August 18, "Calibri","sans-serif";"> Revdex.com of Chicago & Northern Illinois, Inc North Wabash Ave, Suite Chicago, Illinois RE: Case Number: Consumer: Angel [redacted] Our Claim Number: INV Date of Loss: 7/2/ Dear Revdex.com: The complainant’s vehicle, a [redacted] , was deemed a total loss as a result of the above mentioned lossOn 8/11/the company relayed an offer to the complainant in the amount of $3,should she surrender the vehicle to the company, or an owner retained offer in the amount of $2,should she decide to keep the salvaged vehicleSaid offer was determined through the utilization of a widely accepted independent source, CCCThe same date the company spoke with the complainant’s lien holder who advised Ms [redacted] still owed $5,on the vehicle loan To date, after several communications with the complainant, Ms [redacted] has expressed she is not accepting the total loss offer as it will not pay off her total outstanding loanThe company explained to the complainant that in the event of a total loss, the company is only obligated to pay the actual cash value of the vehicle which may not always cover the amount of the loanThis would be the purpose of GAP insurance, which the complainant may or may not have available to her At this time, while unfortunate that the complainant may be upside down in her vehicle from a financial perspective, the company believes that it has acted properly when utilizing a widely accepted independent source to determine the value of the complainants’ vehicle Currently our claim remains open pending acceptance of the total loss offer Sincerely, Joseph [redacted] Vice President of Claims Phone: 708-552-
June 16,
"Calibri","sans-serif"">
Revdex.com
NWabash, Ste3120Chicago IL 60611- RE: Your File No.: ***
Complainant: *** ***
Our Claim No.: ***
Date of Loss: 05/12/ Insured: D*** ***
To Whom It May Concern:
Please allow this to serve as our response to the complaint filed by *** ***
This loss occurred when the insured backed into the complainant’s parked motorcycle causing damageAn independent appraiser inspected the complainant’s motorcycle and submitted an estimate in the amount of $2,less a betterment deduction of $leaving a net amount of $1,The appraiser indicated there were prior scuffs and damages to the vehicle; therefore a betterment charge was appliedThe company related an offer of 100% of the net damages to the complainant which was not acceptedThe complainant did not agree with the betterment charge, nor was he in agreement with the written labor rate of $35/hour
The company advised the complainant that it was not required to compensate him for damages or wear and tear documented to have previously existed on his vehicle prior to the loss occurringHowever, in attempt to resolve this matter, a concession was made wherein the company revised the estimate reducing the betterment charge and increasing the labor rate to that of $50/hourAs such the company extended a revised offer to the complainant for 100% of the revised estimate being $2,less a reduced betterment of $for a net offer of $1,At this time, the complainant advised he is not accepting the revised offer as he wanted to obtain his own estimates for comparison.
Based on the aforementioned we believe that we have fairly in our assessment of the loss related damages as well as that of the pre- existing damagesAt this time, our offer remains available to the complainant should he wish to accept same
Sincerely,
*** ***
Vice President of Claims
*** ***
My car was hit by the driver with First Chicago Insurance company about days ago
Police report was filedDriver accepted his mistake.Required documents (as requested by First Chicago Insurance Company were submitted)
At days I failed to get hold of the Claim officer for an update
Every time I call, I am placed on hold as soon as I give them my claim number
Last reason given was " we are trying to get hold of our driver, and until we do so, this claim can not settle"It would be a fair response, except when I ask them the follow up I am told that " If our driver does not contact us within days, this claim will be closed without settlement"
First Chicago refuses to take responsibility to complete the claim merely because their own driver is not accessible to them, and I am told no information will be shared with me, even if the claim is closed
I was in an accident with a cab driverThe cab driver used this company so I was dealing with themThe story of what happened differed between what I said happened and what the cab driver said happenedIt took over two months for them to deny my claimThey said that they were not able to get the police report that we had filed the same day of the accident for some reasonIt really felt like going into it that the company did not take the claim seriously nor conduct its due diligence in the matteraccording to their Yelp account it sounds like this kind of thing happens a lotLong story short, don't expect someone to get back to you in a timely matter and pretty much assume you'll pay for the damagesTim LWas not friendly or helpful
Complaint: ***
I am rejecting this response because:this is not trueBecause I am an emigrant , the *** *** company think that I am stupid
This driver has not been in front of me on the road, he steps out of PETERSON street, along the curbI walked down the street, normaly when he suddenly made leftI saw that he intended to make left , and I braked , my car was stoped in the moment of impact, and he came to my right and hit my car in the right sideIf I were behind him, my car would not have been hit in the right side, but in front
Sincerely,
*** ***
I saw that he left wants to do, and I braked, my car was stopped in the moment of impact, he came to my right and hit my car on the right side
I saw that he left wants to do, and I braked, my car was stopped in the moment of impact, he came to my right and hit my car on the right side
I saw that he left wants to do, and I braked, my car was stopped in the moment of impact, he came to my right and hit my car on the right side
if I was behind him, the car would not have been hit in the right side, he might have been hit in the face
January 12,
"Calibri","sans-serif";">
Revdex.com of Chicago and Northern Illinois
NWabash Ave, Ste Chicago, IL
RE: Our Claim Number: ***
Consumer: Lori A***
Case Number: Date of Loss: 10/12/
Dear Revdex.com:
The complainant submitted a paid rental invoice for reimbursementThe complainant rented a vehicle for days, with the total bill equating to that of $1,of which $was paid for additional insurance coverages
The company spoke with and informed the complainant on numerous occasions that we would REIMBURSE (which is acknowledged in the complainant’s statement to the Revdex.com) the complainant for rental expenses, however said REIMBURSEMENT was not to exceed $per dayThe complainant rented a vehicle for days at a weekly rate which when converted to a daily rate equated to $per dayThis amount was the basis for the company’s reimbursementThe company reimbursed the complainant $(the full days at $18.65/daily rate inclusive of tax and recovery fee)
The company did not consider reimbursement of $as the company is not required to reimburse the complainant for the purchase of additional insurance coverages offered by the rental facility for the purpose of covering the rental vehicleThese coverage’s are optional and not necessary to rent a vehicle unless the vehicle withdrawn from service did not have coverage that would be transferable to the rental vehicleAccording to our records, we believe that the complainants vehicle did have such transferable coverage with AAA Insurance Company, thus eliminating the need for additional insurance protection to be purchased directly from the rental agencyWith this being said, the optional insurance coverage the complainant purchased for the rental vehicle is not considered to be reasonable or necessaryThe complainant has been advised of this on numerous occasions
To date we believe that we have acted appropriately in that we have fully paid for the loss related repairs to the complainant’s vehicle and reimbursed the complainant only the necessary incurred rental expenses
Sincerely,
James V***
Director of Claims
Phone: (708) 552- j***@firstchicagoinsurance.com
December 9,
Roman" size="3">
Revdex.com of Chicago & Northern Illinois
North Wabash Ave, Suite Chicago, Illinois
RE: Complaint Number: ***
Consumer: *** ***
Dear Revdex.com of Chicago & Northern Illinois
This loss was reported to the company on 10/14/by written statement from that of our insured driver, *** ***Mr*** reports he was trying to make a left turn when he was hit from behind by the complainantMr*** states he was driving on Nagle, a one lane street with parking on the side
On 10/19/the company spoke with the complainant and secured her statementThe complainant reports she was driving northbound on Nagle in the left of two (2) lanes, stating the lanes are separated by painted lines on the road, as well as parking allowed in the right laneThe complainant states the insured vehicle was also northbound in the right lane a little bit ahead of the complainant vehicleShe then reports the insured suddenly changed lanes and was in front of her to make a left turn into an alley, when she was unable to stop in time and struck the rear of the insured’s vehicleThe complainant was asked if the insured utilized a turn signal in which the complainant advised she did not know as she couldn’t see the rear of the insured’s vehicleThe company advised the complainant due to the conflicting statements, a copy of the Illinois Crash Report would be required to finalize the liability investigation
On 11/15/the company received a copy of the Illinois Crash ReportThe narrative stated in summary: Driver of Unit(insured) does not recall if he changed lanes properlyDriver of Unit (complainant) related that the driver of Unit was in the right lane and turned into the left lane headed north with no indicator and then the driver of Unit struck the left rear bumper of unit
Even in light of the Crash report narrative, our insured continued to maintain his position in that he was directly in front of the complainant’s vehicle when struck from behindTherefore we reviewed dash cam footage from the insured’s vehicle which indicates our insured to be traveling in the only northbound lane of NagleA google street-view of the loss location also confirms there to only be one northbound lane of travel on Nagle, therefore contradicting the complainant’s statement that the insured made a sudden lane changeAccordingly, after a thorough investigation, the company determined to not be liable for the damages to the complainant’s vehicle as the complainant failed to reduce her speed and rear ended our insured’s vehicle
The company spoke with the complainant on 11/17/and explained its position regarding the denialA formal denial letter was sent to the complainant as wellIt is never easy for an insurance company to deny a claim, nor is it easy for one to accept the denial; however, we feel we have acted properly in our handling of this claim, given our investigation and the negligence laws in the state of Illinois
Respectfully,
*** ***
Vice President of Claims
Phone: ***
The worse example of a good companyThese are horrible peopleI am still trying to get them to cancel my policyI went to their corporate headquarters at spoke with Jose ***, their VP of claims and told them in person to cancelThey never asked me to sign anythingI have sent emails and called several timesHeather *** told me she would send me cancelation papers as recently as yesterday, but I still don't have themT*** *** & *** *** (who I also complained about) their agent lied to me about my policy and Mr*** asked me, if I was an adult that can read fine printI would strongly suggest that you review their *** and *** reviews as wellThis company has a history of treating people poorly
May 17,
"Calibri","sans-serif";">
Revdex.com of Chicago & Northern Illinois, Inc North Wabash Avenue, Suite Chicago, Illinois
RE: Complaint ID Number: [redacted]
To Whom It May Concern,
Please be advised that we are in receipt of the above subject inquiry to the Revdex.com Unfortunately at this time, after multiple system searches, no claim or policy number was located which could be associated with the complainantAccordingly, the company has reached out to the complainant via both telephone and e-mail and have had no responseTherefore at this time, this leads us to believe the complainant may have possibly misdirected this complaint to the incorrect company.
Should information to the contrary come to light, we will be more than happy to review same
Respectfully,
[redacted]
Vice President of Claims
Phone: [redacted]
j[redacted]@firstchicagoinsurance.com
October 31,
"Calibri","sans-serif";">
Revdex.com of Chicago & Northern Illinois
North Wabash Ave, Suite Chicago, Illinois
RE: Complaint Number: [redacted]
Consumer: Jessica [redacted]
Policy Inception Date: 3/18/ Date of Loss: 10/2/ Our Claim Number: [redacted]
Dear Revdex.com of Chicago & Northern Illinois:
The complainant's vehicle was involved in a collision on 10/2/During the course of the claims investigation it was discovered the complainant had been involved in prior at fault accidents which were not disclosed to the company when the complainant completed her application for insuranceThe company was unable to honor the claim for this reason as the complainant's policy was rescinded based on the conditions section of the policySpecifically, the policy states in part:
Conditions
Misrepresentation
a) If at any time during the first policy period, or year; whichever is less, we become aware of a misrepresentation that would have made the risk ineligible or resulted in a higher premium charge, the policy will be rescinded and annulled.
On 10/19/a premium refund check was mailed to the complainantBased on the conditions section of the policy, we believe we have acted accordingly in our handling of this claim
Sincerely,
Joseph [redacted]
Vice President of Claims
Phone: [redacted]
Complaint: [redacted]
I am rejecting this response because:
This company did nothing for 3 weeks while my daughter car sat at [redacted], they man there said they never received a check was given the run around as well. Nobody done anything until after I filed this complaint, then they wanted to call talking about the car is now a total loss. They could have made that decision 2 weeks earlier and my daughter could have been looking for another car. The Juan gentleman who is the adjuster, was so unprofessional, with asking why did I take it to [redacted] in the first place, cause you gave her 2 weeks to find a place. Now we wait to see how long it takes them to pay the car off, so my daughter can get another one. I will be switching insurance company, because I have never dealt with this type is service.
Sincerely,
Dwayne Ray
Initial Business Response /* (1000, 5, 2015/08/11) */
August 11, 2015
Revdex.com
330 N. Wabash Ave, Ste. 3120
Chicago, IL XXXXX
RE: Our Claim Number: ILVXXXXX
Our Insured/Consumer: Eddie [redacted]
Complaint Case Number: XXXXXXXX
Dear Better...
Business Bureau:
Thank you for the opportunity to respond to the complaint filed by Eddie [redacted]. This claim was reported to our company on 6/29/15 and involves the theft of complainant's Jeep Liberty which was to have occurred on 6/27/15. The vehicle was recovered and we arranged to have it inspected by one of our appraisers so an estimate of damages could be prepared. Said inspection occurred on 6/29/15.
As part of the claim process, we forwarded the complainant our Affidavit of Theft on 6/30/15. The police report for this loss was requested, however was unavailable even as of 7/24/15, when we took the initiative to personally send a representative of the company to the Central Records Office of the [redacted] Department.
Mr. [redacted] returned his Affidavit to us on 7/27/15. Further communication with a representative of the CPD indicated that a filing error may have been responsible for the report being unavailable at the time of request, however, confirmed that report HYXXXXXX was, indeed, a theft report for Mr. [redacted].
At this time we will be proceeding with settlement on this claim and have arranged for Mr. [redacted] to take his vehicle to a company approved facility or into the repair facility of his choice should they honor our repair estimate.
While we regret that this claim was not concluded as quickly as the complainant had hoped or anticipated, the securing of a police report was a necessary step in the validation of the claim and coverage. In addition we note that it took the complainant approximately 30 days to return the completed Affidavit of Theft. Unfortunately in this instance this process was delayed for reasons beyond our control as indicated above. In conclusion, we believe that this matter is now concluded. If you have any questions, please contact me at (XXX) XXX-XXXX.
Sincerely,
James [redacted]
Director of Claims
[redacted]@firstchicagoinsurance.com
Revdex.com of Chicago and Northern Illinois
330 N. Wabash Ave, Ste. 3120
Chicago, IL 60611
RE: Our Claim Number: ILV20976
Consumer: Lori A. [redacted]
Case Number: 11081643
Date of Loss: 10/12/2015
Dear Revdex.com:
While we understand that the denial of a claim or any portion thereof may not be well received, the company has acted appropriately when guided by its legal responsibility.
We have previously stated our position and remain by same.
Sincerely,
James V. [redacted]
Director of Claims
Phone: (708) 552-4421
j[redacted]@firstchicagoinsurance.com
Revdex.com of Chicago & Northern Illinois
330 North Wabash Ave, Suite 3120
Chicago, Illinois 60611
RE: Complaint Number: [redacted]
Consumer: Jessica [redacted]
Policy Inception Date: 3/18/2016
Date of Loss: 10/2/2016
Our Claim Number: I[redacted]
Dear Revdex.com of Chicago & Northern Illinois:
While the complainant’s rebuttal is somewhat confusing, we believe we have already addressed the issue at hand. The complainant failed to notify the company she was involved in a prior at fault accident upon purchasing her policy of insurance. The complainant purchased the policy over the phone. The writing producer specifically asked if the complainant was involved in any prior accidents in which the complainant advised she had none.
Based on our findings, the complainant’s policy of insurance was rescinded based on conditions section of the policy, due to material misrepresentation of the undisclosed at fault losses.
In her rebuttal, the complainant suggests she never signed her application for insurance as it contained incorrect information; however, we find no evidence of the company previously receiving any correspondence or communication from the complainant concerning the alleged misinformation until after the loss and our claims investigation. The complainant has not presented any new or relevant evidence for the company to consider. To the contrary, the company has secured a statement from the agent of the complainants choice confirming that not only were all application questions asked of the complainant, but also that all answers were recorded as provided by the complainant.
In closing, we feel we have addressed all the concerns presented by the complainant and again, feel that we have acted properly in our handling of this matter. Therefore the company stands by our position in this matter.
Sincerely,
Joseph Mase
Vice President of Claims
Phone: [redacted]
Initial Business Response /* (1000, 5, 2015/04/13) */
April 13, 2015
Revdex.com serving Chicago & Northern Illinois
Attention: [redacted]
RE: Case Number: XXXXXXXX
Consumer: [redacted]
Claim Number: PANXXXXX
NAIC Number: XXXXX
Dear [redacted]
The complainant...
reported to the company that she had a loss with her vehicle which resulted in damage to her residential property for which she is a full time resident. The complainant also indicated that she does not own the residence, she rents the property. As part of our normal policy investigation the company requested that the complainant provide the company with a copy of her rental agreement, as well as a copy of the home owners declaration page relative to the residence itself. To date, the company has yet to receive the requested information from Ms. [redacted].
Pursuant to our policy of insurance, the complainant has a duty to cooperate as is noted under the CONDITIONS section of the policy. As such we are currently handling this claim under a Reservation of Rights, wherein the Company reserves our rights to decline this claim based on the complainants' failure to adhere to the terms and conditions of the policy of insurance.
Sincerely,
[redacted] V. [redacted]
Director of Claims
Phone: XXX-XXX-XXXX
The billing customer service representative are great but the underwriting supervisor by the name of Heathers is very unprofessional and rude. She has a very nasty attitude and wasn't very much help in answering my questions and she hung up on me as well as the operator. When I called back after speaking with Heathers the operator hung up on me when I asked for the telephone number to their corporate office. This is very Unprofessional and inconsiderate.
The complainant’s vehicle, a 2006 [redacted] was involved in a collision on 6/29/16. On 7/12/16 an estimate was received on the complainant’s vehicle in the amount of $2,793.78 less the applicable $500 deductible leaving a net estimate of $2,293.78. The vehicle was determined to be repairable. It was not until 8/12/16 the complainant advised he would be having his vehicle repaired at [redacted]; at which time a settlement draft was issued and the estimate was faxed to the repair facility. On 9/2/16 the repair facility contacted the company advising additional damages were found resulting in the vehicle being deemed a total loss.
On 9/8/16 the company spoke with the complainant and advised the additional damages deemed the vehicle totaled. The company relayed an offer to the complainant in the amount of $5,317.96 should he surrender the vehicle to the company, or an owner retained offer in the amount of $4,775.16. On 9/9/16 the company spoke with the complainant’s lien holder who advised the complainant still owed $7,929.31 on the vehicle loan; therefore an owner retained settlement was not an option. The company requested a letter of guarantee and a copy of the title from the lien holder for the First Chicago retained offer of $5,317.96. The company also spoke with the complainant this date and requested they release the vehicle to the company so the salvage may be moved. The company also requested the complainant complete and return a Power of Attorney form on this date.
Based on the aforementioned, we clearly not only advised the complainant that their vehicle was beyond that of economic repair, but also of the additional requirements needed in order to conclude this matter. At this time, our file remains open, pending the requested information from the complainant, as well as his lien holder. Upon receipt of said documents, a total loss settlement draft will be issued, ultimately concluding this matter.
Sincerely,
[redacted]
Vice President of Claims
Phone: [redacted]
Revdex.com of Chicago & Northern Illinois, Inc
330 North Wabash Ave, Suite 3120
Chicago, Illinois 60611
RE: Case Number: 11629591
Consumer: Angel [redacted]
Our Claim Number: INV24862
Date of Loss: 7/2/2016
Dear Revdex.com:
The complainant’s vehicle, a 2006 [redacted], was deemed a total loss as a result of the above mentioned loss. On 8/11/16 the company relayed an offer to the complainant in the amount of $3,303.46 should she surrender the vehicle to the company, or an owner retained offer in the amount of $2,938.66 should she decide to keep the salvaged vehicle. Said offer was determined through the utilization of a widely accepted independent source, CCC. The same date the company spoke with the complainant’s lien holder who advised Ms. [redacted] still owed $5,222.20 on the vehicle loan.
To date, after several communications with the complainant, Ms. [redacted] has expressed she is not accepting the total loss offer as it will not pay off her total outstanding loan. The company explained to the complainant that in the event of a total loss, the company is only obligated to pay the actual cash value of the vehicle which may not always cover the amount of the loan. This would be the purpose of GAP insurance, which the complainant may or may not have available to her.
At this time, while unfortunate that the complainant may be upside down in her vehicle from a financial perspective, the company believes that it has acted properly when utilizing a widely accepted independent source to determine the value of the complainants’ vehicle. Currently our claim remains open pending acceptance of the total loss offer.
Sincerely,
Joseph [redacted]
Vice President of Claims
Phone: 708-552-4621
Initial Business Response /* (1000, 5, 2014/02/21) */
February 21, 2014
Revdex.com of Chicago and Northern Illinois
330 N. Wabash Ave, Ste. 206
Chicago, Illinois 60611
RE: Case Number:XXXXXXXX
Complainant: [redacted]
To Whom It May Concern:
Attached please find our...
response to the Indiana Department of Insurance in regards to the above mentioned case.
[redacted] V. [redacted]
Claims Director
XXX-XXX-XXXX
WARNING! Beware of First Chicago Insurance ("FC"), they are not only unethical, but extremely fraudulent-focused when it comes to processing legal claims. FC operates in an openly unethical manner (e.g., untruths, punishment delays, and all sorts of unsolicited drama). DO NOT personally engage with FC without an attorney who will ensure your rights are not violated. FC will not inform you of its requirements to process a claim, yet, you will be held liable for any inactions you did not make as a result; thus, being the reason to close/dismiss your claim.
It is unclear how FC could claim a A rating in either its auto or workers compensation underwriting function, when even as recent as a few weeks ago anyone can "Google" posted complaints confirming what I am posting now. Try complaining directly to FC, and see if you are not punished with delays to medical care, delays to claim payments, delays to return calls; that is, if you can reach them at all. You will suffer, one way or another.
BEWARE -- to avoid victimization by FC, run as far and as fast as you can to another insurance carrier. Engage with FC at your (and your family's) own risk.
August 18, "Calibri","sans-serif";"> Revdex.com of Chicago & Northern Illinois, Inc North Wabash Ave, Suite Chicago, Illinois RE: Case Number: Consumer: Angel [redacted] Our Claim Number: INV Date of Loss: 7/2/ Dear Revdex.com: The complainant’s vehicle, a [redacted] , was deemed a total loss as a result of the above mentioned lossOn 8/11/the company relayed an offer to the complainant in the amount of $3,should she surrender the vehicle to the company, or an owner retained offer in the amount of $2,should she decide to keep the salvaged vehicleSaid offer was determined through the utilization of a widely accepted independent source, CCCThe same date the company spoke with the complainant’s lien holder who advised Ms [redacted] still owed $5,on the vehicle loan To date, after several communications with the complainant, Ms [redacted] has expressed she is not accepting the total loss offer as it will not pay off her total outstanding loanThe company explained to the complainant that in the event of a total loss, the company is only obligated to pay the actual cash value of the vehicle which may not always cover the amount of the loanThis would be the purpose of GAP insurance, which the complainant may or may not have available to her At this time, while unfortunate that the complainant may be upside down in her vehicle from a financial perspective, the company believes that it has acted properly when utilizing a widely accepted independent source to determine the value of the complainants’ vehicle Currently our claim remains open pending acceptance of the total loss offer Sincerely, Joseph [redacted] Vice President of Claims Phone: 708-552-
June 16,
"Calibri","sans-serif"">
Revdex.com
NWabash, Ste3120Chicago IL 60611- RE: Your File No.: ***
Complainant: *** ***
Our Claim No.: ***
Date of Loss: 05/12/ Insured: D*** ***
To Whom It May Concern:
Please allow this to serve as our response to the complaint filed by *** ***
This loss occurred when the insured backed into the complainant’s parked motorcycle causing damageAn independent appraiser inspected the complainant’s motorcycle and submitted an estimate in the amount of $2,less a betterment deduction of $leaving a net amount of $1,The appraiser indicated there were prior scuffs and damages to the vehicle; therefore a betterment charge was appliedThe company related an offer of 100% of the net damages to the complainant which was not acceptedThe complainant did not agree with the betterment charge, nor was he in agreement with the written labor rate of $35/hour
The company advised the complainant that it was not required to compensate him for damages or wear and tear documented to have previously existed on his vehicle prior to the loss occurringHowever, in attempt to resolve this matter, a concession was made wherein the company revised the estimate reducing the betterment charge and increasing the labor rate to that of $50/hourAs such the company extended a revised offer to the complainant for 100% of the revised estimate being $2,less a reduced betterment of $for a net offer of $1,At this time, the complainant advised he is not accepting the revised offer as he wanted to obtain his own estimates for comparison.
Based on the aforementioned we believe that we have fairly in our assessment of the loss related damages as well as that of the pre- existing damagesAt this time, our offer remains available to the complainant should he wish to accept same
Sincerely,
*** ***
Vice President of Claims
*** ***
My car was hit by the driver with First Chicago Insurance company about days ago
Police report was filedDriver accepted his mistake.Required documents (as requested by First Chicago Insurance Company were submitted)
At days I failed to get hold of the Claim officer for an update
Every time I call, I am placed on hold as soon as I give them my claim number
Last reason given was " we are trying to get hold of our driver, and until we do so, this claim can not settle"It would be a fair response, except when I ask them the follow up I am told that " If our driver does not contact us within days, this claim will be closed without settlement"
First Chicago refuses to take responsibility to complete the claim merely because their own driver is not accessible to them, and I am told no information will be shared with me, even if the claim is closed
I was in an accident with a cab driverThe cab driver used this company so I was dealing with themThe story of what happened differed between what I said happened and what the cab driver said happenedIt took over two months for them to deny my claimThey said that they were not able to get the police report that we had filed the same day of the accident for some reasonIt really felt like going into it that the company did not take the claim seriously nor conduct its due diligence in the matteraccording to their Yelp account it sounds like this kind of thing happens a lotLong story short, don't expect someone to get back to you in a timely matter and pretty much assume you'll pay for the damagesTim LWas not friendly or helpful
Complaint: ***
I am rejecting this response because:this is not trueBecause I am an emigrant , the *** *** company think that I am stupid
This driver has not been in front of me on the road, he steps out of PETERSON street, along the curbI walked down the street, normaly when he suddenly made leftI saw that he intended to make left , and I braked , my car was stoped in the moment of impact, and he came to my right and hit my car in the right sideIf I were behind him, my car would not have been hit in the right side, but in front
Sincerely,
*** ***
I saw that he left wants to do, and I braked, my car was stopped in the moment of impact, he came to my right and hit my car on the right side
I saw that he left wants to do, and I braked, my car was stopped in the moment of impact, he came to my right and hit my car on the right side
I saw that he left wants to do, and I braked, my car was stopped in the moment of impact, he came to my right and hit my car on the right side
if I was behind him, the car would not have been hit in the right side, he might have been hit in the face
January 12,
"Calibri","sans-serif";">
Revdex.com of Chicago and Northern Illinois
NWabash Ave, Ste Chicago, IL
RE: Our Claim Number: ***
Consumer: Lori A***
Case Number: Date of Loss: 10/12/
Dear Revdex.com:
The complainant submitted a paid rental invoice for reimbursementThe complainant rented a vehicle for days, with the total bill equating to that of $1,of which $was paid for additional insurance coverages
The company spoke with and informed the complainant on numerous occasions that we would REIMBURSE (which is acknowledged in the complainant’s statement to the Revdex.com) the complainant for rental expenses, however said REIMBURSEMENT was not to exceed $per dayThe complainant rented a vehicle for days at a weekly rate which when converted to a daily rate equated to $per dayThis amount was the basis for the company’s reimbursementThe company reimbursed the complainant $(the full days at $18.65/daily rate inclusive of tax and recovery fee)
The company did not consider reimbursement of $as the company is not required to reimburse the complainant for the purchase of additional insurance coverages offered by the rental facility for the purpose of covering the rental vehicleThese coverage’s are optional and not necessary to rent a vehicle unless the vehicle withdrawn from service did not have coverage that would be transferable to the rental vehicleAccording to our records, we believe that the complainants vehicle did have such transferable coverage with AAA Insurance Company, thus eliminating the need for additional insurance protection to be purchased directly from the rental agencyWith this being said, the optional insurance coverage the complainant purchased for the rental vehicle is not considered to be reasonable or necessaryThe complainant has been advised of this on numerous occasions
To date we believe that we have acted appropriately in that we have fully paid for the loss related repairs to the complainant’s vehicle and reimbursed the complainant only the necessary incurred rental expenses
Sincerely,
James V***
Director of Claims
Phone: (708) 552- j***@firstchicagoinsurance.com
December 9,
Roman" size="3">
Revdex.com of Chicago & Northern Illinois
North Wabash Ave, Suite Chicago, Illinois
RE: Complaint Number: ***
Consumer: *** ***
Dear Revdex.com of Chicago & Northern Illinois
This loss was reported to the company on 10/14/by written statement from that of our insured driver, *** ***Mr*** reports he was trying to make a left turn when he was hit from behind by the complainantMr*** states he was driving on Nagle, a one lane street with parking on the side
On 10/19/the company spoke with the complainant and secured her statementThe complainant reports she was driving northbound on Nagle in the left of two (2) lanes, stating the lanes are separated by painted lines on the road, as well as parking allowed in the right laneThe complainant states the insured vehicle was also northbound in the right lane a little bit ahead of the complainant vehicleShe then reports the insured suddenly changed lanes and was in front of her to make a left turn into an alley, when she was unable to stop in time and struck the rear of the insured’s vehicleThe complainant was asked if the insured utilized a turn signal in which the complainant advised she did not know as she couldn’t see the rear of the insured’s vehicleThe company advised the complainant due to the conflicting statements, a copy of the Illinois Crash Report would be required to finalize the liability investigation
On 11/15/the company received a copy of the Illinois Crash ReportThe narrative stated in summary: Driver of Unit(insured) does not recall if he changed lanes properlyDriver of Unit (complainant) related that the driver of Unit was in the right lane and turned into the left lane headed north with no indicator and then the driver of Unit struck the left rear bumper of unit
Even in light of the Crash report narrative, our insured continued to maintain his position in that he was directly in front of the complainant’s vehicle when struck from behindTherefore we reviewed dash cam footage from the insured’s vehicle which indicates our insured to be traveling in the only northbound lane of NagleA google street-view of the loss location also confirms there to only be one northbound lane of travel on Nagle, therefore contradicting the complainant’s statement that the insured made a sudden lane changeAccordingly, after a thorough investigation, the company determined to not be liable for the damages to the complainant’s vehicle as the complainant failed to reduce her speed and rear ended our insured’s vehicle
The company spoke with the complainant on 11/17/and explained its position regarding the denialA formal denial letter was sent to the complainant as wellIt is never easy for an insurance company to deny a claim, nor is it easy for one to accept the denial; however, we feel we have acted properly in our handling of this claim, given our investigation and the negligence laws in the state of Illinois
Respectfully,
*** ***
Vice President of Claims
Phone: ***
The worse example of a good companyThese are horrible peopleI am still trying to get them to cancel my policyI went to their corporate headquarters at spoke with Jose ***, their VP of claims and told them in person to cancelThey never asked me to sign anythingI have sent emails and called several timesHeather *** told me she would send me cancelation papers as recently as yesterday, but I still don't have themT*** *** & *** *** (who I also complained about) their agent lied to me about my policy and Mr*** asked me, if I was an adult that can read fine printI would strongly suggest that you review their *** and *** reviews as wellThis company has a history of treating people poorly
May 17,
"Calibri","sans-serif";">
Revdex.com of Chicago & Northern Illinois, Inc North Wabash Avenue, Suite Chicago, Illinois
RE: Complaint ID Number: [redacted]
To Whom It May Concern,
Please be advised that we are in receipt of the above subject inquiry to the Revdex.com Unfortunately at this time, after multiple system searches, no claim or policy number was located which could be associated with the complainantAccordingly, the company has reached out to the complainant via both telephone and e-mail and have had no responseTherefore at this time, this leads us to believe the complainant may have possibly misdirected this complaint to the incorrect company.
Should information to the contrary come to light, we will be more than happy to review same
Respectfully,
[redacted]
Vice President of Claims
Phone: [redacted]
j[redacted]@firstchicagoinsurance.com
October 31,
"Calibri","sans-serif";">
Revdex.com of Chicago & Northern Illinois
North Wabash Ave, Suite Chicago, Illinois
RE: Complaint Number: [redacted]
Consumer: Jessica [redacted]
Policy Inception Date: 3/18/ Date of Loss: 10/2/ Our Claim Number: [redacted]
Dear Revdex.com of Chicago & Northern Illinois:
The complainant's vehicle was involved in a collision on 10/2/During the course of the claims investigation it was discovered the complainant had been involved in prior at fault accidents which were not disclosed to the company when the complainant completed her application for insuranceThe company was unable to honor the claim for this reason as the complainant's policy was rescinded based on the conditions section of the policySpecifically, the policy states in part:
Conditions
Misrepresentation
a) If at any time during the first policy period, or year; whichever is less, we become aware of a misrepresentation that would have made the risk ineligible or resulted in a higher premium charge, the policy will be rescinded and annulled.
On 10/19/a premium refund check was mailed to the complainantBased on the conditions section of the policy, we believe we have acted accordingly in our handling of this claim
Sincerely,
Joseph [redacted]
Vice President of Claims
Phone: [redacted]
Complaint: [redacted]
I am rejecting this response because:
This company did nothing for 3 weeks while my daughter car sat at [redacted], they man there said they never received a check was given the run around as well. Nobody done anything until after I filed this complaint, then they wanted to call talking about the car is now a total loss. They could have made that decision 2 weeks earlier and my daughter could have been looking for another car. The Juan gentleman who is the adjuster, was so unprofessional, with asking why did I take it to [redacted] in the first place, cause you gave her 2 weeks to find a place. Now we wait to see how long it takes them to pay the car off, so my daughter can get another one. I will be switching insurance company, because I have never dealt with this type is service.
Sincerely,
Dwayne Ray
Initial Business Response /* (1000, 5, 2015/08/11) */
August 11, 2015
Revdex.com
330 N. Wabash Ave, Ste. 3120
Chicago, IL XXXXX
RE: Our Claim Number: ILVXXXXX
Our Insured/Consumer: Eddie [redacted]
Complaint Case Number: XXXXXXXX
Dear Better...
Business Bureau:
Thank you for the opportunity to respond to the complaint filed by Eddie [redacted]. This claim was reported to our company on 6/29/15 and involves the theft of complainant's Jeep Liberty which was to have occurred on 6/27/15. The vehicle was recovered and we arranged to have it inspected by one of our appraisers so an estimate of damages could be prepared. Said inspection occurred on 6/29/15.
As part of the claim process, we forwarded the complainant our Affidavit of Theft on 6/30/15. The police report for this loss was requested, however was unavailable even as of 7/24/15, when we took the initiative to personally send a representative of the company to the Central Records Office of the [redacted] Department.
Mr. [redacted] returned his Affidavit to us on 7/27/15. Further communication with a representative of the CPD indicated that a filing error may have been responsible for the report being unavailable at the time of request, however, confirmed that report HYXXXXXX was, indeed, a theft report for Mr. [redacted].
At this time we will be proceeding with settlement on this claim and have arranged for Mr. [redacted] to take his vehicle to a company approved facility or into the repair facility of his choice should they honor our repair estimate.
While we regret that this claim was not concluded as quickly as the complainant had hoped or anticipated, the securing of a police report was a necessary step in the validation of the claim and coverage. In addition we note that it took the complainant approximately 30 days to return the completed Affidavit of Theft. Unfortunately in this instance this process was delayed for reasons beyond our control as indicated above. In conclusion, we believe that this matter is now concluded. If you have any questions, please contact me at (XXX) XXX-XXXX.
Sincerely,
James [redacted]
Director of Claims
[redacted]@firstchicagoinsurance.com
January 13, 2016
Revdex.com of Chicago and Northern Illinois
330 N. Wabash Ave, Ste. 3120
Chicago, IL 60611
RE: Our Claim Number: ILV20976
Consumer: Lori A. [redacted]
Case Number: 11081643
Date of Loss: 10/12/2015
Dear Revdex.com:
While we understand that the denial of a claim or any portion thereof may not be well received, the company has acted appropriately when guided by its legal responsibility.
We have previously stated our position and remain by same.
Sincerely,
James V. [redacted]
Director of Claims
Phone: (708) 552-4421
j[redacted]@firstchicagoinsurance.com
November 17, 2016
Revdex.com of Chicago & Northern Illinois
330 North Wabash Ave, Suite 3120
Chicago, Illinois 60611
RE: Complaint Number: [redacted]
Consumer: Jessica [redacted]
Policy Inception Date: 3/18/2016
Date of Loss: 10/2/2016
Our Claim Number: I[redacted]
Dear Revdex.com of Chicago & Northern Illinois:
While the complainant’s rebuttal is somewhat confusing, we believe we have already addressed the issue at hand. The complainant failed to notify the company she was involved in a prior at fault accident upon purchasing her policy of insurance. The complainant purchased the policy over the phone. The writing producer specifically asked if the complainant was involved in any prior accidents in which the complainant advised she had none.
Based on our findings, the complainant’s policy of insurance was rescinded based on conditions section of the policy, due to material misrepresentation of the undisclosed at fault losses.
In her rebuttal, the complainant suggests she never signed her application for insurance as it contained incorrect information; however, we find no evidence of the company previously receiving any correspondence or communication from the complainant concerning the alleged misinformation until after the loss and our claims investigation. The complainant has not presented any new or relevant evidence for the company to consider. To the contrary, the company has secured a statement from the agent of the complainants choice confirming that not only were all application questions asked of the complainant, but also that all answers were recorded as provided by the complainant.
In closing, we feel we have addressed all the concerns presented by the complainant and again, feel that we have acted properly in our handling of this matter. Therefore the company stands by our position in this matter.
Sincerely,
Joseph Mase
Vice President of Claims
Phone: [redacted]
Initial Business Response /* (1000, 5, 2015/04/13) */
April 13, 2015
Revdex.com serving Chicago & Northern Illinois
Attention: [redacted]
RE: Case Number: XXXXXXXX
Consumer: [redacted]
Claim Number: PANXXXXX
NAIC Number: XXXXX
Dear [redacted]
The complainant...
reported to the company that she had a loss with her vehicle which resulted in damage to her residential property for which she is a full time resident. The complainant also indicated that she does not own the residence, she rents the property. As part of our normal policy investigation the company requested that the complainant provide the company with a copy of her rental agreement, as well as a copy of the home owners declaration page relative to the residence itself. To date, the company has yet to receive the requested information from Ms. [redacted].
Pursuant to our policy of insurance, the complainant has a duty to cooperate as is noted under the CONDITIONS section of the policy. As such we are currently handling this claim under a Reservation of Rights, wherein the Company reserves our rights to decline this claim based on the complainants' failure to adhere to the terms and conditions of the policy of insurance.
Sincerely,
[redacted] V. [redacted]
Director of Claims
Phone: XXX-XXX-XXXX
The billing customer service representative are great but the underwriting supervisor by the name of Heathers is very unprofessional and rude. She has a very nasty attitude and wasn't very much help in answering my questions and she hung up on me as well as the operator. When I called back after speaking with Heathers the operator hung up on me when I asked for the telephone number to their corporate office. This is very Unprofessional and inconsiderate.
September 15,...
2016
Revdex.com of Chicago & Northern Illinois, Inc.
330 North Wabash Ave, Suite 3120
Chicago, Illinois 60611
RE: Complaint Number: [redacted]
Consumer: [redacted]
Claim Number: [redacted]
Dear Revdex.com:
The complainant’s vehicle, a 2006 [redacted] was involved in a collision on 6/29/16. On 7/12/16 an estimate was received on the complainant’s vehicle in the amount of $2,793.78 less the applicable $500 deductible leaving a net estimate of $2,293.78. The vehicle was determined to be repairable. It was not until 8/12/16 the complainant advised he would be having his vehicle repaired at [redacted]; at which time a settlement draft was issued and the estimate was faxed to the repair facility. On 9/2/16 the repair facility contacted the company advising additional damages were found resulting in the vehicle being deemed a total loss.
On 9/8/16 the company spoke with the complainant and advised the additional damages deemed the vehicle totaled. The company relayed an offer to the complainant in the amount of $5,317.96 should he surrender the vehicle to the company, or an owner retained offer in the amount of $4,775.16. On 9/9/16 the company spoke with the complainant’s lien holder who advised the complainant still owed $7,929.31 on the vehicle loan; therefore an owner retained settlement was not an option. The company requested a letter of guarantee and a copy of the title from the lien holder for the First Chicago retained offer of $5,317.96. The company also spoke with the complainant this date and requested they release the vehicle to the company so the salvage may be moved. The company also requested the complainant complete and return a Power of Attorney form on this date.
Based on the aforementioned, we clearly not only advised the complainant that their vehicle was beyond that of economic repair, but also of the additional requirements needed in order to conclude this matter. At this time, our file remains open, pending the requested information from the complainant, as well as his lien holder. Upon receipt of said documents, a total loss settlement draft will be issued, ultimately concluding this matter.
Sincerely,
[redacted]
Vice President of Claims
Phone: [redacted]
August 18, 2016
"Calibri","sans-serif";">
Revdex.com of Chicago & Northern Illinois, Inc
330 North Wabash Ave, Suite 3120
Chicago, Illinois 60611
RE: Case Number: 11629591
Consumer: Angel [redacted]
Our Claim Number: INV24862
Date of Loss: 7/2/2016
Dear Revdex.com:
The complainant’s vehicle, a 2006 [redacted], was deemed a total loss as a result of the above mentioned loss. On 8/11/16 the company relayed an offer to the complainant in the amount of $3,303.46 should she surrender the vehicle to the company, or an owner retained offer in the amount of $2,938.66 should she decide to keep the salvaged vehicle. Said offer was determined through the utilization of a widely accepted independent source, CCC. The same date the company spoke with the complainant’s lien holder who advised Ms. [redacted] still owed $5,222.20 on the vehicle loan.
To date, after several communications with the complainant, Ms. [redacted] has expressed she is not accepting the total loss offer as it will not pay off her total outstanding loan. The company explained to the complainant that in the event of a total loss, the company is only obligated to pay the actual cash value of the vehicle which may not always cover the amount of the loan. This would be the purpose of GAP insurance, which the complainant may or may not have available to her.
At this time, while unfortunate that the complainant may be upside down in her vehicle from a financial perspective, the company believes that it has acted properly when utilizing a widely accepted independent source to determine the value of the complainants’ vehicle. Currently our claim remains open pending acceptance of the total loss offer.
Sincerely,
Joseph [redacted]
Vice President of Claims
Phone: 708-552-4621
Initial Business Response /* (1000, 5, 2014/02/21) */
February 21, 2014
Revdex.com of Chicago and Northern Illinois
330 N. Wabash Ave, Ste. 206
Chicago, Illinois 60611
RE: Case Number:XXXXXXXX
Complainant: [redacted]
To Whom It May Concern:
Attached please find our...
response to the Indiana Department of Insurance in regards to the above mentioned case.
[redacted] V. [redacted]
Claims Director
XXX-XXX-XXXX
WARNING! Beware of First Chicago Insurance ("FC"), they are not only unethical, but extremely fraudulent-focused when it comes to processing legal claims. FC operates in an openly unethical manner (e.g., untruths, punishment delays, and all sorts of unsolicited drama). DO NOT personally engage with FC without an attorney who will ensure your rights are not violated. FC will not inform you of its requirements to process a claim, yet, you will be held liable for any inactions you did not make as a result; thus, being the reason to close/dismiss your claim.
It is unclear how FC could claim a A rating in either its auto or workers compensation underwriting function, when even as recent as a few weeks ago anyone can "Google" posted complaints confirming what I am posting now. Try complaining directly to FC, and see if you are not punished with delays to medical care, delays to claim payments, delays to return calls; that is, if you can reach them at all. You will suffer, one way or another.
BEWARE -- to avoid victimization by FC, run as far and as fast as you can to another insurance carrier. Engage with FC at your (and your family's) own risk.