacted] on November 16, 2015, to find that [redacted] previously inspected the vehicle, and they believe a few adjustments would be needed for proper alignment of the bodywork [redacted] advised they would be happy to complete repairs, but would not be available to begin work until the week following November 23, · ERIE advised [redacted] that we will contact both parties to schedule an appointment on Monday November 30, 2015, to have repairs completed at [redacted] ERIE continues to service this claim for the [redacted] We appreciate the opportunity to review this for the insured and believe we have provided the information necessary to respond to your inquiry If you have any further questions or require any additional information, please do not hesitate to contact me directly at ( [redacted]

Thank you for your letter of January 15, 2015, which we received on January 23, 2015, regarding a Complaintfiled by Ms [redacted] In her correspondence, she disagrees with ERIE's denial of her claim.The incident of December 23, was reported to Erie Insurance on that same day Below, please see thedates and investigative activities that took place in the handling of this file.We made contact with Ms [redacted] on December 23, At this time, she stated that she did not hit thevehicle that was parked to her rightShe indicated that she noticed the damage on that vehicle when she pulledinto the space to the left of Ms [redacted] The ERIE did not have contact information for [redacted] until we were contacted by e-mail from her on January 2, The adjuster assigned to this file attemptedcontact and sent e-mails to Ms [redacted] and they were not able to actually speak until January 8, Atthat time, the adjuster took her recorded statement to obtain her details regarding the accidentAt no time wasthere any mention of an independent witnessOn the same date, we assigned a material damage adjuster toinspect Ms [redacted] 's vehicleAn inspection and recorded statement was also taken from Ms [redacted] .On January 14, 2015, we obtained the police officer's contact information and the adjuster promptly attemptedto contact Officer [redacted] Ms [redacted] had indicated that Ms [redacted] was also acquainted with Officer [redacted] The adjuster received a voice mail from Officer [redacted] on January 27, 2015, indicating that she did notwitness the accident, but thought the damages lined up and in this message, she also indicated that [redacted] was a fellow police officer.In closing, The ERIE performed a detailed investigation that included recorded statements from both parties,inspection of both vehicles in which there was no conclusive evidence to prove Ms [redacted] damaged Ms[redacted] 's vehicle and feedback from the officer that arrived on the scene.Ms [redacted] is adamant she did not make contact with Ms [redacted] 's vehicle and there is no evidence toprove otherwiseMs [redacted] was entering the space to Ms [redacted] 's left and was approaching from Ms[redacted] 's passenger sideIt would be physically unrealistic for the front portion of Ms [redacted] 's vehicle tomiss the rear end of the [redacted] vehicle, but make contact with the door area of the [redacted] vehicle.The ERIE believes a complete, timely investigation was conducted and believes the proper decision wasrenderedWe appreciate you writing to us, which has allowed us to provide our thoughts on this matter.Sincerely, [redacted] , AINS, AIS

On May 25th Erie Insurance provided coverage for an motor vehicle accident involving their insured driver and myselfSince then Erie has contacted me a total of three times to provide reimbursement of my vehicleThey have never seen my vehicle and have no idea of how to compensate me for it
I have contacted both the national number as well as the local agents and supervisors about times hoping to get this resolved to no availThe last call to corporate indicated that this now has a priority status label on itthat was a week agoToday is 8/23/and I have left yet another message for the supervisor
My research indicates that the vehicle was worth about $5,

I have reviewed the response offer made by the business in reference to
complaint ID ***, and have determined that this proposed action would not
resolve my complaint. For your reference, details of the offer I reviewed
appear below.I accept that the Revdex.com will have to close out this complaint
because Erie and I may never come to a resolution I would like to think
the RevDex.com the opportunity to have a neutral forum
I will forever be displeased in the way in which Erie handled this claim
The accusations made in their first response to this complaint against my
integrity as an officer of the law was extremely disappointing I more applaud
at that then the actual car accident I have never been a
person to complain I certainly have never taken action to this level
before and I am upset at the results I am saddened to say that I have no
positive things to say about Erie I hoped their customer service would
have prevailed and a peaceful resolution could have been sought If
asked in the future, I would recommend this company as an insurer? My answer
will be no. Lastly, I would like to
refer to one quote from Erie on the last response, "I would like to stress
that Ms*** is adamant that she saw existing damage on the *** vehicle
as she was approaching the vehicle." Erie, please reflect on
that statement logically Keep in mind the environment of a busy parking
lot approaching a major Holiday. Also,
think about the focus and effort it takes to park a car in generalHow could
she stare at my rear bumper at the same time? The damage is hard to spot
when you stand a foot away from the car How could she have possible seen
it when attempting to park? Ms*** did hit my
car causing the damages Your client is untruthful and I am disappointed
and exhausted arguing the truth I wish your company had a different
outlook I feel like your company is more protective on making money than
doing the right thing.Additionally, I
understand I have the right to take Ms*** to small claims court in
***, Virginia I have debated on filing a complaint It is my
understanding if I win the court could order Ms*** to pay the damage as
well as the court cost I do not wish for Ms*** to be charged
additional fees other than the cost to my vehicleThe truth is, I was
victimized and I still have overall respect for my fellow neighbor At
this time, I cannot tell you either way if I intend to file or not, but I hate
that Erie put me in this position to cause added stress in their clients life
Regards,
*** ***

Thank you for your supplemental letter of January 30, 2015, which we received on February 5, 2015, regarding Ms.***'s rebuttal to our January 26, response to your office.Ms*** states she did not know the police officer that arrived on the sceneA voicemail message was receivedfrom Officer *** on January 21, in which she stated that Ms*** was a police officer and that she did notfeel she would lie about the incidentShe also stated in her message that Ms*** stated at the scene that she did notmake contact with the *** vehicleWe have no indication that Ms*** is not telling the truthOfficer ***further states in her message that she did not witness the accident.This investigation was completed in a timely manner given the difficulty we encountered when trying to make contactwith Ms***I would like to stress that Ms*** is adamant that she saw existing damage on the ***vehicle as she was approaching the vehicleThe *** vehicle was approaching the *** vehicle to park on theleft and at no time struck the *** vehicle.Both parties are as adamant about their recollection of what happened on the day of the mishap, but without anindependent witness, we are standing by our original liability decisionWe are aware that Ms***'s husband was inthe vehicle at the time but he is not an independent witness so a statement was not taken from him.In closing, due to the lack of an independent witness to corroborate either driver's versions of the mishap, we support Ms.***'s details and stand by our denialWe appreciate you writing to us again, which has allowed us to provide ourthoughts on this matter.Sincerely,*** ***, AINS, AISSenior Executive Assistant

I have reviewed the response offer made by the business in reference to
complaint ID ***, and have determined that this proposed action would not
resolve my complaint. For your reference, details of the offer I reviewed
appear below
The indication that I knew the police officer is false I called the
*** County police dispatch at the request of their client The county
assigned an officer to the scene. I had
nothing to do with their selection of Officer *** In fact, this was
the first time and only time I have meet Officer *** Initially, I
did not identify myself as law enforcement to Officer *** because I wanted
to give their client time to speak with the officer without prejudice
After Officer *** finished the information exchange form and the
event was over I provided her with my business card in order to generate
another business contact. The action of
introducing myself as a fellow law enforcement officer after the fact is not
inappropriate and your business should be ashamed for making that assumption
I would like to document
that I treated Erie's client with extreme respect I offered a seat to
rest after the event. I asked if she
needed assistance or if there was someone I could call on her behalf I
wrote my insurance information for her and when she became nervous and thought
she had not hit my vehicle I gladly contacted the authorities at her requested
On multiple occasions I continued to ask if she was ok I afforded
her the opportunity to speak with the Officer first without interruption
because I would never want to give the appearance of impropriety The
assumption that I called a friend to the scene is a defamation of character
It insults my integrity as a law enforcement officer and Erie should be
extremely embarrassed to use that as an argument to not pay out a claim
Additionally, during my
recorded statement I informed Erie's agent that my husband was in the vehicle
I believe he should be counted as another witness for an interview
Although I did not see additional witnesses at the scene it is my experience
that when you have two parties with contradicting statements it is the
investigators due diligence to obtain additional information To my
knowledge no one contacted the staff at *** to obtain witness on their
clients or my behalf Also, if you take the time to really review Officer
***’s statement you will see evidence that adds credibility to my
story. As an law enforcement officer I
know that you can build a case with enough credible statements to understand
the full totality of circumstances. Officer
*** did not witness the incident, but upon her examination it appeared the
damage on my car was caused by their client That is the substance of her statement If
Erie would re-interview their client I am sure she would say confirm that after
the initial allegation no vehicles were moved prior to the officers arrival
Another point I would
like to make is immediately after the incident there was paint transfer on
their client’s car from my vehicle Had they completed their investigation
in a timely manner there was an opportunity to see it Since they waited
over a week and the weather was rainy it left no proof Also, who is to
say their client didn't obtain a car wash Additionally, I provided
photos to my car insurance of the damage on my vehicle, the position the cars
were parked in, and to the best I could provide the paint transfer before their
client proceed to wipe it off in protest
The truth is their
client is an elderly woman who I took sympathy on and now I am being made to
look like a criminal She had no idea she hit my carI am fearful
of her driving on the road A statement she made to me that day is I
don't like to drive when it is crowded That statement indicates she is
not percent confident behind the wheel of a car What if I would
have had my small child with me? What if she had no recollection of
hitting a person? Would the damage to my child not be covered by your
insurance because your client claimed she didn't hit the child? It is a
shame that the person who was in fact victimized in this incident is left with
the cost of the damage and arguing the truth.
Regards,
*** ***

Thank you for your letter of January 15, 2015, which we received on January 23, 2015, regarding a Complaintfiled by Ms. [redacted]. In her correspondence, she disagrees with ERIE's denial of her claim.The incident of December 23, 2014 was reported to Erie Insurance on that same day.  Below,...

please see thedates and investigative activities that took place in the handling of this file.We made contact with Ms. [redacted] on December 23, 2014. At this time, she stated that she did not hit thevehicle that was parked to her right. She indicated that she noticed the damage on that vehicle when she pulledinto the space to the left of Ms. [redacted]. The ERIE did not have contact information for [redacted]until we were contacted by e-mail from her on January 2, 2015. The adjuster assigned to this file attemptedcontact and sent e-mails to Ms. [redacted] and they were not able to actually speak until January 8, 2015. Atthat time, the adjuster took her recorded statement to obtain her details regarding the accident. At no time wasthere any mention of an independent witness. On the same date, we assigned a material damage adjuster toinspect Ms. [redacted]'s vehicle. An inspection and recorded statement was also taken from Ms. [redacted].On January 14, 2015, we obtained the police officer's contact information and the adjuster promptly attemptedto contact Officer [redacted]. Ms. [redacted] had indicated that Ms. [redacted] was also acquainted with Officer[redacted]. The adjuster received a voice mail from Officer [redacted] on January 27, 2015, indicating that she did notwitness the accident, but thought the damages lined up and in this message, she also indicated that [redacted] was a fellow police officer.In closing, The ERIE performed a detailed investigation that included recorded statements from both parties,inspection of both vehicles in which there was no conclusive evidence to prove Ms. [redacted] damaged Ms.[redacted]'s vehicle and feedback from the officer that arrived on the scene.Ms. [redacted] is adamant she did not make contact with Ms. [redacted]'s vehicle and there is no evidence toprove otherwise. Ms. [redacted] was entering the space to Ms. [redacted]'s left and was approaching from Ms.[redacted]'s passenger side. It would be physically unrealistic for the front portion of Ms. [redacted]'s vehicle tomiss the rear end of the [redacted] vehicle, but make contact with the door area of the [redacted] vehicle.The ERIE believes a complete, timely investigation was conducted and believes the proper decision wasrendered. We appreciate you writing to us, which has allowed us to provide our thoughts on this matter.Sincerely, [redacted], AINS, AIS

Thank you for your letter dated November 13, 2015, received in our office on November 25, 2015. You request ERIE review and respond to the [redacted] concerns regarding the claim for the accident occurring September 25, 2015. Specifically, the [redacted] question if new or used car parts were used to make...

repairs, and that they were not satisfied with the quality of workmanship for repairs performed on their vehicle. In review of our claim file, the following chain of events occurred: ·         ERIE contacted [redacted] on November 16, 2015, and explained that repairs to the insured vehicle were completed with all new OEM components. ERIE advised that since repairs were completed at an ERIE Insurance Direct Repair Shop, that the repairs would be covered under a lifetime warranty for workmanship. Because [redacted] was unhappy with the work performed by this repair shop, she communicated her desire to have the vehicle serviced at a different repair shop of her choice, [redacted] ERIE agreed and informed her we would contact [redacted] to make necessary arrangements for a follow-up inspection to determine any current damages and address any further repairs needed. ·         ERIE contacted [redacted] on November 16, 2015, to find that [redacted] previously inspected the vehicle, and they believe a few adjustments would be needed for proper alignment of the bodywork. [redacted] advised they would be happy to complete repairs, but would not be available to begin work until the week following November 23, 2015. ·         ERIE advised [redacted] that we will contact both parties to schedule an appointment on Monday November 30, 2015, to have repairs completed at [redacted] ERIE continues to service this claim for the [redacted]. We appreciate the opportunity to review this for the insured and believe we have provided the information necessary to respond to your inquiry.  If you have any further questions or require any additional information, please do not hesitate to contact me directly at ([redacted]

Review: On 12/23/2014, at the [redacted] Store parking lot located at [redacted] attempted to park a grey Toyota Corolla in a parking spot next to my 2009 white ford Escape. Her vehicle struck the rear bumper of my Escape causing damage. I was seated in the driver seat of my vehicle and my husband was seated in the passenger seat. My vehicle was parked and turned off at the time of the accident. The vehicle was examined by a [redacted] certified body shop that estimated the repair to be over $380.00 USD. Since the repair is less that my insurance deductible my insurance company [redacted] filed a claim with [redacted]'s insurance company Erie Auto Insurance. Erie contacted me on 01/014/2015, stating that they would not pay for my vehicle damages.

The company failed to do a full and complete investigation on the accident and failed to complete the claim in a timely manner. They took over 15 business days to make a determination. Over the past weeks, I attempted to contact Erie via phone and email. Their responses were often delayed or only returned after I would follow up with numerous emails. During that time, I made myself available to ensure a speedy process. Erie sent an inspector to look at my vehicle to which he assessed the damage to be over $300.00 USD. Erie did not attempt to investigate further. They did not call the police officer in [redacted] who responded to the accident, or attempt to locate other possible witnesses.

On the day of the accident the responding police officer told Erie’s client ([redacted]) it was clear her car had struck my vehicle. The officer could not legally write a ticket because the parking lot is considered private property. However, the officer told me that the insurance companies could call her for a witness statement and she provided her contact information. I passed the officer’s contact information to [redacted] who in turn passed it to Erie Auto Insurance.

Furthermore, the officer stated that if she was legally able to write a ticket she would have found [redacted] at fault. In addition, Erie did not attempt to contact [redacted] employees to obtain witnesses to the accident or video footage.

It is my belief that Erie did not do their due diligence to fully investigate the scene. Per the conversation with an Erie representative their determination of the accident was made partly on the statement made by their client that she did not hit my car. If they cannot use my statement (because I am the vehicle owner) then their client’s statement should also not affect the determination of the claim. If in fact they can make a determination based on our statements then Erie failed to interview all parties present by not interviewing my husband who was in the passenger seat of my vehicle at the time of the accident.Desired Settlement: I would like the damages to my vehicle paid for. Additionally, I would like to use a [redacted] accredit body shop to do so.

Business

Response:

Thank you for your letter of January 15, 2015, which we received on January 23, 2015, regarding a Complaintfiled by Ms. [redacted]. In her correspondence, she disagrees with ERIE's denial of her claim.The incident of December 23, 2014 was reported to Erie Insurance on that same day. Below, please see thedates and investigative activities that took place in the handling of this file.We made contact with Ms. [redacted] on December 23, 2014. At this time, she stated that she did not hit thevehicle that was parked to her right. She indicated that she noticed the damage on that vehicle when she pulledinto the space to the left of Ms. [redacted]. The ERIE did not have contact information for [redacted]until we were contacted by e-mail from her on January 2, 2015. The adjuster assigned to this file attemptedcontact and sent e-mails to Ms. [redacted] and they were not able to actually speak until January 8, 2015. Atthat time, the adjuster took her recorded statement to obtain her details regarding the accident. At no time wasthere any mention of an independent witness. On the same date, we assigned a material damage adjuster toinspect Ms. [redacted]'s vehicle. An inspection and recorded statement was also taken from Ms. [redacted].On January 14, 2015, we obtained the police officer's contact information and the adjuster promptly attemptedto contact Officer [redacted]. Ms. [redacted] had indicated that Ms. [redacted] was also acquainted with Officer[redacted]. The adjuster received a voice mail from Officer [redacted] on January 27, 2015, indicating that she did notwitness the accident, but thought the damages lined up and in this message, she also indicated that [redacted] was a fellow police officer.In closing, The ERIE performed a detailed investigation that included recorded statements from both parties,inspection of both vehicles in which there was no conclusive evidence to prove Ms. [redacted] damaged Ms.[redacted]'s vehicle and feedback from the officer that arrived on the scene.Ms. [redacted] is adamant she did not make contact with Ms. [redacted]'s vehicle and there is no evidence toprove otherwise. Ms. [redacted] was entering the space to Ms. [redacted]'s left and was approaching from Ms.[redacted]'s passenger side. It would be physically unrealistic for the front portion of Ms. [redacted]'s vehicle tomiss the rear end of the [redacted] vehicle, but make contact with the door area of the [redacted] vehicle.The ERIE believes a complete, timely investigation was conducted and believes the proper decision wasrendered. We appreciate you writing to us, which has allowed us to provide our thoughts on this matter.Sincerely, [redacted], AINS, AIS

Consumer

Response:

I have reviewed the response offer made by the business in reference to

complaint ID [redacted], and have determined that this proposed action would not

resolve my complaint. For your reference, details of the offer I reviewed

appear below.

The indication that I knew the police officer is false. I called the

[redacted] County police dispatch at the request of their client. The county

assigned an officer to the scene. I had

nothing to do with their selection of Officer [redacted]. In fact, this was

the first time and only time I have meet Officer [redacted]. Initially, I

did not identify myself as law enforcement to Officer [redacted] because I wanted

to give their client time to speak with the officer without prejudice.

After Officer [redacted] finished the information exchange form and the

event was over I provided her with my business card in order to generate

another business contact. The action of

introducing myself as a fellow law enforcement officer after the fact is not

inappropriate and your business should be ashamed for making that assumption.

I would like to document

that I treated Erie's client with extreme respect. I offered a seat to

rest after the event. I asked if she

needed assistance or if there was someone I could call on her behalf. I

wrote my insurance information for her and when she became nervous and thought

she had not hit my vehicle I gladly contacted the authorities at her requested.

On multiple occasions I continued to ask if she was ok. I afforded

her the opportunity to speak with the Officer first without interruption

because I would never want to give the appearance of impropriety. The

assumption that I called a friend to the scene is a defamation of character.

It insults my integrity as a law enforcement officer and Erie should be

extremely embarrassed to use that as an argument to not pay out a claim.

Additionally, during my

recorded statement I informed Erie's agent that my husband was in the vehicle.

I believe he should be counted as another witness for an interview.

Although I did not see additional witnesses at the scene it is my experience

that when you have two parties with contradicting statements it is the

investigators due diligence to obtain additional information. To my

knowledge no one contacted the staff at [redacted] to obtain witness on their

clients or my behalf. Also, if you take the time to really review Officer

[redacted]’s statement you will see evidence that adds credibility to my

story. As an law enforcement officer I

know that you can build a case with enough credible statements to understand

the full totality of circumstances. Officer

[redacted] did not witness the incident, but upon her examination it appeared the

damage on my car was caused by their client. That is the substance of her statement. If

Erie would re-interview their client I am sure she would say confirm that after

the initial allegation no vehicles were moved prior to the officers arrival.

Another point I would

like to make is immediately after the incident there was paint transfer on

their client’s car from my vehicle. Had they completed their investigation

in a timely manner there was an opportunity to see it. Since they waited

over a week and the weather was rainy it left no proof. Also, who is to

say their client didn't obtain a car wash. Additionally, I provided

photos to my car insurance of the damage on my vehicle, the position the cars

were parked in, and to the best I could provide the paint transfer before their

client proceed to wipe it off in protest.

The truth is their

client is an elderly woman who I took sympathy on and now I am being made to

look like a criminal. She had no idea she hit my car. I am fearful

of her driving on the road. A statement she made to me that day is I

don't like to drive when it is crowded. That statement indicates she is

not 100 percent confident behind the wheel of a car. What if I would

have had my small child with me? What if she had no recollection of

hitting a person? Would the damage to my child not be covered by your

insurance because your client claimed she didn't hit the child? It is a

shame that the person who was in fact victimized in this incident is left with

the cost of the damage and arguing the truth.

Regards,

Business

Response:

Thank you for your supplemental letter of January 30, 2015, which we received on February 5, 2015, regarding Ms.[redacted]'s rebuttal to our January 26, 2015 response to your office.Ms. [redacted] states she did not know the police officer that arrived on the scene. A voicemail message was receivedfrom Officer [redacted] on January 21, 2015 in which she stated that Ms. [redacted] was a police officer and that she did notfeel she would lie about the incident. She also stated in her message that Ms. [redacted] stated at the scene that she did notmake contact with the [redacted] vehicle. We have no indication that Ms. [redacted] is not telling the truth. Officer [redacted]further states in her message that she did not witness the accident.This investigation was completed in a timely manner given the difficulty we encountered when trying to make contactwith Ms. [redacted]. I would like to stress that Ms. [redacted] is adamant that she saw existing damage on the [redacted]vehicle as she was approaching the vehicle. The [redacted] vehicle was approaching the [redacted] vehicle to park on theleft and at no time struck the [redacted] vehicle.Both parties are as adamant about their recollection of what happened on the day of the mishap, but without anindependent witness, we are standing by our original liability decision. We are aware that Ms. [redacted]'s husband was inthe vehicle at the time but he is not an independent witness so a statement was not taken from him.In closing, due to the lack of an independent witness to corroborate either driver's versions of the mishap, we support Ms.[redacted]'s details and stand by our denial. We appreciate you writing to us again, which has allowed us to provide ourthoughts on this matter.Sincerely,[redacted], AINS, AISSenior Executive Assistant

Consumer

Response:

I have reviewed the response offer made by the business in reference to

complaint ID [redacted], and have determined that this proposed action would not

resolve my complaint. For your reference, details of the offer I reviewed

appear below.I accept that the Revdex.com will have to close out this complaint

because Erie and I may never come to a resolution. I would like to think

the Revdex.com the opportunity to have a neutral forum.

I will forever be displeased in the way in which Erie handled this claim.

The accusations made in their first response to this complaint against my

integrity as an officer of the law was extremely disappointing. I more applaud

at that then the actual car accident. I have never been a

person to complain. I certainly have never taken action to this level

before and I am upset at the results. I am saddened to say that I have no

positive things to say about Erie. I hoped their customer service would

have prevailed and a peaceful resolution could have been sought. If

asked in the future, I would recommend this company as an insurer? My answer

will be no. Lastly, I would like to

refer to one quote from Erie on the last response, "I would like to stress

that Ms. [redacted] is adamant that she saw existing damage on the [redacted] vehicle

as she was approaching the vehicle." Erie, please reflect on

that statement logically. Keep in mind the environment of a busy parking

lot approaching a major Holiday. Also,

think about the focus and effort it takes to park a car in general. How could

she stare at my rear bumper at the same time? The damage is hard to spot

when you stand a foot away from the car. How could she have possible seen

it when attempting to park? Ms. [redacted] did hit my

car causing the damages. Your client is untruthful and I am disappointed

and exhausted arguing the truth. I wish your company had a different

outlook. I feel like your company is more protective on making money than

doing the right thing.Additionally, I

understand I have the right to take Ms. [redacted] to small claims court in

[redacted], Virginia. I have debated on filing a complaint. It is my

understanding if I win the court could order Ms. [redacted] to pay the damage as

well as the court cost. I do not wish for Ms. [redacted] to be charged

additional fees other than the cost to my vehicle. The truth is, I was

victimized and I still have overall respect for my fellow neighbor. At

this time, I cannot tell you either way if I intend to file or not, but I hate

that Erie put me in this position to cause added stress in their clients life.

Regards,