Complaint: [redacted]I am rejecting this response because:
Again, esurance and its representatives have failed to address the actual concerns and allegations listed in the initial complaint and subsequent follow-up communications. Instead of truly listening to the issues raised, they choose to provide a shortened timeline of events that skips over many of the concerning events to try to glaze over the wrongdoings of their company and attempt to save face when they know that they are in the wrong.
Upon notification of impending expiration of the insurance, I provided the company with the correct information for the mortgage company. At that point, I was assured that everything was to be taken care of by the company. Later, I found out that esurance had incorrectly entered the mortgage payee information in their clause, which contributed to the delay in the policy renewal. Furthermore, they provided the mortgage company with a PO box for the mailing of the check, which surely would not have arrived in time for the payment due date. When I found out this information, I switched companies and called to cancel my policy. However, the policy was already canceled by esurance, so the agent stated that he would note that I had called to cancel and that the check would be refunded. However, once the check arrived, esurance reinstated my policy against my wishes and explicit discussion with the agent. My allegations are that their agents misrepresented the facts on numerous occasions, ignored and disregarded customer requests, and that key communications were not made available to the customer after the policy initially expired as the website was no longer accessible once the policy expired. Please respond to those issues with a plan to address the misrepresentation by the customer service agents and overall improvement plan for the company to adhere to stricter standards of communications.
Sincerely,[redacted]
Initial Business Response /* (1000, 5, 2015/11/18) */
November 17, 2015
Revdex.com
Attention: [redacted] Dispute Resolutions
XXX XXth Street, Suite 550
Oakland, CA XXXXX-XXXX
Via Electronic Response: www.oakland.Revdex.com.org
Case Number: XXXXXXXX
Complainant Name:...
[redacted]
Named Insured: [redacted]
Policy Number: PAMI-XXXXXXX
Insurance Company: Esurance Property and Casualty Insurance Company
Dear Ms. [redacted]
Please accept this letter as confirmation that Esurance Insurance Services, Inc. (Esurance) on behalf of Esurance Property and Casualty Insurance Company, is in receipt of the consumer complaint submitted by [redacted] regarding the above referenced personal automobile insurance policy.
In his complaint Mr. [redacted] that while incarcerated his Esurance policy renewed without his approval on July 03, 2013. Mr. [redacted] also states that he is seeking reimbursement for the premium associated with the policy term from July 03, 2013, through January 01, 2014.
At the time of policy purchase, and upon each subsequent renewal, Mr. [redacted] accepted the terms and conditions of the policy in which he agreed to transact business electronically, which included the automatic renewal of the policy.
On August 20, 2013, [redacted] contacted Esurance to cancel this policy and advised that she had power of attorney to handle Mr. [redacted] affairs. Esurance requested a copy of the Power of Attorney in order to assist her with Mr. [redacted] policy.
On August 25, 2013, Esurance reviewed the Power of Attorney documentation provided by Ms. [redacted].
On August 25, 2013, Esurance advised Ms. [redacted] that the Power of Attorney documentation was specific to banking/business needs for [redacted]'s business (Maple Lane Discount). Ms. [redacted] was advised that Esurance this was not sufficient to cancel Mr. [redacted]'s personal auto policy.
No additional contact was made with Esurance by Ms. [redacted], the next contact Esurance received was on October 28, 2015, from Mr. [redacted] requesting the policy expiration be backdated to July 03, 2013.
Esurance advised Mr. [redacted] that we would be unable to backdate the policy expiration without proof of other insurance coverage or documentation showing the vehicle was placed on non-operation with the department of motor vehicles during that time.
Thank you for allowing Esurance the opportunity to respond to the concerns. If you have any questions or require additional information, please direct all future correspondence to [redacted], Compliance Analyst, at; P.O. Box 2890, Rocklin, CA, XXXXX.
Sincerely,
[redacted]
Compliance Analyst
Esurance Insurance Services, Inc.
On Behalf of Esurance Property and Casualty Insurance Company
Initial Consumer Rebuttal /* (3000, 7, 2015/11/29) */
(The consumer indicated he/she DID NOT accept the response from the business.)
They were informed of the circumstances and my request to cancel the policy when it was first renewed. Refusing to cancel a policy based on a technicality, when it was obvious that I was the one that requested it be cancelled is dishonest. Rather than being understanding and helping one of their customers, they are taking advantage of my circumstance and basicly stealing fees for 6 months of [redacted] when no [redacted] was provided or wanted. If you will not refund my money here, I will have my attorney sue you for the amount.
Final Business Response /* (4000, 9, 2015/12/15) */
December 15, 2015
Revdex.com
Attention: [redacted], Dispute Resolutions
XXX XXth Street, Suite 550
Oakland, CA XXXXX-XXXX
Via Electronic Response: www.oakland.Revdex.com.org
Case Number: XXXXXXXX
Complainant Name: [redacted]
Named Insured: [redacted]
Policy Number: PAMI-XXXXXXX
Insurance Company: Esurance Property and Casualty Insurance Company
Dear Ms. [redacted]:
Please accept this letter as confirmation that Esurance Insurance Services, Inc. (Esurance) on behalf of Esurance Property and Casualty Insurance Company, is in receipt of the consumer rebuttal submitted by [redacted] regarding the above referenced personal automobile insurance policy.
In his rebuttal Mr. [redacted] states that Esurance was informed of his request to cancel this policy and that Esurance did not cancel the policy.
On August 20, 2013,[redacted] contacted Esurance to cancel this policy and advised that she had power of attorney to handle Mr. [redacted]'s affairs. Esurance requested a copy of the Power of Attorney in order to assist her with Mr. [redacted]'s policy.
On August 25, 2013, Esurance reviewed the Power of Attorney documentation provided by Ms. [redacted]
On August 25, 2013, Esurance advised Ms. [redacted] that the Power of Attorney documentation was specific to banking/business needs for [redacted]'s business (Maple Lane Discount). Ms. [redacted] was advised by Esurance that this was not sufficient to cancel Mr. [redacted]'s personal auto policy.
Esurance was unable to process the cancelation at that time. The Power of Attorney documentation provided to Esurance did not authorize Ms. [redacted] to transact business on Mr. [redacted]'s personal automobile insurance policy.
Esurance is unable to backdate the policy expiration without proof of other insurance coverage or documentation showing the vehicle was placed on non-operation with the department of motor vehicles.
Thank you for allowing Esurance the opportunity to respond to the concerns. If you have any questions or require additional information, please direct all future correspondence to [redacted], Compliance Analyst, at; P.O. Box 2890, Rocklin, CA, XXXXX.
Sincerely,
[redacted]
Compliance Analyst
Esurance Insurance Services, Inc.
On Behalf of Esurance Property and Casualty Insurance Company
Final Consumer Response /* (4200, 11, 2015/12/18) */
(The consumer indicated he/she DID NOT accept the response from the business.)
There was no proposed resolution offered by Esurance. They are not offering any resolve what so ever. They simply restate the same old original response to my requesting that this policy (which should have never been renewed automatically by them) be canceled. I never requested that it be renewed, so none of this should even be an issue. Progressive insurance would never have even billed me a renewal without my authorization, so I would never have needed to ask to have it canceled/refunded. Esurance asks that I provide documentation that I never used the vehicle during the period I am asking to be refunded. I can most definitely provide documentation from the State of Michigan that I did not use the vehicle from the dates of May 13, 2013 to October 20, 2015. I already emailed Esurance a copy of that document, but they choose to ignore it.
Initial Business Response /* (1000, 5, 2015/12/18) */
December 18, 2015
Revdex.com
Attention: [redacted]
Dispute Resolution Specialist
1000 Broadway, Suite 625
Oakland, CA XXXXX
Via Electronic Response: www.oakland.Revdex.com.org
Re: Revdex.com Case Number: XXXXXXXX
Complainant...
Name: [redacted]
Insured Name: [redacted]
Policy Number: PAGAXXXXXXX
Insurance Company: Esurance Property and Casualty Insurance Company
Dear Ms. [redacted]
Please accept this letter as confirmation that Esurance Insurance Services, Inc. (Esurance) on behalf of Esurance Property and Casualty Insurance Company is in receipt of the above referenced complaint.
Esurance records indicate that this policy was purchased on November 22, 2015, via online application, to be effective on November 23, 2015. At the time of purchase, Ms. [redacted] agreed to the terms and conditions of the policy, which declares that the statements contained in the Application are true and agree to pay any applicable surcharges or recomputed premium resulting from inaccurate statements in the Application. The terms of the policy also disclose policy fees, including, but not limited to, a Short Rate Fee equal to 10% of the unearned premium if the policy is cancelled for any reason.
Insurance carriers are afforded 60 days to review an insurance application for accuracy; this is called the underwriting period. During the underwriting period, it was discovered that Ms. [redacted] had not disclosed an at-fault accident and two speeding violations during the application process. The quote originally provided to Ms. [redacted] was based on the information provided in the application. When Ms. [redacted]'s driving record was updated to reflect the discovered activity, the premium did change accordingly. An amended policy declaration and payment schedule were issued on November 24, 2015.
On December 14, 2015, Ms. [redacted] contacted Esurance to request that the policy be cancelled. As a courtesy, Esurance waived the short rate fee and cancelled the policy per the insured's request, effective on this same date. A refund of all unearned premium was issued the following day to the bank account on file.
Thank you for allowing us the opportunity to respond to this complaint.
Sincerely,
[redacted]
Compliance Analyst
Esurance Insurance Services, Inc.
On behalf of Esurance Property and Casualty Insurance Company
Initial Consumer Rebuttal /* (2000, 7, 2015/12/22) */
(The consumer indicated he/she ACCEPTED the response from the business.)
Esurance cancelled the policy and waived the cancellation fee. I am satisfied with the response. With this, the matter is closed. Thank you for the fast response.
Initial Business Response /* (1000, 5, 2015/06/02) */
June 2, 2015
Revdex.com
Attention: [redacted] Suite [redacted]
Oakland, CA XXXXX
Via Electronic Response: www.oakland.Revdex.com.org
Re: Revdex.com Case Number: XXXXXXXX
Complainant Name: [redacted]
Insured...
Name: [redacted]
Policy Number: PACA-XXXXXXX
Insurance Company: Esurance Property and Casualty Insurance Company
Dear Ms. [redacted]
Please accept this letter as confirmation that Esurance Insurance Services, Inc. (Esurance) on behalf of Esurance Property and Casualty Insurance Company is in receipt of the above referenced complaint.
At the time of policy purchase, the insured indicated that the 2004 Volkswagen Jetta was driven less than 4,500 miles annually. Esurance issued the [redacted] Auto Supplement form with the original policy. This form stated that the Company reserves the right to charge additional premium if the mileage is greater than what the insured indicated on the application. Esurance listed several options to verify the annual mileage.
Esurance received documentation of annual mileage; however, the documents that the insured provided indicated that the vehicle was driven 9,496 miles annually. The mileage was updated and the new term premium was $476.18.
Esurance attempted to debit the account on file for the additional premium; however, the payment was declined. The policy cancelled due to nonpayment of premium on January 14, 2015.
The outstanding balance due in the amount of $50.51 is for earned premium and the cancellation fee. At the time of policy purchase, the insured accepted the terms and conditions in which the insured agreed that he would be charged a $50.00 cancellation fee if the policy cancelled for any reason.
Supporting documents are available upon request.
Thank you for the opportunity to respond to this complaint.
Sincerely,
[redacted]
Senior Compliance Analyst
Esurance Insurance Services, Inc.
On behalf of Esurance Property and Casualty Insurance Company
Initial Consumer Rebuttal /* (3000, 12, 2015/08/17) */
Thank you for working on this and the response. There was never evidence given that it was driven 9,496 miles annually. The data that was given showed the car is driven four times a week only from residence to [redacted] Bart station, a round trip of 12 miles a day. That 4 times a week, times four weeks a month, times 12 months total 2304 annually.
That was the only documentation provided and on top of that Esurance was invited to do independent odometer readings, which it never did or even responded to.
Esurance was given this information and further written correspondence that if Esurance had a dispute, it needed to cancel the account, not charge more. The company never canceled the account or attempted to rectify the matter, instead going straight to added rate that was never agreed upon.
The same documentation has been provided to my current insurer and it has been verified and not an issue.
Again I expect this to be corrected and taken out of collections ASAP. It is a false and illegal claim and a clear breach of the agreed upon contract.
This is not how a professionally company should be operating and it should assure customers that it does not practice bait and switch contracts, which this clearly is.
Thank you for your attention and your response.
[redacted]
Final Consumer Response /* (3000, 32, 2015/12/14) */
The policy was never canceled. It wasn't renewed. IT was paid 6 months in advance per your policy on 08/04. Payment from my credit card statement below, which I am happy to provide the original copy:
Card Purchase 08/02 Esurance Car Insurance XXX-XXX-XXXX CA Card XXXX- XXX.92
The policy expired in January 2015, so how could you cancel a policy that had already ended? Again you are charging a cancellation fee for a policy that was not renewed. I owed you money for 6 months, that was paid in full per your request at the start of the 6 months.
If a response and correction is not given promptly my next option will be to file a civil claim per the terms of our contract since mediation failed.
Final Business Response /* (4000, 34, 2015/12/28) */
December 28, 2015
Revdex.com
Attention: [redacted] Suite [redacted] CA XXXXX
Via Electronic Response: www.oakland.Revdex.com.org
Re: Revdex.com Case Number: XXXXXXXX
Complainant Name: [redacted]
Insured Name: [redacted]
Policy Number: PACA-XXXXXXX
Insurance Company: Esurance Property and Casualty Insurance Company
Dear Ms. Griffith:
Please accept this letter as confirmation that Esurance Insurance Services, Inc. (Esurance) on behalf of Esurance Property and Casualty Insurance Company is in receipt of the above referenced complaint.
Esurance records indicate that the policy cancelled effective January 14, 2015, due to nonpayment of premium. The cancellation fee was charged as the policy cancelled prior to the end of the policy term.
Thank you for the opportunity to respond to this complaint.
Sincerely,
[redacted]
Senior Compliance Analyst
Esurance Insurance Services, Inc.
On behalf of Esurance Property and Casualty Insurance Company
Initial Business Response /* (1000, 8, 2015/06/01) */
June 1, 2015
Revdex.com
Attention: [redacted] Suite [redacted]
Oakland, CA XXXXX
Via Electronic Response: www.oakland.Revdex.com.org
Re: Revdex.com Case Number: XXXXXXXX
Complainant Name: [redacted]
Insured...
Name: [redacted]
Policy Number: PANV-XXXXXXX
Claim Number: ATL-XXXXXXX
Date of Loss: 02/06/2014
Insurance Company: Esurance Property and Casualty Insurance Company
Dear Ms. [redacted]
Please accept this letter as confirmation that Esurance Insurance Services, Inc. (Esurance) on behalf of Esurance Property and Casualty Insurance Company is in receipt of the above referenced complaint.
A claim was reported to Esurance on May 3, 2014, involving the complainant's [redacted]. Per the statement taken from Ms. [redacted], the vehicle was being towed when it came loose from the dolly. This incident occurred on February 6, 2014, (approximately 3 months before the loss was reported to Esurance). The vehicle dropped to the ground causing damages. An inspection of the vehicle revealed cosmetic damages to the front bumper. Ms. [redacted] advised she was not concerned about the damages to the bumper and was concerned about the mechanical damages to the vehicle. However, no damages were found to the gas gauge or the transmission that were related to the impact. A mechanical inspection was completed by Centro and verified the same findings. The damages to the transmission and gas gauge were mechanical in nature and not covered under the personal auto policy.
A payment was issued to Ms. [redacted] on November 16, 2014, for $99.84 to reimburse her for the diagnostic charges. The payment has not cleared our bank. Therefore, Esurance will stop pay that check and re-issue it to Ms. [redacted]. Based on complaint, Ms. [redacted] does want Esurance to present the claim for the cosmetic damages to her bumper. The bumper damages totaled $1.091.57. A payment for the damages less the $1,000.00 collision deductible will be processed for $91.57.
Thank you for allowing Esurance the opportunity to respond to this inquiry. .
Sincerely,
[redacted]
Claims Manager
Esurance Insurance Services, Inc.
On behalf of Esurance Property and Casualty Insurance Company
Initial Consumer Rebuttal /* (3000, 10, 2015/06/10) */
(The consumer indicated he/she DID NOT accept the response from the business.)
As stated before, and based on supporting documentation, up to and including the denial letter from UHaul, the incident was reported to both Esurance and Uhaul when it occurred initially. ESURANCE told me to pursue the claim with Uhaul FIRST and contact if/when denial letter was received, which I did, at their behest.
PLEASE NOTE I was advised by Esurance during my initial call on 2/6/2014, witnessed by Victor Garcia, who was present during accident, and through mobile records which detail the call to Esurance, that NO (Esurance) claim could be opened until a (Uhaul) claim was pursued, and a subsequent denial of claim from Uhaul received.
This begs the question if this is a usual ploy of Esurances' to regularly deny claims as the many on line reviews seem to support. This appears to be a standard operating procedure for the company. I am including the link for the top 472 - most of which discuss Esurances' denial of legitimate claims and shoddy business practices in rate raising without provocation or reason after (Esurance) is forced to pay for a legitimate claim.
: http://www.consumeraffairs.com/insurance/esurance.html?page=3
Additionally: http://car-insurance.credio.com/l/13/Esurance
Esurance has an obvious history of inadequate record keeping, response, and accuracy as can be seen in supporting documents provided to them directly in an attempt to resolve this matter. I will mail such in its entirety as additional supporting documentation to the Revdex.com.
The mechanical inspection by Centro was once again full of conflict (from their own person), and inaccurate according to the certified mechanics documentation and pictures which show physical damage to the undercarriage of the vehicle, bumper, and heavy duty tow hitch. All of which undeniably supports the claim of interior mechanical damage as well.
Payment was finally issued and received for diagnostic charges and bumper within the last 14 days. Please note it was issued from the individual/representative that I have Esurance saying no longer worked for them (through a recorded call that I can provide). I feel this continues to support their inept, corrupt, and negligent business practices.
Ms. [redacted] I will mail you the supporting papers to better allow the Revdex.com to see the above statements from Esurance are false.
Final Business Response /* (4000, 12, 2015/06/23) */
June 23, 2015
Revdex.com
Attention: Deborah [redacted]
1000 Broadway, Suite 625
Oakland, CA XXXXX
Via Electronic Response: www.oakland.Revdex.com.org
Re: Revdex.com Case Number: XXXXXXXX
Complainant Name: [redacted]
Insured Name: [redacted]
Policy Number: PANV-XXXXXXX
Claim Number: ATL-XXXXXXX
Date of Loss: 02/06/2014
Insurance Company: Esurance Property and Casualty Insurance Company
Dear Ms. [redacted]:
Please accept this letter as confirmation that Esurance Insurance Services, Inc. (Esurance) on behalf of Esurance Property and Casualty Insurance Company is in receipt of the additional correspondence regarding the above referenced claim.
Ms. [redacted] has been paid for the damages to the vehicle that were deemed related to the vehicle falling off the dolly. She has also been reimbursed for the diagnostic charges when the vehicle was taken to a local Hyundai dealership for a mechanical inspection.
Esurance had the vehicle inspected by Davis Claims (an independent appraisal source), Centro (a mechanical inspection company), and Hendricks Hyundai (local Hyundai dealership). At this time, Esurance can't relate the damages to the transmission or gas gauge as related to the vehicle falling off the dolly.
Esurance investigates all claims based on the individual facts and circumstances. All claims resolutions are based on the facts gathered throughout the investigation.
If Ms. [redacted] would like to present additional information to support the damages to the transmission and the gas gauge are related to falling off the dolly, we will gladly review it for consideration.
Thank you for allowing Esurance the opportunity to respond to this additional correspondence.
Sincerely,
[redacted]
Claims Manager
Esurance Insurance Services, Inc.
On behalf of Esurance Property and Casualty Insurance Company
Final Consumer Response /* (4200, 14, 2015/06/24) */
(The consumer indicated he/she DID NOT accept the response from the business.)
Esurance is simply restating their initial decision; not providing additional proof of WHY they state transmission and gas gauge was not related to accident even though there were no recalls (Hyundai), this would not be under normal wear and tear (by Esurances own admission), based on limited miles and the exceptional condition vehicle was kept in, and according to the Exxon (certified) mechanics report. I have provided evidence showing the claim was reported immediately and Esurance was negligent in delaying actually opening a claim, which a certified mechanic in an independent facility stated damage was caused to vehicle transmission and gas gauge. The Cento mechanic (contracted to Esurance and whose report contradicted itself and the claim) verified damage however said he felt it was unrelated b/c it was not reported until 7 month later - I refuted this FACTUALLY. Also if Davis claims shows there was over $1100 in cosmetic damage how can Esurance claim zero internal damage. One does not rationally support the other. Hyundai verified/reported damage to transmission and the gas gauge however they do not make recommendations as to cause in these (auto) claims. Hyundai did however reiterate that there are no recalls on vehicle and this is not normal wear and tear. Esurance does not even appear to be reading/responding to the claim in anything other than a generic manner. Based on the inaccuracies and contradictions in Esurances own report that have been pointed out for you numerous times I would formally request a full acceptance of claim and payment.
Re: Case Number: [redacted]
Complainant Name: [redacted]
Insured Name: [redacted]
Policy Number: [redacted]
Company: Esurance Property and Casualty Insurance Company
NAIC Number: [redacted]
To Whom It May Concern:
Esurance Insurance Services, Inc. (“Esurance”), on behalf of Esurance Property and Casualty Insurance Company, is in receipt of the follow-up consumer inquiry submitted by [redacted] regarding the above referenced private passenger automobile policy.
After further review the percentage of premium increase calculation on the Notice is based on the surcharge for the at-fault accident, dated August 18, 2017, and the removal of Claim-Free Discount and the removal of the Online Shopper Discount. In accordance with Esurance’s filed rate and rules in the [redacted], the rated term premium is valid.
The premium for [redacted]’s policy has increased because of the driving record or claims experience of the listed driver(s), [redacted] under this policy. Esurance has offered not to charge [redacted] the increase in premium if the he agrees to exclude coverage under the policy for the individual(s) whose driving record or claims experience justified the increase in premium.
Esurance apologizes for any miscommunication that the insured may have received as we strive to provide excellent customer service.
Thank you for allowing Esurance the opportunity to address your inquiry.
Sincerely,
[redacted]
Compliance Analyst
Esurance Insurance Services, Inc.
On behalf of Esurance Property and Casualty Insurance Company
Re: Revdex.com Case Number: [redacted]
Complainant Name: [redacted]
Insured Name: [redacted] E. [redacted]
Policy Number: [redacted]
Insurance Company: Esurance Insurance Property and Casualty Company
Dear Ms. [redacted]:
Esurance Insurance Services, Inc. (Esurance), on behalf of Esurance Property and Casualty...
Insurance
Company, is in receipt of the consumer complaint submitted by [redacted] regarding the above
referenced private passenger automobile policy.
Esurance records reflect the above referenced policy was purchased effective September 30, 2015,
for a six month policy term. At the time of purchase, Ms. [redacted] authorized Esurance to debit the
method of payment on file for all future payments upon renewal or changes to his policy.
On January 30, 2016, A Renewal Offer was issued to Ms. [redacted] for an additional six month policy
term effective March 31, 2016. An email was sent to Ms. [redacted] advising her method of payment
would be debited for the policy renewal on March 1, 2016.
On March 5, 2016, Esurance received a returned electronic check from Mr. [redacted]’ financial
institution. At that time, a Cancellation notice was issued to the insured effective March 31, 2016.
Subsequently, a Notice of Reinstatement was issued to the insured.
Esurance records confirm the above referenced policy was cancelled at the insured’s request effective
March 31, 2016, and reflects a zero outstanding account balance remaining on the policy. Esurance
strives to provide exceptional customer service, and apologizes for any frustration or confusion this
may have caused Ms. [redacted].
Thank you for allowing us the opportunity to respond to this complaint.
Sincerely,
[redacted]
Compliance Analyst
Esurance Insurance Services, Inc.
On behalf of Esurance Insurance Property and Casualty Company
Initial Business Response /* (1000, 5, 2015/09/25) */
September 24, 2015
Revdex.com
Attention: [redacted]
Dispute Resolution Specialist
1000 Broadway, Suite 625
Oakland, CA XXXXX
Via Electronic Response: www.oakland.Revdex.com.org
Re: Case Number:...
XXXXXXXX
Complainant Name: [redacted]
Insured Name: [redacted]
Policy Number: HPINXXXXXXXXX
Company: Esurance Insurance Company
Dear Ms. [redacted]
Esurance Insurance Services, Inc. (Esurance), on behalf of Esurance Insurance Company, is in receipt of the consumer complaint submitted by [redacted] regarding the above referenced Homeowner's policy.
Esurance records indicate the above referenced policy was purchased on July 16, 2015, effective August 5, 2015. At the time of purchase, the selected replacement cost and dwelling coverages totaled $671,605 based upon the total gross living area of 3,990 square feet.
The policyholder provided a property appraisal which indicated 4,540 square feet of gross living area. The replacement cost was recalculated to $848,510, based upon the information provided in the home appraisal.
On September 11, 2015, the Mr. [redacted]'s policy was submitted for cancellation effective September 26, 2015, due to the residence replacement cost exceeded the company threshold.
Upon further review of the appraisal provided by the policyholder, it was determined a portion of the area included for the total gross living was duplicated at the time the replacement cost was recalculated. Esurance has recalculated the replacement cost amount of 721,770 to reflect the correct gross living area and attached features.
Esurance records confirm Mr. [redacted]'s policy has been reinstated, and the dwelling protection coverage has been corrected to $721,770. Esurance has notified Mr. [redacted] regarding the policy reinstatement, and the retroactive policy changes. An Amended Declaration has been issued to Mr. [redacted] to reflect the updated dwelling protection limit.
Thank you for allowing Esurance the opportunity to address your inquiry.
Sincerely,
[redacted]
Sr. Manager Underwriting
Esurance Insurance Services, Inc.
On behalf of Esurance Insurance Company
Initial Business Response /* (1000, 5, 2015/09/15) */
September 15, 2015
Revdex.com
Attention: [redacted]
1000 Broadway, Suite 625
Oakland, CA XXXXX
Via Electronic Response: www.oakland.Revdex.com.org
Re: Revdex.com Case Number: XXXXXXXX
Complainant Name: [redacted]...
[redacted]
Insured Name: [redacted]
Policy Number: PAMAXXXXXXX
Insurance Company: Esurance Insurance Company
Dear Ms. [redacted]
Please accept this letter as confirmation that Esurance Insurance Services, Inc. (Esurance) on behalf of Esurance Insurance Company is in receipt of the above referenced complaint.
Esurance records indicate that this policy was purchased on January 19, 2015, to be effective on this same date. At the time of purchase, Ms. [redacted] opted to take advantage of the Esurance DriveSenseTM Discount Program, in which a discount will be given to customers that volunteer to install Esurance Driving Devices into all device-compatible vehicles listed on their policy. Ms. [redacted] also accepted the terms and conditions of the policy, which discloses that a Driving Device Restocking Fee of $100.00 may be charged for each device when the device is not returned following policy cancellation or opting out of the DriveSenseTM Discount Program.
On July 7, 2015, Ms. [redacted] requested that her policy not be renewed and the policy expired effective July 19, 2015. When the DriveSenseTM Device Restocking Fee was collected on August 25, 2015, the policy was reinstated effective August 26, 2015.
Esurance strives to provide excellent [redacted] and regrets that Ms. [redacted]'s experience was not satisfactory. Esurance has re-cancelled the policy effective July 19, 2015, per the insured's request, and as a concession, has waived the restocking fee. Esurance sincerely apologizes for any inconvenience this may have caused.
Thank you for allowing Esurance the opportunity to respond to this inquiry.
Sincerely,
[redacted]
Compliance Analyst
Esurance Insurance Services, Inc.
On behalf of Esurance Insurance Company
Please accept this letter as confirmation that Esurance Insurance Services, Inc. (Esurance) on behalf of Esurance Property and Casualty Insurance Company is in receipt of the above referenced complaint.
Esurance records indicate that this policy was purchased online on February 12, 2016, to...
be effective February 13, 2016. At the time of purchase, Ms. [redacted] accepted to the terms and conditions of the policy, which discloses that a Short Rate Fee equal to 10% of the unearned premium may be charged if the Policy is cancelled for any reason. This Short Rate Fee is in addition to any earned premium for the coverage provided and may be deducted from any refund due to the policyholder.
Also at the time of purchase, Ms. [redacted] opted to pay the term premium in monthly installments to be paid on the 13th of each month. Ms. [redacted] authorized Esurance to charge the method of payment provided for the down payment, as well as all future payments.
On March 8, 2016, Esurance issued a scheduled payment notification as a reminder that the next installment would be due on March 13, 2016. Esurance attempted to collect the scheduled payment on the due date, but was unsuccessful. Therefore, Esurance issued a Notice of Cancellation for non-payment of premium effective March 28, 2016.
On March 24, 2016, Ms. [redacted] requested via email that the policy be cancelled. Esurance cancelled the policy per the insured’s request effective on this same date and replied via email, confirming that the policy was cancelled, as well as reminding Ms. [redacted] of the Short Rate cancellation fee. Esurance then issued a final payment notification on this same date to advise that the outstanding premium balance of $188.25 was due on April 3, 2016.
On April 3, 2016, the final payment was successfully charged to the method of payment provided by Ms. [redacted]. Esurance has no record of Ms. [redacted] requesting payment arrangements for the outstanding balance or revoking payment authorization prior to the due date. Esurance empathizes with your financial position, but is unable to offer a refund as this premium was collected according to the agreements made between Ms. [redacted] and Esurance.
Thank you for allowing us the opportunity to respond to this complaint.
Number: [redacted]
Complainant Name: [redacted] Goodrich
Insured Name: [redacted] Goodrich
Claim Number: [redacted]
Policy Number: [redacted]
Date of Loss: 2/2/2018
Company: Esurance Insurance Company
NAIC Number: [redacted]
To Whom It May Concern:
Please accept this letter as confirmation that Esurance Insurance Services, Inc. (“Esurance”), on behalf of Esurance Insurance Company, is in receipt of the complaint submitted by [redacted] Goodrich regarding the above referenced claim for a private passenger automobile policy.
On February 10, 2018, Esurance received notification of this loss, when the insured reported that she ran over a broken tire in the middle of the road. This was documented as colliding with a broken tire in the road which falls under the collision coverage and the insured’s deductible will apply in accordance with her automobile policy at the time of loss.
After further review and discussing the loss in detail with the insured, we have agreed to change this to a not at-fault accident. The insured advised us that she is not pursuing the claim at this time, therefore; Esurance considers this matter resolved.
Thank you for allowing Esurance the opportunity to address your inquiry.
Sincerely,
Margaret [redacted]
Rapid Response Manager
Esurance Insurance Services, Inc.
On behalf of Esurance Insurance Company
Esurance Insurance Services, Inc. (“Esurance”), on behalf of Esurance Property and Casualty Insurance Company, is in receipt of the consumer correspondence submitted by [redacted] regarding the above referenced private passenger automobile policy.
Esurance records indicate the above referenced policy was purchased on September 26, 2016, with an effective date of October 1, 2016, for the full term premium of $1,351.50. The policy provided coverage for three vehicles a 2005 Mini Cooper S, 2004 Mazda Speed Miata, and a 2009 Mazda MazdaA31, and two operators, [redacted]
On March 31, 2017, [redacted] contacted Esurance to make several policy adjustments. During that call the insured was advised of the revised premium due as a result of the policy adjustments. Esurance records indicated a premium increased and the amount of $709.82 was owed due to the recent policy changes.
On April 3, 2017, [redacted] contacted Esurance to inquiry into his billing invoice, as a result of the recent policy adjustments. At that time Esurance completed a billing audit.
After further review Esurance records indicate the billing issue had been resolved and an adjustment was completed for the amount of $709.82 that is currently showing due, bringing the insured's balance to $0.00. The adjustment should be completed within 48 hours.
On April 6, 2017, Esurance contacted[redacted] via email to advise him the recent update and the policy adjustment that is in process.
Esurance strives to provide an excellent customer experience and apologizes for any inconvenience this billing matter may have caused.
Thank you for allowing Esurance the opportunity to address your inquiry. If you have any questions or need additional information regarding this file, please direct all correspondence to[redacted], or via email to [redacted]
Sincerely,
[redacted]
Compliance Analyst
Esurance Insurance Services, Inc.
On behalf of Esurance Property and Casualty Insurance Company
Initial Business Response /* (1000, 5, 2016/01/14) */
January 14, 2016
Revdex.com
Attention: [redacted]
Dispute Resolution Specialist
1000 Broadway, Suite 625
Oakland, CA XXXXX
Via Electronic Response: goldengate.app.Revdex.com.org
Re: Revdex.com Case...
Number: XXXXXXXX
Complainant Name: [redacted]
Insured Name: [redacted]
Policy Number: PAFLXXXXXXX
Insurance Company: Esurance Insurance Property and Casualty Company
Dear Ms. Griffith:
Please accept this letter as confirmation that Esurance Insurance Services, Inc. (Esurance) on behalf of Esurance Insurance Property and Casualty Company is in receipt of the above referenced complaint regarding the premium increase of a quote obtained online.
Esurance utilizes several reports in order to properly underwrite policies, including, but not limited to, the Motor Vehicle Report (MVR), Comprehensive Loss and Underwriting Exchange (CLUE), as well as credit reports. These reports are necessary to obtain an accurate quote.
Esurance records indicate that this existing policyholder applied for a new policy online on January 3, 2016. Once the credit information was obtained, the premium did increase. A review of the quote indicates that the credit information was intermittently not reflected in the quoted premium during the application process due to system issues. Esurance has evaluated the quote manually and confirmed that the correct term premium would be $1,056.64 based on the information provided. Esurance strives to provide excellent [redacted] and rating consistency and apologizes to Mr. [redacted] for any confusion or inconvenience this has caused.
Esurance has also reviewed Mr. [redacted]'s existing policy. The policy term premium did increase at renewal from $733.90 to $809.90 due to a statewide rate change that affected all policyholders renewing on or after July 10, 2015.
Esurance empathizes with policyholders that have been impacted by the recent premium change. Esurance does evaluate premiums and loss experience periodically and, at times, must make the difficult decision to increase rates to offset costs.
Thank you for allowing us the opportunity to respond to this complaint.
Sincerely,
[redacted]
Compliance Analyst
Esurance Insurance Services, Inc.
On behalf of Esurance Insurance Property and Casualty Company
Please accept this letter as confirmation that Esurance Insurance Services, Inc. (Esurance) on behalf of Esurance Property and Casualty Insurance Company is in receipt of the consumer review regarding a premium increase due to a claim made on a personal automobile...
policy.
The loss occurred on January 14, 2016. It was reported that[redacted] flip flops became entangled with his gas pedal, impeding his ability to brake as he was backing. As a result, [redacted] backed in to a vehicle parked on the opposite side of the street. The vehicle was parked and unoccupied.[redacted] knocked on the neighbor’s door and no one answered so he left a note on the damaged vehicle and left the scene.
At the time of the accident report and in a subsequent conversation with [redacted] there was no mention of the other vehicle being illegally parked. Had that been the case, it would likely have had no impact on the liability decision unless the illegally parked vehicle was blocking road access or ingress/egress, which it was not.
The damage to[redacted] vehicle was to the right rear.[redacted] was driving a 2008 Ford Explorer, which is a higher profile vehicle than the parked 2006 Chevrolet Colorado. The damage to the Colorado was also to the right rear but more to the side panel of the bed to the rear and higher due to the varying heights of the vehicles[redacted] damages totaled $861.60, while the claimant’s repairs came to $3,576.13, with supplements for hidden damage.
[redacted] was determined to be at-fault for this accident and his driving record was update accordingly. The policy renewal premium was affected by this at-fault accident and Esurance issued a renewal offer on March 23, 2016, to be effective May 12, 2016. [redacted] declined the renewal offer and the policy was cancelled effective May 12, 2016, per the insured’s request.
Recently, [redacted] submitted photographs of the claimant vehicle, expressing concern about the damages paid. Those photographs and estimate were reviewed by a material damage expert, who wrote an email response to [redacted] on May 10, 2017, confirming receipt of the photos and providing an explanation of the damages seen. Esurance confirms that the submitted photos are similar to the photos already on file and that the repair estimates were in line with the damage visible in the submitted photos.
Esurance further confirms that this policy has been cancelled since May 12, 2016, and that the policy was rated correctly while active. Thank you for the opportunity to respond to this complaint.
Sincerely,
[redacted]
Compliance Consultant
Esurance Insurance Services, Inc.On behalf of Esurance Property and Casualty Insurance Company
Revdex.com:I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID[redacted], and find that this resolution is satisfactory to me.
For record, the claim is still open for the loss in question.
Sincerely, Derrek [redacted]
Please accept this letter as confirmation that Esurance Insurance Services, Inc. (Esurance), on behalf of Esurance Property and Casualty Insurance Company, is in receipt of the consumer complaint submitted by [redacted] regarding the above referenced Personal Homeowners Policy.
The above referenced policy was purchased on February 23, 2018, to be effective March 5, 2018, for a one-year policy term. During the underwriting review period, the replacement cost estimator tool was updated to reflect the age of the home, resulting in an adjustment to the full term premium. Esurance has reviewed [redacted] policy, and as a courtesy, agreed to waive the premium increase for his current term.
Please note, the update to the replacement cost will take effect upon renewal of [redacted] policy, and premium adjusted accordingly. Esurance strives to provide exceptional customer service, and apologizes this was not the case for Mr. [redacted].
Thank you for allowing Esurance the opportunity to respond to this inquiry.
Initial Business Response /* (1000, 5, 2015/09/29) */
September 29, 2015
Revdex.com
Attention: [redacted]
1000 Broadway, Suite 625
Oakland, CA XXXXX
Via Electronic Response: www.oakland.Revdex.com.org
Re: Revdex.com Case Number: XXXXXXXX
Complainant Name: [redacted]
Insured...
Name: [redacted]
Policy Number: PANJXXXXXXX
Insurance Company: Esurance Insurance Company of New Jersey
Dear Ms. [redacted]:
Please accept this letter as confirmation that Esurance Insurance Services, Inc. (Esurance) on behalf of Esurance Insurance Company of New Jersey is in receipt of the above referenced complaint.
Esurance records indicate that this policy was purchased on May 10, 2012, to be effective on this same date. This policy most recently, automatically renewed effective May 15, 2015, upon receipt of payment on April 15, 2015, for the Renewal Offer provided on March 15, 2015. A claim was reported on May 14, 2015, by an additional insured, [redacted], but Esurance has no other record of contact with the insured or a request to cancel the policy since that date.
On September 16, 2015, Ms. [redacted] contacted Esurance to advise that the policy should be cancelled. Again, Esurance had no record of a cancellation request, therefore, in order to backdate the cancellation effective date, Esurance requested proof of other insurance.
Ms. [redacted] provided a copy of her current policy with Allstate on September 17, 2015. Due to Personal Injury Protection (PIP) coverage differences, Esurance was unable to backdate the cancellation of the entire policy, but offered to compensate Ms. [redacted] for all coverage, except PIP. Esurance attempted to explain that PIP coverage has been provided, therefore, the premium has been earned.
By September 22, 2015, Esurance had received a signed Cancellation Request/Policy Release. By receipt of this document, which releases Esurance of any coverage liability effective May 15, 2015, going forward, Esurance was able to cancel the policy effective that date.
Thank you for allowing Esurance the opportunity to respond to this inquiry.
Sincerely,
[redacted]
Compliance Analyst
Esurance Insurance Services, Inc.
On behalf of Esurance Insurance Company
Initial Consumer Rebuttal /* (3000, 7, 2015/09/30) */
(The consumer indicated he/she DID NOT accept the response from the business.)
No, because I do not feel that what they have stated is completely true. But Esurance has resolved this case on 9/23/15 and refunded the premium for the full amount and back dated the cancellation to 5/15/15. I would like for Revdex.com to close this case. Thank you for all your help.
Final Business Response /* (4000, 9, 2015/10/05) */
October 5, 2015
Revdex.com
Attention: [redacted]
1000 Broadway, Suite 625
Oakland, CA XXXXX
Via Electronic Response: www.oakland.Revdex.com.org
Re: Revdex.com Case Number: XXXXXXXX
Complainant Name: [redacted]
Insured Name: [redacted]
Policy Number: PANJXXXXXXX
Insurance Company: Esurance Insurance Company of New Jersey
Dear Ms. [redacted]:
Please accept this letter as confirmation that Esurance Insurance Services, Inc. (Esurance) on behalf of Esurance Insurance Company of New Jersey is in receipt of the request to close the above referenced complaint, but that Ms. [redacted] does not believe that the truth was stated in the previous complaint response.
As previously advised, Esurance records indicate that this policy was purchased on May 10, 2012, to be effective on this same date. Esurance policies automatically renew as long as the premium is paid. This policy automatically renewed effective May 15, 2015, upon receipt of payment on April 15, 2015, for the Renewal Offer provided on March 15, 2015. A claim was reported on May 14, 2015, by an additional insured, [redacted], but Esurance has no other record of contact with the insured or a request to cancel the policy since that date.
On September 16, 2015, Ms. [redacted] contacted Esurance to advise that the policy should be cancelled. Again, Esurance has no record of a cancellation request prior to this date, therefore, in order to backdate the cancellation effective date, Esurance requested proof of other insurance.
Ms. [redacted] provided a copy of her current policy with Allstate on September 17, 2015. Due to Personal Injury Protection (PIP) coverage differences, Esurance was unable to backdate the cancellation of the entire policy, but offered to compensate Ms. [redacted] for all coverage costs, except PIP. Esurance attempted to explain that PIP coverage has been provided, therefore, the premium had been earned. If a PIP loss had occurred between May 15, 2015, and September 17, 2015, Esurance would have been obligated to pay that claim as the policy contract was still in effect during that time period.
By September 22, 2015, Esurance had received a signed Cancellation Request/Policy Release. This signed document released Esurance of any coverage liability effective May 15, 2015, going forward. Since Esurance no longer had an obligation to pay any PIP claims, Esurance was able to backdate cancellation of the policy effective May 15, 2015.
Esurance apologizes for any inconvenience and is relieved to hear that Ms. [redacted]'s case has been resolved. Thank you for allowing Esurance the opportunity to respond to this inquiry.
Sincerely,
[redacted]
Compliance Analyst
Esurance Insurance Services, Inc.
On behalf of Esurance Insurance Company
Initial Business Response /* (1000, 5, 2015/06/15) */
June 15, 2015
Revdex.com
Attention: Dispute Resolution Department
[redacted] Broadway, Suite 625
Oakland, CA XXXXX
Via Electronic Response: www.oakland.Revdex.com.org
Re: Case Number: XXXXXXXX
Complainant Name: [redacted]...
[redacted]
Insured Name: [redacted]
Policy Number: PACO-XXXXXXX
Claim Number: DEN-XXXXX
Date of Loss: 05/26/2015
Company: Esurance Property and Casualty Insurance Company
NAIC: XXXXX
Dear Ms. [redacted]
Esurance Insurance Services, Inc. (Esurance) on behalf of Esurance Property and Casualty Insurance Company is in receipt of the consumer correspondence submitted by [redacted] regarding the above referenced claim for a private passenger [redacted] policy.
In her complaint, Ms. [redacted] is disputing the liability determination of her sons claim resulting from the loss dated, May 26, 2015.
On May 29, 2015, this loss was reported to Esurance by the claimant, Adam [redacted]. This loss was reported that our insured, [redacted] was travelling eastbound on 27th Street and Adam [redacted] was travelling northbound on U.S. 59. The accident occurred in this intersection. Esurance conducted a thorough investigation by obtaining recorded statements from each of the drivers, obtaining the police report to review for potential witnesses and reviewing scene photos. Based on the statements of each party Esurance determined that Mr. Lukowiak, the insured was 80% liable based the fact that he entered the intersection on a flashing red light. The insured had stopped at the flashing red light and then crossed over two southbound lanes when struck in the left most northbound lane by the claimant. We determined that the claimant was twenty percent liable for not maintaining a proper lookout, not driving defensively and not taking the proper evasive action to avoid this loss.
Kansas is a Modified Comparative Negligence state. The claimant's damages were appropriately reduced by the applicable liability we assessed on this claim.
Thank you for allowing Esurance the opportunity to address your inquiry. If you have any questions or need additional information regarding this file, please direct all correspondence to Kimberly Sims, Compliance Analyst, P.O. Box 2890, Rocklin, CA, XXXXX, or via email to [redacted]@esurance.com
Sincerely,
[redacted]
Denver Claims Unit Manager
Esurance Insurance Services, Inc.
On behalf of Esurance Property and Casualty Insurance Company
Initial Consumer Rebuttal /* (3000, 7, 2015/06/17) */
(The consumer indicated he/she DID NOT accept the response from the business.)
State Farm has determined [redacted] was 100% at fault. [redacted] tried to stop but [redacted] sped up to tried to beat him. [redacted]'s car struck Adams first as it was hit from the side.
[redacted] should have practiced defensive driving also instead of trying to speed in front of a car headed into the in section and waited until the intersection was clear and safe to pass. This is the law of a flashing red light.
[redacted] also changed his story from what he told the police officer and what he told the insurance company.
He said there was a car stopped at the yellow light for 10 minutes and he gave up and went through the intersection.
This was not
Final Business Response /* (4000, 10, 2015/07/02) */
July 2, 2015
Revdex.com
Attention: Dispute Resolution Department
[redacted] Suite [redacted]
Oakland, CA XXXXX
Via Electronic Response: www.oakland.Revdex.com.org
Re: Case Number: XXXXXXXX
Complainant Name: [redacted]
Insured Name: [redacted]
Policy Number: PACO-XXXXXXX
Claim Number: DEN-XXXXX
Date of Loss: 05/26/2015
Company: Esurance Property and Casualty Insurance Company
NAIC: XXXXX
Dear Ms. [redacted]
Esurance Insurance Services, Inc. (Esurance) on behalf of Esurance Property and Casualty Insurance Company is in receipt of the consumer follow-up correspondence submitted by [redacted] regarding the above referenced claim for a private passenger [redacted] policy.
In her complaint, Ms. [redacted] is disputing the liability determination of her sons claim resulting from the loss dated, May 26, 2015.
Esurance has reviewed our position in regards to Ms. [redacted]'s disagreement with our liability determination. Taking into account all the available evidence Esurance reiterates its original position where we found the insured, [redacted] 80% liable for this loss.
On June 11, 2015, Ms. [redacted] contacted, Jason Giles, Denver's Claim's Branch Manager where she advised him that she will be pursue her vehicle's damages through her own insurance carrier, State Farm Insurance. This dispute will be resolved via inter-company arbitration where the evidence is heard by an independent arbitrator. The decision that is rendered is binding on each company. Ms. [redacted]'s insurance company will advise her of the final outcome of this hearing.
Thank you for allowing Esurance the opportunity to address your inquiry. If you have any questions or need additional information regarding this file, please direct all correspondence to Kimberly Sims, Compliance Analyst, P.O. Box 2890, Rocklin, CA, XXXXX, or via email to [redacted]@esurance.com
Sincerely,
[redacted]
Denver Claims Unit Manager
Esurance Insurance Services, Inc.
On behalf of Esurance Property and Casualty Insurance Company
Final Consumer Response /* (4200, 12, 2015/07/08) */
(The consumer indicated he/she DID NOT accept the response from the business.)
Only in America can someone run a flashing red light, cause a serious accident, receive a traffic citation and then the other person is blamed. May the best attorney win!
Complaint: [redacted]I am rejecting this response because:
While the response contains the corrects dates and pieces of information, it certainly misses both the details and alleged wrongdoing. When I first received notice of expiration I call to verify all the details regarding the mortgage payee. At that time, I was assured that everything was corrected and no further action was required on my behalf. Thus, I found it to be quite surprising when the policy was allowed to expire. Furthermore, esurance did not correctly address the mortgage payee in the insurance clause, causing delays in their ability to process the payment. Lastly, I was not included in these communications and had no idea that these issues were happening as I was in fact assured that everything would be taken care of.
Upon policy expiration, I lost access to all policy documents and correspondence, making it impossible to review previous communications and documents as well. My concerns surround around the lack of communication, complete lack of ownership and accountability regarding their errors in this process, and the lack of transparency. These issues were not addressed in the response.
Sincerely,[redacted]
Initial Business Response /* (1000, 5, 2015/08/31) */
August 31, 2015
Revdex.com
Attention: [redacted] Dispute Resolutions
Dispute Resolution Specialist
1000 Broadway, Suite 625
Oakland, CA XXXXX
Via Electronic Response: www.oakland.Revdex.com.org
Re: Case...
Number: XXXXXXXX
Complainant Name: [redacted]
Insured Name: [redacted] Policy Number: PAMO-XXXXXXX
Company: Esurance Property and Casualty Insurance Company
Dear Ms. [redacted]:
Esurance Insurance Services, Inc. (Esurance) on behalf of Esurance Property and Casualty Insurance Company is in receipt of the consumer correspondence submitted by [redacted] regarding the above referenced private passenger [redacted] policy.
In her complaint, Ms. [redacted] is demanding that Esurance refund the difference of premiums for adding an additional driver.
Esurance records indicate the above referenced policy was purchased on May 14, 2014, with an effective date of May 15, 2014, with a six-month policy term for the full term premium of $559.00. The policy provided coverage for two vehicles, a 2012 Chevrolet Sonic LS and a 1994 Dodge Ram 1500 and Ms. [redacted] as a single operator.
On October 28, 2014, Esurance discovered several potential unlisted drivers that may need to be added to Ms. [redacted]'s automobile policy, unless the Underwriting Department receives the following; Proof of Other Insurance or a Driver Exclusion Form or the insured confirms the unlisted drivers only has a permit. Esurance also advised the insured to contact us once the permitted driver obtains an active license. On this same day Esurance contacted Ms. [redacted] via email to verify if the two unlisted drivers, [redacted] Thiffeault and [redacted] needed to be added to her automobile policy. The Underwriting Department informed Ms. [redacted] of the required due date to provide the requested information and informed the insured if the requested information was not received within 10 days, her premium may increase or her policy may be canceled or non-renewed.
On October 31, 2014, and again on November 5, 2014, Esurance attempted to contact Ms. [redacted] and unfortunately ultimately left a voicemail message both times.
On November 8, 2014, Esurance discovered [redacted] only had a permit, therefore; no further action was required.
On December 20, 2014, Ms. [redacted] contacted Esurance to obtain a quote with the additional driver.
On June 16, 2015, Esurance contacted Ms. [redacted] via email to inform her that it was discovered that [redacted] was the driver in a recent loss, dated February 23, 2015, but was not a listed operator. Again Esurance requested Ms. [redacted] contact Esurance to add [redacted] to her automobile policy or complete a Driver Exclusion Form within 10 days of this notice.
On June 30, 2015, Ms. [redacted] contacted Esurance via mail to request a copy of the Driver Exclusion Form. On that same day Esurance contacted Ms. [redacted] and advised her a copy of the Driver Exclusion Form would be emailed, per her request, and the form must be completed and returned by July 6, 2015, to avoid the cancellation or non-renewal or the additional driver being added to her automobile policy.
On July 7, 2015, Esurance contacted Ms. [redacted] via email to advise her that we have not received the previously requested information, therefore; that additional operator was add the insured's automobile policy. As a result; of the policy updated Ms. [redacted]'s six-month policy term premium increased from $470.00 to $1,742.00.
On August 9, 2015, Esurance received the Driver Exclusion Form.
On August 15, 2015, Ms. [redacted] contacted Esurance to inquiry about her premium increase. Esurance advised her the additional operator has been excluded, but the pro-rate increase is the amount owed for the time the additional operator was added to the policy.
On August 16, 2015, Ms. [redacted] contacted Esurance to request the cancellation of her automobile policy and during that call the representative advised her of the cancellation fee and informed her that a refund in the amount of $18.82 will be credited to the method of payment on file within 5-7 days. On that same day Esurance issued a credit notification to Ms. [redacted] advising her of the credit and to allow up to 30 days for her financial institution to credit the account.
Esurance records indicate all unearned premiums have been refunded to the insured.
Thank you for allowing Esurance the opportunity to address your inquiry. If you have any questions or need additional information regarding this file, please direct all correspondence to [redacted], Compliance Analyst, P.O. Box 2890, Rocklin, CA, XXXXX, or via email to [redacted]@esurance.com
Sincerely,
[redacted]
Compliance Analyst
Esurance Insurance Services, Inc.
On behalf of Esurance Property and Casualty Insurance Company
Initial Consumer Rebuttal /* (3000, 7, 2015/09/01) */
(The consumer indicated he/she DID NOT accept the response from the business.)
First of all I NEVER had 2 unlisted drivers in my house. I had my son [redacted] and I have no idea who this [redacted] person is. Second of all as I have informed Esurance on several different occasions when [redacted] was involved in that accident he was NOT living with me,the was NOT in my car, and I was NOT involved. That claim was made because the other person in the vehicle with [redacted] had a previous injury and thought it would be an easy pay day. I didn't even know about the accident until Esurance contacted me. I was told I would receive an exclusion form via e-mail and never did, I called twice to try and get it resolved. The first time I was told it couldn't be done by anyone but a claims adjuster when there was an active claim and then was left in hold for over 10 minutes. I got a letter telling me my premium was going up to over 500 dollars for August and September when I called I was told that they had added my son to the policy, back dated it for the whole insurance term and split the cost between the last 2 months. When I finally got him excluded they still took over $200 dollars. When I called for a refund I spoke to 5 different people and spent an hour on the phone before finally being told that even though I never got the exclusion form and it was their oversite I had to pay it anyway. This was after being left on hold for several minutes. When I cancelled my policy I was NOT told about any cancellation fee. I was only told that my refund would be 18.82. I was not given a reason for it.
Final Business Response /* (4000, 9, 2015/09/14) */
September 14, 2015
Revdex.com
Attention: [redacted], Dispute Resolutions
Dispute Resolution Specialist
1000 Broadway, Suite 625
Oakland, CA XXXXX
Via Electronic Response: www.oakland.Revdex.com.org
Re: Case Number: XXXXXXXX
Complainant Name: [redacted]
Insured Name: [redacted]
Policy Number: PAMO-XXXXXXX
Company: Esurance Property and Casualty Insurance Company
Dear Ms. [redacted]:
Esurance Insurance Services, Inc. (Esurance) on behalf of Esurance Property and Casualty Insurance Company is in receipt of the consumer follow-up correspondence submitted by [redacted] regarding the above referenced private passenger [redacted] policy.
In her complaint, Ms. [redacted] is demanding that Esurance refund the difference of premiums for adding an additional driver.
After further review, again Esurance records indicate on June 30, 2015, Ms. [redacted] contacted Esurance via mail to request a copy of the Driver Exclusion Form. On that same day Esurance contacted Ms. [redacted] and advised her a copy of the Driver Exclusion Form would be emailed, per her request, and the form must be completed and returned by July 6, 2015, to avoid the cancellation or non-renewal or the additional driver being added to her automobile policy. No further contact was received from Ms. [redacted] regarding the Driver Exclusion Form.
On July 7, 2015, Esurance contacted Ms. [redacted] via email to advise her that we have not received the previously requested information, therefore; the additional operator was added the insured's automobile policy. As a result; Ms. [redacted]'s six-month policy term premium increased from $470.00 to $1,742.00. Esurance also advised Ms. [redacted] of the following steps to mitigate the premium increase:
1.If this driver is currently insured on a separate policy, Esurance request that you to send us a copy of their current insurance declaration page.
2.If you would like to exclude this driver from your policy, Esurance request that you to complete a Driver Exclusion Form. Excluded drivers will not be covered by your policy if they're involved in an accident.
On August 9, 2015, Esurance received the Driver Exclusion Form.
On August 15, 2015, Ms. [redacted] contacted Esurance to inquiry about her premium increase. Esurance advised her the additional operator had been excluded, but the pro-rate increase is the amount owed for the time the additional operator was added to the policy.
On August 16, 2015, Ms. [redacted] contacted Esurance to request the cancellation of her automobile policy and during that call the representative advised her of the cancellation fee and informed her that a refund in the amount of $18.82 will be credited to the method of payment on file within 5-7 days. On that same day Esurance issued a credit notification to Ms. [redacted] advising her of the credit and to allow up to 30 days for her financial institution to credit the account.
Esurance records indicate all unearned premiums have been refunded to the insured.
Thank you for allowing Esurance the opportunity to address your inquiry. If you have any questions or need additional information regarding this file, please direct all correspondence to [redacted], Compliance Analyst, P.O. Box 2890, Rocklin, CA, XXXXX, or via email to [redacted]@esurance.com
Sincerely,
[redacted]
Compliance Analyst
Esurance Insurance Services, Inc.
On behalf of Esurance Property and Casualty Insurance Company
Final Consumer Response /* (4200, 11, 2015/09/17) */
(The consumer indicated he/she DID NOT accept the response from the business.)
I will explain again that the form I was supposed to receive never came. I was also told as long as I got the exclusion completed before my August payment the increase would not be applied. I waited a week or two and called back, I told Esurance I did not receive the form and after getting the run around from 4 different people I was told an adjustor had to do the exclusion because there was a pending claim. This was a claim that went on for 2 months! The claim never should have existed as it was not an accident I was involved in and my son did not live at my residence when it happened. My vehicle was also not involved. When I was transferred to the adjustor he left me on hold for 10 minutes. It took me 3 tries to get the exclusion done. There is no reason I should have been charged. Esurance dropped the ball and should foot the bill. I am not going to accept excuses.
Complaint: [redacted]I am rejecting this response because:
Again, esurance and its representatives have failed to address the actual concerns and allegations listed in the initial complaint and subsequent follow-up communications. Instead of truly listening to the issues raised, they choose to provide a shortened timeline of events that skips over many of the concerning events to try to glaze over the wrongdoings of their company and attempt to save face when they know that they are in the wrong.
Upon notification of impending expiration of the insurance, I provided the company with the correct information for the mortgage company. At that point, I was assured that everything was to be taken care of by the company. Later, I found out that esurance had incorrectly entered the mortgage payee information in their clause, which contributed to the delay in the policy renewal. Furthermore, they provided the mortgage company with a PO box for the mailing of the check, which surely would not have arrived in time for the payment due date. When I found out this information, I switched companies and called to cancel my policy. However, the policy was already canceled by esurance, so the agent stated that he would note that I had called to cancel and that the check would be refunded. However, once the check arrived, esurance reinstated my policy against my wishes and explicit discussion with the agent. My allegations are that their agents misrepresented the facts on numerous occasions, ignored and disregarded customer requests, and that key communications were not made available to the customer after the policy initially expired as the website was no longer accessible once the policy expired. Please respond to those issues with a plan to address the misrepresentation by the customer service agents and overall improvement plan for the company to adhere to stricter standards of communications.
Sincerely,[redacted]
Initial Business Response /* (1000, 5, 2015/11/18) */
November 17, 2015
Revdex.com
Attention: [redacted] Dispute Resolutions
XXX XXth Street, Suite 550
Oakland, CA XXXXX-XXXX
Via Electronic Response: www.oakland.Revdex.com.org
Case Number: XXXXXXXX
Complainant Name:...
[redacted]
Named Insured: [redacted]
Policy Number: PAMI-XXXXXXX
Insurance Company: Esurance Property and Casualty Insurance Company
Dear Ms. [redacted]
Please accept this letter as confirmation that Esurance Insurance Services, Inc. (Esurance) on behalf of Esurance Property and Casualty Insurance Company, is in receipt of the consumer complaint submitted by [redacted] regarding the above referenced personal automobile insurance policy.
In his complaint Mr. [redacted] that while incarcerated his Esurance policy renewed without his approval on July 03, 2013. Mr. [redacted] also states that he is seeking reimbursement for the premium associated with the policy term from July 03, 2013, through January 01, 2014.
At the time of policy purchase, and upon each subsequent renewal, Mr. [redacted] accepted the terms and conditions of the policy in which he agreed to transact business electronically, which included the automatic renewal of the policy.
On August 20, 2013, [redacted] contacted Esurance to cancel this policy and advised that she had power of attorney to handle Mr. [redacted] affairs. Esurance requested a copy of the Power of Attorney in order to assist her with Mr. [redacted] policy.
On August 25, 2013, Esurance reviewed the Power of Attorney documentation provided by Ms. [redacted].
On August 25, 2013, Esurance advised Ms. [redacted] that the Power of Attorney documentation was specific to banking/business needs for [redacted]'s business (Maple Lane Discount). Ms. [redacted] was advised that Esurance this was not sufficient to cancel Mr. [redacted]'s personal auto policy.
No additional contact was made with Esurance by Ms. [redacted], the next contact Esurance received was on October 28, 2015, from Mr. [redacted] requesting the policy expiration be backdated to July 03, 2013.
Esurance advised Mr. [redacted] that we would be unable to backdate the policy expiration without proof of other insurance coverage or documentation showing the vehicle was placed on non-operation with the department of motor vehicles during that time.
Thank you for allowing Esurance the opportunity to respond to the concerns. If you have any questions or require additional information, please direct all future correspondence to [redacted], Compliance Analyst, at; P.O. Box 2890, Rocklin, CA, XXXXX.
Sincerely,
[redacted]
Compliance Analyst
Esurance Insurance Services, Inc.
On Behalf of Esurance Property and Casualty Insurance Company
Initial Consumer Rebuttal /* (3000, 7, 2015/11/29) */
(The consumer indicated he/she DID NOT accept the response from the business.)
They were informed of the circumstances and my request to cancel the policy when it was first renewed. Refusing to cancel a policy based on a technicality, when it was obvious that I was the one that requested it be cancelled is dishonest. Rather than being understanding and helping one of their customers, they are taking advantage of my circumstance and basicly stealing fees for 6 months of [redacted] when no [redacted] was provided or wanted. If you will not refund my money here, I will have my attorney sue you for the amount.
Final Business Response /* (4000, 9, 2015/12/15) */
December 15, 2015
Revdex.com
Attention: [redacted], Dispute Resolutions
XXX XXth Street, Suite 550
Oakland, CA XXXXX-XXXX
Via Electronic Response: www.oakland.Revdex.com.org
Case Number: XXXXXXXX
Complainant Name: [redacted]
Named Insured: [redacted]
Policy Number: PAMI-XXXXXXX
Insurance Company: Esurance Property and Casualty Insurance Company
Dear Ms. [redacted]:
Please accept this letter as confirmation that Esurance Insurance Services, Inc. (Esurance) on behalf of Esurance Property and Casualty Insurance Company, is in receipt of the consumer rebuttal submitted by [redacted] regarding the above referenced personal automobile insurance policy.
In his rebuttal Mr. [redacted] states that Esurance was informed of his request to cancel this policy and that Esurance did not cancel the policy.
On August 20, 2013,[redacted] contacted Esurance to cancel this policy and advised that she had power of attorney to handle Mr. [redacted]'s affairs. Esurance requested a copy of the Power of Attorney in order to assist her with Mr. [redacted]'s policy.
On August 25, 2013, Esurance reviewed the Power of Attorney documentation provided by Ms. [redacted]
On August 25, 2013, Esurance advised Ms. [redacted] that the Power of Attorney documentation was specific to banking/business needs for [redacted]'s business (Maple Lane Discount). Ms. [redacted] was advised by Esurance that this was not sufficient to cancel Mr. [redacted]'s personal auto policy.
Esurance was unable to process the cancelation at that time. The Power of Attorney documentation provided to Esurance did not authorize Ms. [redacted] to transact business on Mr. [redacted]'s personal automobile insurance policy.
Esurance is unable to backdate the policy expiration without proof of other insurance coverage or documentation showing the vehicle was placed on non-operation with the department of motor vehicles.
Thank you for allowing Esurance the opportunity to respond to the concerns. If you have any questions or require additional information, please direct all future correspondence to [redacted], Compliance Analyst, at; P.O. Box 2890, Rocklin, CA, XXXXX.
Sincerely,
[redacted]
Compliance Analyst
Esurance Insurance Services, Inc.
On Behalf of Esurance Property and Casualty Insurance Company
Final Consumer Response /* (4200, 11, 2015/12/18) */
(The consumer indicated he/she DID NOT accept the response from the business.)
There was no proposed resolution offered by Esurance. They are not offering any resolve what so ever. They simply restate the same old original response to my requesting that this policy (which should have never been renewed automatically by them) be canceled. I never requested that it be renewed, so none of this should even be an issue. Progressive insurance would never have even billed me a renewal without my authorization, so I would never have needed to ask to have it canceled/refunded. Esurance asks that I provide documentation that I never used the vehicle during the period I am asking to be refunded. I can most definitely provide documentation from the State of Michigan that I did not use the vehicle from the dates of May 13, 2013 to October 20, 2015. I already emailed Esurance a copy of that document, but they choose to ignore it.
Initial Business Response /* (1000, 5, 2015/12/18) */
December 18, 2015
Revdex.com
Attention: [redacted]
Dispute Resolution Specialist
1000 Broadway, Suite 625
Oakland, CA XXXXX
Via Electronic Response: www.oakland.Revdex.com.org
Re: Revdex.com Case Number: XXXXXXXX
Complainant...
Name: [redacted]
Insured Name: [redacted]
Policy Number: PAGAXXXXXXX
Insurance Company: Esurance Property and Casualty Insurance Company
Dear Ms. [redacted]
Please accept this letter as confirmation that Esurance Insurance Services, Inc. (Esurance) on behalf of Esurance Property and Casualty Insurance Company is in receipt of the above referenced complaint.
Esurance records indicate that this policy was purchased on November 22, 2015, via online application, to be effective on November 23, 2015. At the time of purchase, Ms. [redacted] agreed to the terms and conditions of the policy, which declares that the statements contained in the Application are true and agree to pay any applicable surcharges or recomputed premium resulting from inaccurate statements in the Application. The terms of the policy also disclose policy fees, including, but not limited to, a Short Rate Fee equal to 10% of the unearned premium if the policy is cancelled for any reason.
Insurance carriers are afforded 60 days to review an insurance application for accuracy; this is called the underwriting period. During the underwriting period, it was discovered that Ms. [redacted] had not disclosed an at-fault accident and two speeding violations during the application process. The quote originally provided to Ms. [redacted] was based on the information provided in the application. When Ms. [redacted]'s driving record was updated to reflect the discovered activity, the premium did change accordingly. An amended policy declaration and payment schedule were issued on November 24, 2015.
On December 14, 2015, Ms. [redacted] contacted Esurance to request that the policy be cancelled. As a courtesy, Esurance waived the short rate fee and cancelled the policy per the insured's request, effective on this same date. A refund of all unearned premium was issued the following day to the bank account on file.
Thank you for allowing us the opportunity to respond to this complaint.
Sincerely,
[redacted]
Compliance Analyst
Esurance Insurance Services, Inc.
On behalf of Esurance Property and Casualty Insurance Company
Initial Consumer Rebuttal /* (2000, 7, 2015/12/22) */
(The consumer indicated he/she ACCEPTED the response from the business.)
Esurance cancelled the policy and waived the cancellation fee. I am satisfied with the response. With this, the matter is closed. Thank you for the fast response.
Initial Business Response /* (1000, 5, 2015/06/02) */
June 2, 2015
Revdex.com
Attention: [redacted] Suite [redacted]
Oakland, CA XXXXX
Via Electronic Response: www.oakland.Revdex.com.org
Re: Revdex.com Case Number: XXXXXXXX
Complainant Name: [redacted]
Insured...
Name: [redacted]
Policy Number: PACA-XXXXXXX
Insurance Company: Esurance Property and Casualty Insurance Company
Dear Ms. [redacted]
Please accept this letter as confirmation that Esurance Insurance Services, Inc. (Esurance) on behalf of Esurance Property and Casualty Insurance Company is in receipt of the above referenced complaint.
At the time of policy purchase, the insured indicated that the 2004 Volkswagen Jetta was driven less than 4,500 miles annually. Esurance issued the [redacted] Auto Supplement form with the original policy. This form stated that the Company reserves the right to charge additional premium if the mileage is greater than what the insured indicated on the application. Esurance listed several options to verify the annual mileage.
Esurance received documentation of annual mileage; however, the documents that the insured provided indicated that the vehicle was driven 9,496 miles annually. The mileage was updated and the new term premium was $476.18.
Esurance attempted to debit the account on file for the additional premium; however, the payment was declined. The policy cancelled due to nonpayment of premium on January 14, 2015.
The outstanding balance due in the amount of $50.51 is for earned premium and the cancellation fee. At the time of policy purchase, the insured accepted the terms and conditions in which the insured agreed that he would be charged a $50.00 cancellation fee if the policy cancelled for any reason.
Supporting documents are available upon request.
Thank you for the opportunity to respond to this complaint.
Sincerely,
[redacted]
Senior Compliance Analyst
Esurance Insurance Services, Inc.
On behalf of Esurance Property and Casualty Insurance Company
Initial Consumer Rebuttal /* (3000, 12, 2015/08/17) */
Thank you for working on this and the response. There was never evidence given that it was driven 9,496 miles annually. The data that was given showed the car is driven four times a week only from residence to [redacted] Bart station, a round trip of 12 miles a day. That 4 times a week, times four weeks a month, times 12 months total 2304 annually.
That was the only documentation provided and on top of that Esurance was invited to do independent odometer readings, which it never did or even responded to.
Esurance was given this information and further written correspondence that if Esurance had a dispute, it needed to cancel the account, not charge more. The company never canceled the account or attempted to rectify the matter, instead going straight to added rate that was never agreed upon.
The same documentation has been provided to my current insurer and it has been verified and not an issue.
Again I expect this to be corrected and taken out of collections ASAP. It is a false and illegal claim and a clear breach of the agreed upon contract.
This is not how a professionally company should be operating and it should assure customers that it does not practice bait and switch contracts, which this clearly is.
Thank you for your attention and your response.
[redacted]
Final Consumer Response /* (3000, 32, 2015/12/14) */
The policy was never canceled. It wasn't renewed. IT was paid 6 months in advance per your policy on 08/04. Payment from my credit card statement below, which I am happy to provide the original copy:
Card Purchase 08/02 Esurance Car Insurance XXX-XXX-XXXX CA Card XXXX- XXX.92
The policy expired in January 2015, so how could you cancel a policy that had already ended? Again you are charging a cancellation fee for a policy that was not renewed. I owed you money for 6 months, that was paid in full per your request at the start of the 6 months.
If a response and correction is not given promptly my next option will be to file a civil claim per the terms of our contract since mediation failed.
Final Business Response /* (4000, 34, 2015/12/28) */
December 28, 2015
Revdex.com
Attention: [redacted] Suite [redacted] CA XXXXX
Via Electronic Response: www.oakland.Revdex.com.org
Re: Revdex.com Case Number: XXXXXXXX
Complainant Name: [redacted]
Insured Name: [redacted]
Policy Number: PACA-XXXXXXX
Insurance Company: Esurance Property and Casualty Insurance Company
Dear Ms. Griffith:
Please accept this letter as confirmation that Esurance Insurance Services, Inc. (Esurance) on behalf of Esurance Property and Casualty Insurance Company is in receipt of the above referenced complaint.
Esurance records indicate that the policy cancelled effective January 14, 2015, due to nonpayment of premium. The cancellation fee was charged as the policy cancelled prior to the end of the policy term.
Thank you for the opportunity to respond to this complaint.
Sincerely,
[redacted]
Senior Compliance Analyst
Esurance Insurance Services, Inc.
On behalf of Esurance Property and Casualty Insurance Company
Initial Business Response /* (1000, 8, 2015/06/01) */
June 1, 2015
Revdex.com
Attention: [redacted] Suite [redacted]
Oakland, CA XXXXX
Via Electronic Response: www.oakland.Revdex.com.org
Re: Revdex.com Case Number: XXXXXXXX
Complainant Name: [redacted]
Insured...
Name: [redacted]
Policy Number: PANV-XXXXXXX
Claim Number: ATL-XXXXXXX
Date of Loss: 02/06/2014
Insurance Company: Esurance Property and Casualty Insurance Company
Dear Ms. [redacted]
Please accept this letter as confirmation that Esurance Insurance Services, Inc. (Esurance) on behalf of Esurance Property and Casualty Insurance Company is in receipt of the above referenced complaint.
A claim was reported to Esurance on May 3, 2014, involving the complainant's [redacted]. Per the statement taken from Ms. [redacted], the vehicle was being towed when it came loose from the dolly. This incident occurred on February 6, 2014, (approximately 3 months before the loss was reported to Esurance). The vehicle dropped to the ground causing damages. An inspection of the vehicle revealed cosmetic damages to the front bumper. Ms. [redacted] advised she was not concerned about the damages to the bumper and was concerned about the mechanical damages to the vehicle. However, no damages were found to the gas gauge or the transmission that were related to the impact. A mechanical inspection was completed by Centro and verified the same findings. The damages to the transmission and gas gauge were mechanical in nature and not covered under the personal auto policy.
A payment was issued to Ms. [redacted] on November 16, 2014, for $99.84 to reimburse her for the diagnostic charges. The payment has not cleared our bank. Therefore, Esurance will stop pay that check and re-issue it to Ms. [redacted]. Based on complaint, Ms. [redacted] does want Esurance to present the claim for the cosmetic damages to her bumper. The bumper damages totaled $1.091.57. A payment for the damages less the $1,000.00 collision deductible will be processed for $91.57.
Thank you for allowing Esurance the opportunity to respond to this inquiry. .
Sincerely,
[redacted]
Claims Manager
Esurance Insurance Services, Inc.
On behalf of Esurance Property and Casualty Insurance Company
Initial Consumer Rebuttal /* (3000, 10, 2015/06/10) */
(The consumer indicated he/she DID NOT accept the response from the business.)
As stated before, and based on supporting documentation, up to and including the denial letter from UHaul, the incident was reported to both Esurance and Uhaul when it occurred initially. ESURANCE told me to pursue the claim with Uhaul FIRST and contact if/when denial letter was received, which I did, at their behest.
PLEASE NOTE I was advised by Esurance during my initial call on 2/6/2014, witnessed by Victor Garcia, who was present during accident, and through mobile records which detail the call to Esurance, that NO (Esurance) claim could be opened until a (Uhaul) claim was pursued, and a subsequent denial of claim from Uhaul received.
This begs the question if this is a usual ploy of Esurances' to regularly deny claims as the many on line reviews seem to support. This appears to be a standard operating procedure for the company. I am including the link for the top 472 - most of which discuss Esurances' denial of legitimate claims and shoddy business practices in rate raising without provocation or reason after (Esurance) is forced to pay for a legitimate claim.
: http://www.consumeraffairs.com/insurance/esurance.html?page=3
Additionally: http://car-insurance.credio.com/l/13/Esurance
Esurance has an obvious history of inadequate record keeping, response, and accuracy as can be seen in supporting documents provided to them directly in an attempt to resolve this matter. I will mail such in its entirety as additional supporting documentation to the Revdex.com.
The mechanical inspection by Centro was once again full of conflict (from their own person), and inaccurate according to the certified mechanics documentation and pictures which show physical damage to the undercarriage of the vehicle, bumper, and heavy duty tow hitch. All of which undeniably supports the claim of interior mechanical damage as well.
Payment was finally issued and received for diagnostic charges and bumper within the last 14 days. Please note it was issued from the individual/representative that I have Esurance saying no longer worked for them (through a recorded call that I can provide). I feel this continues to support their inept, corrupt, and negligent business practices.
Ms. [redacted] I will mail you the supporting papers to better allow the Revdex.com to see the above statements from Esurance are false.
Final Business Response /* (4000, 12, 2015/06/23) */
June 23, 2015
Revdex.com
Attention: Deborah [redacted]
1000 Broadway, Suite 625
Oakland, CA XXXXX
Via Electronic Response: www.oakland.Revdex.com.org
Re: Revdex.com Case Number: XXXXXXXX
Complainant Name: [redacted]
Insured Name: [redacted]
Policy Number: PANV-XXXXXXX
Claim Number: ATL-XXXXXXX
Date of Loss: 02/06/2014
Insurance Company: Esurance Property and Casualty Insurance Company
Dear Ms. [redacted]:
Please accept this letter as confirmation that Esurance Insurance Services, Inc. (Esurance) on behalf of Esurance Property and Casualty Insurance Company is in receipt of the additional correspondence regarding the above referenced claim.
Ms. [redacted] has been paid for the damages to the vehicle that were deemed related to the vehicle falling off the dolly. She has also been reimbursed for the diagnostic charges when the vehicle was taken to a local Hyundai dealership for a mechanical inspection.
Esurance had the vehicle inspected by Davis Claims (an independent appraisal source), Centro (a mechanical inspection company), and Hendricks Hyundai (local Hyundai dealership). At this time, Esurance can't relate the damages to the transmission or gas gauge as related to the vehicle falling off the dolly.
Esurance investigates all claims based on the individual facts and circumstances. All claims resolutions are based on the facts gathered throughout the investigation.
If Ms. [redacted] would like to present additional information to support the damages to the transmission and the gas gauge are related to falling off the dolly, we will gladly review it for consideration.
Thank you for allowing Esurance the opportunity to respond to this additional correspondence.
Sincerely,
[redacted]
Claims Manager
Esurance Insurance Services, Inc.
On behalf of Esurance Property and Casualty Insurance Company
Final Consumer Response /* (4200, 14, 2015/06/24) */
(The consumer indicated he/she DID NOT accept the response from the business.)
Esurance is simply restating their initial decision; not providing additional proof of WHY they state transmission and gas gauge was not related to accident even though there were no recalls (Hyundai), this would not be under normal wear and tear (by Esurances own admission), based on limited miles and the exceptional condition vehicle was kept in, and according to the Exxon (certified) mechanics report. I have provided evidence showing the claim was reported immediately and Esurance was negligent in delaying actually opening a claim, which a certified mechanic in an independent facility stated damage was caused to vehicle transmission and gas gauge. The Cento mechanic (contracted to Esurance and whose report contradicted itself and the claim) verified damage however said he felt it was unrelated b/c it was not reported until 7 month later - I refuted this FACTUALLY. Also if Davis claims shows there was over $1100 in cosmetic damage how can Esurance claim zero internal damage. One does not rationally support the other. Hyundai verified/reported damage to transmission and the gas gauge however they do not make recommendations as to cause in these (auto) claims. Hyundai did however reiterate that there are no recalls on vehicle and this is not normal wear and tear. Esurance does not even appear to be reading/responding to the claim in anything other than a generic manner. Based on the inaccuracies and contradictions in Esurances own report that have been pointed out for you numerous times I would formally request a full acceptance of claim and payment.
February 6, 2018
[redacted]
Attention: [redacted]
[redacted]Via Electronic Response: [redacted]
Re: Case Number: [redacted]
Complainant Name: [redacted]
Insured Name: [redacted]
Policy Number: [redacted]
Company: Esurance Property and Casualty Insurance Company
NAIC Number: [redacted]
To Whom It May Concern:
Esurance Insurance Services, Inc. (“Esurance”), on behalf of Esurance Property and Casualty Insurance Company, is in receipt of the follow-up consumer inquiry submitted by [redacted] regarding the above referenced private passenger automobile policy.
After further review the percentage of premium increase calculation on the Notice is based on the surcharge for the at-fault accident, dated August 18, 2017, and the removal of Claim-Free Discount and the removal of the Online Shopper Discount. In accordance with Esurance’s filed rate and rules in the [redacted], the rated term premium is valid.
The premium for [redacted]’s policy has increased because of the driving record or claims experience of the listed driver(s), [redacted] under this policy. Esurance has offered not to charge [redacted] the increase in premium if the he agrees to exclude coverage under the policy for the individual(s) whose driving record or claims experience justified the increase in premium.
Esurance apologizes for any miscommunication that the insured may have received as we strive to provide excellent customer service.
Thank you for allowing Esurance the opportunity to address your inquiry.
Sincerely,
[redacted]
Compliance Analyst
Esurance Insurance Services, Inc.
On behalf of Esurance Property and Casualty Insurance Company
Re: Revdex.com Case Number: [redacted]
Complainant Name: [redacted]
Insured Name: [redacted] E. [redacted]
Policy Number: [redacted]
Insurance Company: Esurance Insurance Property and Casualty Company
Dear Ms. [redacted]:
Esurance Insurance Services, Inc. (Esurance), on behalf of Esurance Property and Casualty...
Insurance
Company, is in receipt of the consumer complaint submitted by [redacted] regarding the above
referenced private passenger automobile policy.
Esurance records reflect the above referenced policy was purchased effective September 30, 2015,
for a six month policy term. At the time of purchase, Ms. [redacted] authorized Esurance to debit the
method of payment on file for all future payments upon renewal or changes to his policy.
On January 30, 2016, A Renewal Offer was issued to Ms. [redacted] for an additional six month policy
term effective March 31, 2016. An email was sent to Ms. [redacted] advising her method of payment
would be debited for the policy renewal on March 1, 2016.
On March 5, 2016, Esurance received a returned electronic check from Mr. [redacted]’ financial
institution. At that time, a Cancellation notice was issued to the insured effective March 31, 2016.
Subsequently, a Notice of Reinstatement was issued to the insured.
Esurance records confirm the above referenced policy was cancelled at the insured’s request effective
March 31, 2016, and reflects a zero outstanding account balance remaining on the policy. Esurance
strives to provide exceptional customer service, and apologizes for any frustration or confusion this
may have caused Ms. [redacted].
Thank you for allowing us the opportunity to respond to this complaint.
Sincerely,
[redacted]
Compliance Analyst
Esurance Insurance Services, Inc.
On behalf of Esurance Insurance Property and Casualty Company
Initial Business Response /* (1000, 5, 2015/09/25) */
September 24, 2015
Revdex.com
Attention: [redacted]
Dispute Resolution Specialist
1000 Broadway, Suite 625
Oakland, CA XXXXX
Via Electronic Response: www.oakland.Revdex.com.org
Re: Case Number:...
XXXXXXXX
Complainant Name: [redacted]
Insured Name: [redacted]
Policy Number: HPINXXXXXXXXX
Company: Esurance Insurance Company
Dear Ms. [redacted]
Esurance Insurance Services, Inc. (Esurance), on behalf of Esurance Insurance Company, is in receipt of the consumer complaint submitted by [redacted] regarding the above referenced Homeowner's policy.
Esurance records indicate the above referenced policy was purchased on July 16, 2015, effective August 5, 2015. At the time of purchase, the selected replacement cost and dwelling coverages totaled $671,605 based upon the total gross living area of 3,990 square feet.
The policyholder provided a property appraisal which indicated 4,540 square feet of gross living area. The replacement cost was recalculated to $848,510, based upon the information provided in the home appraisal.
On September 11, 2015, the Mr. [redacted]'s policy was submitted for cancellation effective September 26, 2015, due to the residence replacement cost exceeded the company threshold.
Upon further review of the appraisal provided by the policyholder, it was determined a portion of the area included for the total gross living was duplicated at the time the replacement cost was recalculated. Esurance has recalculated the replacement cost amount of 721,770 to reflect the correct gross living area and attached features.
Esurance records confirm Mr. [redacted]'s policy has been reinstated, and the dwelling protection coverage has been corrected to $721,770. Esurance has notified Mr. [redacted] regarding the policy reinstatement, and the retroactive policy changes. An Amended Declaration has been issued to Mr. [redacted] to reflect the updated dwelling protection limit.
Thank you for allowing Esurance the opportunity to address your inquiry.
Sincerely,
[redacted]
Sr. Manager Underwriting
Esurance Insurance Services, Inc.
On behalf of Esurance Insurance Company
Initial Business Response /* (1000, 5, 2015/09/15) */
September 15, 2015
Revdex.com
Attention: [redacted]
1000 Broadway, Suite 625
Oakland, CA XXXXX
Via Electronic Response: www.oakland.Revdex.com.org
Re: Revdex.com Case Number: XXXXXXXX
Complainant Name: [redacted]...
[redacted]
Insured Name: [redacted]
Policy Number: PAMAXXXXXXX
Insurance Company: Esurance Insurance Company
Dear Ms. [redacted]
Please accept this letter as confirmation that Esurance Insurance Services, Inc. (Esurance) on behalf of Esurance Insurance Company is in receipt of the above referenced complaint.
Esurance records indicate that this policy was purchased on January 19, 2015, to be effective on this same date. At the time of purchase, Ms. [redacted] opted to take advantage of the Esurance DriveSenseTM Discount Program, in which a discount will be given to customers that volunteer to install Esurance Driving Devices into all device-compatible vehicles listed on their policy. Ms. [redacted] also accepted the terms and conditions of the policy, which discloses that a Driving Device Restocking Fee of $100.00 may be charged for each device when the device is not returned following policy cancellation or opting out of the DriveSenseTM Discount Program.
On July 7, 2015, Ms. [redacted] requested that her policy not be renewed and the policy expired effective July 19, 2015. When the DriveSenseTM Device Restocking Fee was collected on August 25, 2015, the policy was reinstated effective August 26, 2015.
Esurance strives to provide excellent [redacted] and regrets that Ms. [redacted]'s experience was not satisfactory. Esurance has re-cancelled the policy effective July 19, 2015, per the insured's request, and as a concession, has waived the restocking fee. Esurance sincerely apologizes for any inconvenience this may have caused.
Thank you for allowing Esurance the opportunity to respond to this inquiry.
Sincerely,
[redacted]
Compliance Analyst
Esurance Insurance Services, Inc.
On behalf of Esurance Insurance Company
Please accept this letter as confirmation that Esurance Insurance Services, Inc. (Esurance) on behalf of Esurance Property and Casualty Insurance Company is in receipt of the above referenced complaint.
Esurance records indicate that this policy was purchased online on February 12, 2016, to...
be effective February 13, 2016. At the time of purchase, Ms. [redacted] accepted to the terms and conditions of the policy, which discloses that a Short Rate Fee equal to 10% of the unearned premium may be charged if the Policy is cancelled for any reason. This Short Rate Fee is in addition to any earned premium for the coverage provided and may be deducted from any refund due to the policyholder.
Also at the time of purchase, Ms. [redacted] opted to pay the term premium in monthly installments to be paid on the 13th of each month. Ms. [redacted] authorized Esurance to charge the method of payment provided for the down payment, as well as all future payments.
On March 8, 2016, Esurance issued a scheduled payment notification as a reminder that the next installment would be due on March 13, 2016. Esurance attempted to collect the scheduled payment on the due date, but was unsuccessful. Therefore, Esurance issued a Notice of Cancellation for non-payment of premium effective March 28, 2016.
On March 24, 2016, Ms. [redacted] requested via email that the policy be cancelled. Esurance cancelled the policy per the insured’s request effective on this same date and replied via email, confirming that the policy was cancelled, as well as reminding Ms. [redacted] of the Short Rate cancellation fee. Esurance then issued a final payment notification on this same date to advise that the outstanding premium balance of $188.25 was due on April 3, 2016.
On April 3, 2016, the final payment was successfully charged to the method of payment provided by Ms. [redacted]. Esurance has no record of Ms. [redacted] requesting payment arrangements for the outstanding balance or revoking payment authorization prior to the due date. Esurance empathizes with your financial position, but is unable to offer a refund as this premium was collected according to the agreements made between Ms. [redacted] and Esurance.
Thank you for allowing us the opportunity to respond to this complaint.
Sincerely,
[redacted]
February 20, 2018
Revdex.com
Attention: [redacted]Via Electronic Response: [redacted]
Re: Case...
Number: [redacted]
Complainant Name: [redacted] Goodrich
Insured Name: [redacted] Goodrich
Claim Number: [redacted]
Policy Number: [redacted]
Date of Loss: 2/2/2018
Company: Esurance Insurance Company
NAIC Number: [redacted]
To Whom It May Concern:
Please accept this letter as confirmation that Esurance Insurance Services, Inc. (“Esurance”), on behalf of Esurance Insurance Company, is in receipt of the complaint submitted by [redacted] Goodrich regarding the above referenced claim for a private passenger automobile policy.
On February 10, 2018, Esurance received notification of this loss, when the insured reported that she ran over a broken tire in the middle of the road. This was documented as colliding with a broken tire in the road which falls under the collision coverage and the insured’s deductible will apply in accordance with her automobile policy at the time of loss.
After further review and discussing the loss in detail with the insured, we have agreed to change this to a not at-fault accident. The insured advised us that she is not pursuing the claim at this time, therefore; Esurance considers this matter resolved.
Thank you for allowing Esurance the opportunity to address your inquiry.
Sincerely,
Margaret [redacted]
Rapid Response Manager
Esurance Insurance Services, Inc.
On behalf of Esurance Insurance Company
April 7, 2017
Revdex.com
Attention[redacted]Via Electronic Response: [redacted]
Re: Case...
Number: [redacted]
Complainant Name: [redacted]
Insured Name: [redacted]
Policy Number: [redacted]
Company: Esurance Property and Casualty Insurance Company
NAIC Number: [redacted]
Dear [redacted]
Esurance Insurance Services, Inc. (“Esurance”), on behalf of Esurance Property and Casualty Insurance Company, is in receipt of the consumer correspondence submitted by [redacted] regarding the above referenced private passenger automobile policy.
Esurance records indicate the above referenced policy was purchased on September 26, 2016, with an effective date of October 1, 2016, for the full term premium of $1,351.50. The policy provided coverage for three vehicles a 2005 Mini Cooper S, 2004 Mazda Speed Miata, and a 2009 Mazda MazdaA31, and two operators, [redacted]
On March 31, 2017, [redacted] contacted Esurance to make several policy adjustments. During that call the insured was advised of the revised premium due as a result of the policy adjustments. Esurance records indicated a premium increased and the amount of $709.82 was owed due to the recent policy changes.
On April 3, 2017, [redacted] contacted Esurance to inquiry into his billing invoice, as a result of the recent policy adjustments. At that time Esurance completed a billing audit.
After further review Esurance records indicate the billing issue had been resolved and an adjustment was completed for the amount of $709.82 that is currently showing due, bringing the insured's balance to $0.00. The adjustment should be completed within 48 hours.
On April 6, 2017, Esurance contacted[redacted] via email to advise him the recent update and the policy adjustment that is in process.
Esurance strives to provide an excellent customer experience and apologizes for any inconvenience this billing matter may have caused.
Thank you for allowing Esurance the opportunity to address your inquiry. If you have any questions or need additional information regarding this file, please direct all correspondence to[redacted], or via email to [redacted]
Sincerely,
[redacted]
Compliance Analyst
Esurance Insurance Services, Inc.
On behalf of Esurance Property and Casualty Insurance Company
Initial Business Response /* (1000, 5, 2016/01/14) */
January 14, 2016
Revdex.com
Attention: [redacted]
Dispute Resolution Specialist
1000 Broadway, Suite 625
Oakland, CA XXXXX
Via Electronic Response: goldengate.app.Revdex.com.org
Re: Revdex.com Case...
Number: XXXXXXXX
Complainant Name: [redacted]
Insured Name: [redacted]
Policy Number: PAFLXXXXXXX
Insurance Company: Esurance Insurance Property and Casualty Company
Dear Ms. Griffith:
Please accept this letter as confirmation that Esurance Insurance Services, Inc. (Esurance) on behalf of Esurance Insurance Property and Casualty Company is in receipt of the above referenced complaint regarding the premium increase of a quote obtained online.
Esurance utilizes several reports in order to properly underwrite policies, including, but not limited to, the Motor Vehicle Report (MVR), Comprehensive Loss and Underwriting Exchange (CLUE), as well as credit reports. These reports are necessary to obtain an accurate quote.
Esurance records indicate that this existing policyholder applied for a new policy online on January 3, 2016. Once the credit information was obtained, the premium did increase. A review of the quote indicates that the credit information was intermittently not reflected in the quoted premium during the application process due to system issues. Esurance has evaluated the quote manually and confirmed that the correct term premium would be $1,056.64 based on the information provided. Esurance strives to provide excellent [redacted] and rating consistency and apologizes to Mr. [redacted] for any confusion or inconvenience this has caused.
Esurance has also reviewed Mr. [redacted]'s existing policy. The policy term premium did increase at renewal from $733.90 to $809.90 due to a statewide rate change that affected all policyholders renewing on or after July 10, 2015.
Esurance empathizes with policyholders that have been impacted by the recent premium change. Esurance does evaluate premiums and loss experience periodically and, at times, must make the difficult decision to increase rates to offset costs.
Thank you for allowing us the opportunity to respond to this complaint.
Sincerely,
[redacted]
Compliance Analyst
Esurance Insurance Services, Inc.
On behalf of Esurance Insurance Property and Casualty Company
To whom it may concern:
Please accept this letter as confirmation that Esurance Insurance Services, Inc. (Esurance) on behalf of Esurance Property and Casualty Insurance Company is in receipt of the consumer review regarding a premium increase due to a claim made on a personal automobile...
policy.
The loss occurred on January 14, 2016. It was reported that[redacted] flip flops became entangled with his gas pedal, impeding his ability to brake as he was backing. As a result, [redacted] backed in to a vehicle parked on the opposite side of the street. The vehicle was parked and unoccupied.[redacted] knocked on the neighbor’s door and no one answered so he left a note on the damaged vehicle and left the scene.
At the time of the accident report and in a subsequent conversation with [redacted] there was no mention of the other vehicle being illegally parked. Had that been the case, it would likely have had no impact on the liability decision unless the illegally parked vehicle was blocking road access or ingress/egress, which it was not.
The damage to[redacted] vehicle was to the right rear.[redacted] was driving a 2008 Ford Explorer, which is a higher profile vehicle than the parked 2006 Chevrolet Colorado. The damage to the Colorado was also to the right rear but more to the side panel of the bed to the rear and higher due to the varying heights of the vehicles[redacted] damages totaled $861.60, while the claimant’s repairs came to $3,576.13, with supplements for hidden damage.
[redacted] was determined to be at-fault for this accident and his driving record was update accordingly. The policy renewal premium was affected by this at-fault accident and Esurance issued a renewal offer on March 23, 2016, to be effective May 12, 2016. [redacted] declined the renewal offer and the policy was cancelled effective May 12, 2016, per the insured’s request.
Recently, [redacted] submitted photographs of the claimant vehicle, expressing concern about the damages paid. Those photographs and estimate were reviewed by a material damage expert, who wrote an email response to [redacted] on May 10, 2017, confirming receipt of the photos and providing an explanation of the damages seen. Esurance confirms that the submitted photos are similar to the photos already on file and that the repair estimates were in line with the damage visible in the submitted photos.
Esurance further confirms that this policy has been cancelled since May 12, 2016, and that the policy was rated correctly while active. Thank you for the opportunity to respond to this complaint.
Sincerely,
[redacted]
Compliance Consultant
Esurance Insurance Services, Inc.On behalf of Esurance Property and Casualty Insurance Company
Revdex.com:I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID[redacted], and find that this resolution is satisfactory to me.
For record, the claim is still open for the loss in question.
Sincerely, Derrek [redacted]
Case No.: ...
[redacted]Complainant: ...⇄ [redacted]
Policyholder: [redacted]
Policy Number: [redacted]
Company: Esurance Insurance Company
Dear Dispute Resolution Specialist:
Please accept this letter as confirmation that Esurance Insurance Services, Inc. (Esurance), on behalf of Esurance Property and Casualty Insurance Company, is in receipt of the consumer complaint submitted by [redacted] regarding the above referenced Personal Homeowners Policy.
The above referenced policy was purchased on February 23, 2018, to be effective March 5, 2018, for a one-year policy term. During the underwriting review period, the replacement cost estimator tool was updated to reflect the age of the home, resulting in an adjustment to the full term premium. Esurance has reviewed [redacted] policy, and as a courtesy, agreed to waive the premium increase for his current term.
Please note, the update to the replacement cost will take effect upon renewal of [redacted] policy, and premium adjusted accordingly. Esurance strives to provide exceptional customer service, and apologizes this was not the case for Mr. [redacted].
Thank you for allowing Esurance the opportunity to respond to this inquiry.
Initial Business Response /* (1000, 5, 2015/09/29) */
September 29, 2015
Revdex.com
Attention: [redacted]
1000 Broadway, Suite 625
Oakland, CA XXXXX
Via Electronic Response: www.oakland.Revdex.com.org
Re: Revdex.com Case Number: XXXXXXXX
Complainant Name: [redacted]
Insured...
Name: [redacted]
Policy Number: PANJXXXXXXX
Insurance Company: Esurance Insurance Company of New Jersey
Dear Ms. [redacted]:
Please accept this letter as confirmation that Esurance Insurance Services, Inc. (Esurance) on behalf of Esurance Insurance Company of New Jersey is in receipt of the above referenced complaint.
Esurance records indicate that this policy was purchased on May 10, 2012, to be effective on this same date. This policy most recently, automatically renewed effective May 15, 2015, upon receipt of payment on April 15, 2015, for the Renewal Offer provided on March 15, 2015. A claim was reported on May 14, 2015, by an additional insured, [redacted], but Esurance has no other record of contact with the insured or a request to cancel the policy since that date.
On September 16, 2015, Ms. [redacted] contacted Esurance to advise that the policy should be cancelled. Again, Esurance had no record of a cancellation request, therefore, in order to backdate the cancellation effective date, Esurance requested proof of other insurance.
Ms. [redacted] provided a copy of her current policy with Allstate on September 17, 2015. Due to Personal Injury Protection (PIP) coverage differences, Esurance was unable to backdate the cancellation of the entire policy, but offered to compensate Ms. [redacted] for all coverage, except PIP. Esurance attempted to explain that PIP coverage has been provided, therefore, the premium has been earned.
By September 22, 2015, Esurance had received a signed Cancellation Request/Policy Release. By receipt of this document, which releases Esurance of any coverage liability effective May 15, 2015, going forward, Esurance was able to cancel the policy effective that date.
Thank you for allowing Esurance the opportunity to respond to this inquiry.
Sincerely,
[redacted]
Compliance Analyst
Esurance Insurance Services, Inc.
On behalf of Esurance Insurance Company
Initial Consumer Rebuttal /* (3000, 7, 2015/09/30) */
(The consumer indicated he/she DID NOT accept the response from the business.)
No, because I do not feel that what they have stated is completely true. But Esurance has resolved this case on 9/23/15 and refunded the premium for the full amount and back dated the cancellation to 5/15/15. I would like for Revdex.com to close this case. Thank you for all your help.
Final Business Response /* (4000, 9, 2015/10/05) */
October 5, 2015
Revdex.com
Attention: [redacted]
1000 Broadway, Suite 625
Oakland, CA XXXXX
Via Electronic Response: www.oakland.Revdex.com.org
Re: Revdex.com Case Number: XXXXXXXX
Complainant Name: [redacted]
Insured Name: [redacted]
Policy Number: PANJXXXXXXX
Insurance Company: Esurance Insurance Company of New Jersey
Dear Ms. [redacted]:
Please accept this letter as confirmation that Esurance Insurance Services, Inc. (Esurance) on behalf of Esurance Insurance Company of New Jersey is in receipt of the request to close the above referenced complaint, but that Ms. [redacted] does not believe that the truth was stated in the previous complaint response.
As previously advised, Esurance records indicate that this policy was purchased on May 10, 2012, to be effective on this same date. Esurance policies automatically renew as long as the premium is paid. This policy automatically renewed effective May 15, 2015, upon receipt of payment on April 15, 2015, for the Renewal Offer provided on March 15, 2015. A claim was reported on May 14, 2015, by an additional insured, [redacted], but Esurance has no other record of contact with the insured or a request to cancel the policy since that date.
On September 16, 2015, Ms. [redacted] contacted Esurance to advise that the policy should be cancelled. Again, Esurance has no record of a cancellation request prior to this date, therefore, in order to backdate the cancellation effective date, Esurance requested proof of other insurance.
Ms. [redacted] provided a copy of her current policy with Allstate on September 17, 2015. Due to Personal Injury Protection (PIP) coverage differences, Esurance was unable to backdate the cancellation of the entire policy, but offered to compensate Ms. [redacted] for all coverage costs, except PIP. Esurance attempted to explain that PIP coverage has been provided, therefore, the premium had been earned. If a PIP loss had occurred between May 15, 2015, and September 17, 2015, Esurance would have been obligated to pay that claim as the policy contract was still in effect during that time period.
By September 22, 2015, Esurance had received a signed Cancellation Request/Policy Release. This signed document released Esurance of any coverage liability effective May 15, 2015, going forward. Since Esurance no longer had an obligation to pay any PIP claims, Esurance was able to backdate cancellation of the policy effective May 15, 2015.
Esurance apologizes for any inconvenience and is relieved to hear that Ms. [redacted]'s case has been resolved. Thank you for allowing Esurance the opportunity to respond to this inquiry.
Sincerely,
[redacted]
Compliance Analyst
Esurance Insurance Services, Inc.
On behalf of Esurance Insurance Company
Initial Business Response /* (1000, 5, 2015/06/15) */
June 15, 2015
Revdex.com
Attention: Dispute Resolution Department
[redacted] Broadway, Suite 625
Oakland, CA XXXXX
Via Electronic Response: www.oakland.Revdex.com.org
Re: Case Number: XXXXXXXX
Complainant Name: [redacted]...
[redacted]
Insured Name: [redacted]
Policy Number: PACO-XXXXXXX
Claim Number: DEN-XXXXX
Date of Loss: 05/26/2015
Company: Esurance Property and Casualty Insurance Company
NAIC: XXXXX
Dear Ms. [redacted]
Esurance Insurance Services, Inc. (Esurance) on behalf of Esurance Property and Casualty Insurance Company is in receipt of the consumer correspondence submitted by [redacted] regarding the above referenced claim for a private passenger [redacted] policy.
In her complaint, Ms. [redacted] is disputing the liability determination of her sons claim resulting from the loss dated, May 26, 2015.
On May 29, 2015, this loss was reported to Esurance by the claimant, Adam [redacted]. This loss was reported that our insured, [redacted] was travelling eastbound on 27th Street and Adam [redacted] was travelling northbound on U.S. 59. The accident occurred in this intersection. Esurance conducted a thorough investigation by obtaining recorded statements from each of the drivers, obtaining the police report to review for potential witnesses and reviewing scene photos. Based on the statements of each party Esurance determined that Mr. Lukowiak, the insured was 80% liable based the fact that he entered the intersection on a flashing red light. The insured had stopped at the flashing red light and then crossed over two southbound lanes when struck in the left most northbound lane by the claimant. We determined that the claimant was twenty percent liable for not maintaining a proper lookout, not driving defensively and not taking the proper evasive action to avoid this loss.
Kansas is a Modified Comparative Negligence state. The claimant's damages were appropriately reduced by the applicable liability we assessed on this claim.
Thank you for allowing Esurance the opportunity to address your inquiry. If you have any questions or need additional information regarding this file, please direct all correspondence to Kimberly Sims, Compliance Analyst, P.O. Box 2890, Rocklin, CA, XXXXX, or via email to [redacted]@esurance.com
Sincerely,
[redacted]
Denver Claims Unit Manager
Esurance Insurance Services, Inc.
On behalf of Esurance Property and Casualty Insurance Company
Initial Consumer Rebuttal /* (3000, 7, 2015/06/17) */
(The consumer indicated he/she DID NOT accept the response from the business.)
State Farm has determined [redacted] was 100% at fault. [redacted] tried to stop but [redacted] sped up to tried to beat him. [redacted]'s car struck Adams first as it was hit from the side.
[redacted] should have practiced defensive driving also instead of trying to speed in front of a car headed into the in section and waited until the intersection was clear and safe to pass. This is the law of a flashing red light.
[redacted] also changed his story from what he told the police officer and what he told the insurance company.
He said there was a car stopped at the yellow light for 10 minutes and he gave up and went through the intersection.
This was not
Final Business Response /* (4000, 10, 2015/07/02) */
July 2, 2015
Revdex.com
Attention: Dispute Resolution Department
[redacted] Suite [redacted]
Oakland, CA XXXXX
Via Electronic Response: www.oakland.Revdex.com.org
Re: Case Number: XXXXXXXX
Complainant Name: [redacted]
Insured Name: [redacted]
Policy Number: PACO-XXXXXXX
Claim Number: DEN-XXXXX
Date of Loss: 05/26/2015
Company: Esurance Property and Casualty Insurance Company
NAIC: XXXXX
Dear Ms. [redacted]
Esurance Insurance Services, Inc. (Esurance) on behalf of Esurance Property and Casualty Insurance Company is in receipt of the consumer follow-up correspondence submitted by [redacted] regarding the above referenced claim for a private passenger [redacted] policy.
In her complaint, Ms. [redacted] is disputing the liability determination of her sons claim resulting from the loss dated, May 26, 2015.
Esurance has reviewed our position in regards to Ms. [redacted]'s disagreement with our liability determination. Taking into account all the available evidence Esurance reiterates its original position where we found the insured, [redacted] 80% liable for this loss.
On June 11, 2015, Ms. [redacted] contacted, Jason Giles, Denver's Claim's Branch Manager where she advised him that she will be pursue her vehicle's damages through her own insurance carrier, State Farm Insurance. This dispute will be resolved via inter-company arbitration where the evidence is heard by an independent arbitrator. The decision that is rendered is binding on each company. Ms. [redacted]'s insurance company will advise her of the final outcome of this hearing.
Thank you for allowing Esurance the opportunity to address your inquiry. If you have any questions or need additional information regarding this file, please direct all correspondence to Kimberly Sims, Compliance Analyst, P.O. Box 2890, Rocklin, CA, XXXXX, or via email to [redacted]@esurance.com
Sincerely,
[redacted]
Denver Claims Unit Manager
Esurance Insurance Services, Inc.
On behalf of Esurance Property and Casualty Insurance Company
Final Consumer Response /* (4200, 12, 2015/07/08) */
(The consumer indicated he/she DID NOT accept the response from the business.)
Only in America can someone run a flashing red light, cause a serious accident, receive a traffic citation and then the other person is blamed. May the best attorney win!
Complaint: [redacted]I am rejecting this response because:
While the response contains the corrects dates and pieces of information, it certainly misses both the details and alleged wrongdoing. When I first received notice of expiration I call to verify all the details regarding the mortgage payee. At that time, I was assured that everything was corrected and no further action was required on my behalf. Thus, I found it to be quite surprising when the policy was allowed to expire. Furthermore, esurance did not correctly address the mortgage payee in the insurance clause, causing delays in their ability to process the payment. Lastly, I was not included in these communications and had no idea that these issues were happening as I was in fact assured that everything would be taken care of.
Upon policy expiration, I lost access to all policy documents and correspondence, making it impossible to review previous communications and documents as well. My concerns surround around the lack of communication, complete lack of ownership and accountability regarding their errors in this process, and the lack of transparency. These issues were not addressed in the response.
Sincerely,[redacted]
Initial Business Response /* (1000, 5, 2015/08/31) */
August 31, 2015
Revdex.com
Attention: [redacted] Dispute Resolutions
Dispute Resolution Specialist
1000 Broadway, Suite 625
Oakland, CA XXXXX
Via Electronic Response: www.oakland.Revdex.com.org
Re: Case...
Number: XXXXXXXX
Complainant Name: [redacted]
Insured Name: [redacted] Policy Number: PAMO-XXXXXXX
Company: Esurance Property and Casualty Insurance Company
Dear Ms. [redacted]:
Esurance Insurance Services, Inc. (Esurance) on behalf of Esurance Property and Casualty Insurance Company is in receipt of the consumer correspondence submitted by [redacted] regarding the above referenced private passenger [redacted] policy.
In her complaint, Ms. [redacted] is demanding that Esurance refund the difference of premiums for adding an additional driver.
Esurance records indicate the above referenced policy was purchased on May 14, 2014, with an effective date of May 15, 2014, with a six-month policy term for the full term premium of $559.00. The policy provided coverage for two vehicles, a 2012 Chevrolet Sonic LS and a 1994 Dodge Ram 1500 and Ms. [redacted] as a single operator.
On October 28, 2014, Esurance discovered several potential unlisted drivers that may need to be added to Ms. [redacted]'s automobile policy, unless the Underwriting Department receives the following; Proof of Other Insurance or a Driver Exclusion Form or the insured confirms the unlisted drivers only has a permit. Esurance also advised the insured to contact us once the permitted driver obtains an active license. On this same day Esurance contacted Ms. [redacted] via email to verify if the two unlisted drivers, [redacted] Thiffeault and [redacted] needed to be added to her automobile policy. The Underwriting Department informed Ms. [redacted] of the required due date to provide the requested information and informed the insured if the requested information was not received within 10 days, her premium may increase or her policy may be canceled or non-renewed.
On October 31, 2014, and again on November 5, 2014, Esurance attempted to contact Ms. [redacted] and unfortunately ultimately left a voicemail message both times.
On November 8, 2014, Esurance discovered [redacted] only had a permit, therefore; no further action was required.
On December 20, 2014, Ms. [redacted] contacted Esurance to obtain a quote with the additional driver.
On June 16, 2015, Esurance contacted Ms. [redacted] via email to inform her that it was discovered that [redacted] was the driver in a recent loss, dated February 23, 2015, but was not a listed operator. Again Esurance requested Ms. [redacted] contact Esurance to add [redacted] to her automobile policy or complete a Driver Exclusion Form within 10 days of this notice.
On June 30, 2015, Ms. [redacted] contacted Esurance via mail to request a copy of the Driver Exclusion Form. On that same day Esurance contacted Ms. [redacted] and advised her a copy of the Driver Exclusion Form would be emailed, per her request, and the form must be completed and returned by July 6, 2015, to avoid the cancellation or non-renewal or the additional driver being added to her automobile policy.
On July 7, 2015, Esurance contacted Ms. [redacted] via email to advise her that we have not received the previously requested information, therefore; that additional operator was add the insured's automobile policy. As a result; of the policy updated Ms. [redacted]'s six-month policy term premium increased from $470.00 to $1,742.00.
On August 9, 2015, Esurance received the Driver Exclusion Form.
On August 15, 2015, Ms. [redacted] contacted Esurance to inquiry about her premium increase. Esurance advised her the additional operator has been excluded, but the pro-rate increase is the amount owed for the time the additional operator was added to the policy.
On August 16, 2015, Ms. [redacted] contacted Esurance to request the cancellation of her automobile policy and during that call the representative advised her of the cancellation fee and informed her that a refund in the amount of $18.82 will be credited to the method of payment on file within 5-7 days. On that same day Esurance issued a credit notification to Ms. [redacted] advising her of the credit and to allow up to 30 days for her financial institution to credit the account.
Esurance records indicate all unearned premiums have been refunded to the insured.
Thank you for allowing Esurance the opportunity to address your inquiry. If you have any questions or need additional information regarding this file, please direct all correspondence to [redacted], Compliance Analyst, P.O. Box 2890, Rocklin, CA, XXXXX, or via email to [redacted]@esurance.com
Sincerely,
[redacted]
Compliance Analyst
Esurance Insurance Services, Inc.
On behalf of Esurance Property and Casualty Insurance Company
Initial Consumer Rebuttal /* (3000, 7, 2015/09/01) */
(The consumer indicated he/she DID NOT accept the response from the business.)
First of all I NEVER had 2 unlisted drivers in my house. I had my son [redacted] and I have no idea who this [redacted] person is. Second of all as I have informed Esurance on several different occasions when [redacted] was involved in that accident he was NOT living with me,the was NOT in my car, and I was NOT involved. That claim was made because the other person in the vehicle with [redacted] had a previous injury and thought it would be an easy pay day. I didn't even know about the accident until Esurance contacted me. I was told I would receive an exclusion form via e-mail and never did, I called twice to try and get it resolved. The first time I was told it couldn't be done by anyone but a claims adjuster when there was an active claim and then was left in hold for over 10 minutes. I got a letter telling me my premium was going up to over 500 dollars for August and September when I called I was told that they had added my son to the policy, back dated it for the whole insurance term and split the cost between the last 2 months. When I finally got him excluded they still took over $200 dollars. When I called for a refund I spoke to 5 different people and spent an hour on the phone before finally being told that even though I never got the exclusion form and it was their oversite I had to pay it anyway. This was after being left on hold for several minutes. When I cancelled my policy I was NOT told about any cancellation fee. I was only told that my refund would be 18.82. I was not given a reason for it.
Final Business Response /* (4000, 9, 2015/09/14) */
September 14, 2015
Revdex.com
Attention: [redacted], Dispute Resolutions
Dispute Resolution Specialist
1000 Broadway, Suite 625
Oakland, CA XXXXX
Via Electronic Response: www.oakland.Revdex.com.org
Re: Case Number: XXXXXXXX
Complainant Name: [redacted]
Insured Name: [redacted]
Policy Number: PAMO-XXXXXXX
Company: Esurance Property and Casualty Insurance Company
Dear Ms. [redacted]:
Esurance Insurance Services, Inc. (Esurance) on behalf of Esurance Property and Casualty Insurance Company is in receipt of the consumer follow-up correspondence submitted by [redacted] regarding the above referenced private passenger [redacted] policy.
In her complaint, Ms. [redacted] is demanding that Esurance refund the difference of premiums for adding an additional driver.
After further review, again Esurance records indicate on June 30, 2015, Ms. [redacted] contacted Esurance via mail to request a copy of the Driver Exclusion Form. On that same day Esurance contacted Ms. [redacted] and advised her a copy of the Driver Exclusion Form would be emailed, per her request, and the form must be completed and returned by July 6, 2015, to avoid the cancellation or non-renewal or the additional driver being added to her automobile policy. No further contact was received from Ms. [redacted] regarding the Driver Exclusion Form.
On July 7, 2015, Esurance contacted Ms. [redacted] via email to advise her that we have not received the previously requested information, therefore; the additional operator was added the insured's automobile policy. As a result; Ms. [redacted]'s six-month policy term premium increased from $470.00 to $1,742.00. Esurance also advised Ms. [redacted] of the following steps to mitigate the premium increase:
1.If this driver is currently insured on a separate policy, Esurance request that you to send us a copy of their current insurance declaration page.
2.If you would like to exclude this driver from your policy, Esurance request that you to complete a Driver Exclusion Form. Excluded drivers will not be covered by your policy if they're involved in an accident.
On August 9, 2015, Esurance received the Driver Exclusion Form.
On August 15, 2015, Ms. [redacted] contacted Esurance to inquiry about her premium increase. Esurance advised her the additional operator had been excluded, but the pro-rate increase is the amount owed for the time the additional operator was added to the policy.
On August 16, 2015, Ms. [redacted] contacted Esurance to request the cancellation of her automobile policy and during that call the representative advised her of the cancellation fee and informed her that a refund in the amount of $18.82 will be credited to the method of payment on file within 5-7 days. On that same day Esurance issued a credit notification to Ms. [redacted] advising her of the credit and to allow up to 30 days for her financial institution to credit the account.
Esurance records indicate all unearned premiums have been refunded to the insured.
Thank you for allowing Esurance the opportunity to address your inquiry. If you have any questions or need additional information regarding this file, please direct all correspondence to [redacted], Compliance Analyst, P.O. Box 2890, Rocklin, CA, XXXXX, or via email to [redacted]@esurance.com
Sincerely,
[redacted]
Compliance Analyst
Esurance Insurance Services, Inc.
On behalf of Esurance Property and Casualty Insurance Company
Final Consumer Response /* (4200, 11, 2015/09/17) */
(The consumer indicated he/she DID NOT accept the response from the business.)
I will explain again that the form I was supposed to receive never came. I was also told as long as I got the exclusion completed before my August payment the increase would not be applied. I waited a week or two and called back, I told Esurance I did not receive the form and after getting the run around from 4 different people I was told an adjustor had to do the exclusion because there was a pending claim. This was a claim that went on for 2 months! The claim never should have existed as it was not an accident I was involved in and my son did not live at my residence when it happened. My vehicle was also not involved. When I was transferred to the adjustor he left me on hold for 10 minutes. It took me 3 tries to get the exclusion done. There is no reason I should have been charged. Esurance dropped the ball and should foot the bill. I am not going to accept excuses.