Free Air Fine Art

Dear Revdex.com,This letter serves as our response to the reply letter from the insured we received onMay 23rd.We have reviewed the insured's letter and while our position remains unchanged andwe feel that we adequately handled this loss we und[redacted]tand and recognize that there isan impasse to the extent of the smoke damage to the home and contents. Pursuant tothe terms of the policy we will arrange for the inspection of the insured's home andcontents by an independent third party air quality expert to assist in determining theextent of smoke damage and what the proper repair protocol would consist of. Grangewill retain [redacted] to perform these test andrender a professional opinion as to their findings. Upon assignment, [redacted] will contact theinsured to establish an inspection time. Once completed, review of the findings againstthe current proposed repairs will be completed with the appropriate explanation and oradjustments being completed as warranted. We will contact the insured immediately todiscuss this plan in an effort to expedite the process.A breakdown of the items for the plastic toys, food and [redacted] cleaning items wasrequested. We issued payment for these items in amount of $3,602.79 on May llth.The [redacted] invoice was included on our first response and I have included this invoice withthis response as well. We based our settlement on the plastic toys from the Actual CashValue items as quoted by [redacted]. The following are the line item numbers thatwere considered from [redacted] estimate including 6.75% sales tax: #1,181#1,182 #1,183 #1,184 #1,186 #1,187 #1,188 # 1,189 #1,205 #1,206 #1,207 #1,241.Perishable food items totaling $480 were also considered in the payment and werebased from [redacted].Please notify us as soon as possible should you have any questions or require anyadditional information.Sincerely,Jon M[redacted] Division Claims ManagerPhone: ###-###-####Cell: ###-###-####

To Whom It May Concern:   The policy is now cancelled and the insured will not receive any future billings. I have written off the Earned Premium that was due as a courtesy.  There is no way to refund the insured any money as this policy was written at his request, and coverage was provided until the cancellation date.   Thank you for allowing Grange Insurance to respond to this complaint.   Sincerely,

I have attached the 2 estimates I've received to date. I am in the process of obtaining a 3rd.Grange contacted a contractor, [redacted] who I fired during the dry out process for multiple reasons, one of which was breaking my bed & causing me & my wife to sleep on the couch for a week, and asked them to provide an estimate based off of the estimate provided by Mr. P[redacted]. [redacted] did not receive payment for their part in the dry out due to their incompetency which caused me to fire them & hire another company. If Grange believes this is a fair & accurate attempt to come to a resolution they are sadly mistaken. Grange's estimate was for $5,698.07, [redacted] was $6,440.46. My 2 contractors, one of which I've never met before, came in at $8,550 & $11,631. I will obtain the 3rd estimate & we will be in touch with regards to how we would like to proceed as far as the appraisal, etc. I've had my home taken apart for 2 months all because Grange has refused to pay a fair & reasonable contractor the rate which they are charging. My preferred contractor was the cheaper of the 2 estimates I received & I suspect the 3rd estimate will be higher than my preferred contractor as well. Grange calling on a contractor I fired, one which they also refer to clients, to obtain an estimate where they did not receive payment for the work they completed is not only unethical but down right bad business. I find it VERY suspicious & disappointing that this company, who will ultimately lose about $750/month from me and also all of the business which I have referred to the agent who was writing many of these policies through them, would go to such extremes to be unreasonable & unfair with regards to paying their claims. I have never had an insurance claim in my life so this is my 1st experience & a very disappointing one at that. Regards, [redacted]

RE:  Complaint # [redacted]           To Whom It May Concern: The policy was issued on June 7, 2017.  A cancellation was processed on July 13, 2017, effective the same date.  This created a refund of $42.86 that was mailed to...

Insureds at the address on the policy.   On July 24, 2017, a corrective reinstatement was process to cancel the policy back to the date of inception.  This will create a second refund that will be issued on August 3, 2017 in the amount of $97.46. A full refund of the amount paid will not be sent, due to the fact that there was a returned payment in the amount of $85.66 on July 14, 2017. Ms. [redacted] spoke to two different Grange Insurance representatives and was told to provide a bank statement showing this payment cleared the bank account. To my knowledge, this bank statement was never provided. Grange Insurance received an electronic notification that this payment was returned for a reason of Insufficient Funds.  Thank you for allowing Grange Insurance to respond to this complaint. Sincerely, Joey G[redacted]  Joey G[redacted]Grange Insurance, Accounts Receivable Manager[redacted]###-###-#######-###-#### fax

:they have enough copies and proof that the policy that are 20 + years old did not lapse. [redacted] and [redacted] people I was talking to in March and April assured me that there was going to be no problems with these policies. Anf Yes I'm speaking with [redacted] right now with Grange about these policies...but I have a also asked for there phone recording of my conversations with [redacted] and [redacted] that is proof that I'm right...because when zip talked to them they indicated the calls are recorded...if they need more information I have it..March 31,2016 was the day I talk to [redacted] and he indicated to send payment to Columbus addresses since we have sent it twice to Cincinnati drop box address and it keeps getting sent back even know it has a policy no in the meno area..(I even tried to pay over the phone) and I called every day until [redacted] said he got the payments...and call when my father receive received a letter stating it lapsed and called immediately and [redacted] told me he will note the account and not we would not have to worry about it because of our previous conversations. These policies have been in place since 1989 and other in 1992 and all of sudden Grange doesn't know we're to apply the checks to because the check was from my father business account even know the policy numbers were in the memo area and there payment portion of the invoice was sent...I believe it's Grange fault for this whole thing...and are liable to pay the claims.
Regards,
[redacted]

Thank you for allowing Grange Mutual Casualty Company the opportunity to respond to Mrs. M[redacted]’s inquiry.  Dear Ms. [redacted]:Thank you for asking us to provide your Automobile Insurance.Enclosed are your Confirmation of Coverage, Information Digest and Application form.We suggest you...

review the Digest as it summarizes policy coverages and limitations. It alsohighlights available premium credits.Please keep Amica in mind for all your personal insurance needs. We can provide Life,Homeowners, Marine and Personal Excess Liability Insurance at competitive prices withpersonal service. If you would like more information, please call us.Please complete and return the enclosed application. Your new policy will be mailedshortly.Sincerely,Lisa E D[redacted]Supervising Account Rep. Amica Mutual Insurance Companyld[redacted]@amica.com

Thank you for allowing Grange lndemnity the opportunity to respond to the complainant'sinquiry.Mr. Complainant disagrees with our liability position regarding this file. Complainant contendsthat our insured entered his lane of travel while negotiating a curve in the roadway and struckthe left rear...

wheel of his trailer. Our insured contends that the rear of the complainant's trailerentered her lane of travel while negotiating a curve in the roadway, causing our insured to strikethe trailer of the complainant. Seeing that we could not prove one account over the other asthere was no evidence to prove which lane the impact occurred, liability was subsequentlydenied and referred to our subrogation department. Our subrogation department initiallyrequested reimbursement for the amount paid for our insured's damages. We have sincedecided to cease pursuing collection due to conflicting accounts. While the police did respondto the accident scene, the responding officer did not witness the accident and the vehicles weremoved prior to the police department's arrival. Our insured disputed the citation she receivedand ultimately had it dismissed in court.I hope this addresses any concerns you may have. If you require additional information, pleasecontact our office.Sincerely,Steven E[redacted]P# ###-###-####E: [redacted]

Our office received the claim on November 28, 2016. Claim representative Nat W[redacted] contacted our insured and set an appointment to inspect the home the next morning.   Mr. W[redacted] observed the laundry area in the basement where the dryer was located at the time of the lint fire and...

subsequent smoke loss. The structure area around the laundry room was observed to have minimal smoke residue on the walls and ceilings. The remaining portions of the basement had no detectable smoke related issues. Mr. W[redacted] discussed a plan of action with our insured to clean the immediate area of smoke. Our insured preferred that nothing be done until his contractor was able to inspect. It was agreed that [redacted] would come out and assess the contents that were located in the basement and give their recommendation. Our insured stated he would prefer a Hydroxyl generator be placed in the basement to alleviate the smell and [redacted] complied with his request, but advised it would be better to start moving contents around and start the cleaning and painting in the basement. The unit was installed and ran for four days. [redacted] was brought-in for a textile assessment. On December 1st our insured expressed concern regarding four laptops, a computer tower and musical equipment in his basement. We contacted ERS (Electronic Restoration Services) and they scheduled an appointment to analyze the electronics. We wrote and submitted our estimate to our insured for the structure cleaning and painting to the basement and first floor in the amount of $8,327.02. We received the textile cleaning estimate from FRSTeam for $13,984.26. We settled this amount separately with our insured per the estimate by FRSTeam. On December 12th, ERS informed us that most of the electrical items in the basement were not affected from smoke. They quoted a list of speakers and amps that were related to smoke and all the other items were unaffected. Mr. W[redacted] informed our insured of ERS’ findings and our insured claimed that we were telling ERS what to do. As was the case with FRSTeam and their opinion to clean the clothing they felt were affected from the smoke, we rely solely on each vendor’s independent analysis and damage assessment. [redacted] reported to us that no other action on the hard goods needed to be taken. They suggested that the plastic children’s toys be disposed of as a precaution. Mr. W[redacted] explained this to our insured and provided content sheets for these toys to be listed. No other content items need to be cleaned or replaced according to [redacted] and our evaluation. Our insur3ed, in an email to us dated December 14th, stated that we were being unfair because we allegedly told ERS what to do. Again, we rely on the specialized vendors to give us their professional opinion on the repair/cleaning protocol from their investigation. Based on the light amount of smoke that was emitted from the dryer and the lack of soot found on the electronics, ERD felt no other action needed to be taken. Mr. W[redacted] contacted our insured on December 21st to review the claim and our insured said he would send us his electronics’ estimate and the content sheets after the New Year. Mr. W[redacted] contacted our insured on January 6th 2017 and offered to issue a check for the electronics cleaning but our insured advised he was waiting on his vendor to give him a quote. Mr. W[redacted] called our insured on January 18th and our insured was still waiting on obtaining an estimate from his vendor. On February 1st Mr. W[redacted] left a detailed voice mail message for our insured. On February 6th Mr. W[redacted] contacted our insured and was informed that two estimates were being obtained: one for repair and one estimate for the replacement of electronics that cannot be repaired. We asked who this company was so we could hopefully expedite for him, but our insured claimed he did not know their name. On February 16th Mr. W[redacted] left a detailed voice mail message for our insured. Another voice mail was left on our insured’s phone on February 22nd. Mr. W[redacted] spoke with our insured on March 8th and our insured stated he received the electronics estimate and will forward to us once he receives his contractors estimates and completes his contents sheets. On March 23rd we received the estimates from our insured. An estimate for the electroncis’ from Clean Tech was submitted for the amount of $11,429.75.  An estimate from Daily Exteriors for the contents cleaning and replacement was submitted in the amount of $25,297.65. some electroincs’ and contents may have been disposed of by our insured and/or the vendor. The only items that we agre4ed to be disposed of would be the plastic toys in the basement. Mr. W[redacted] contacted our insured on march 27th to discuss the settlement of the plastic items and any other remaining items. Our insured was not in agreement and ended the conversation before anything could be discussed or reviewed. At this point, that was the last communication we have had with our insured regarding his claim. At the on-set of the claim we have provided professional vendors to assist with the evaluation and cleaning of his items. We issued an estimate and paid for the structure cleaning and painting of the affected areas within four days of the date of loss. We have communicated with the insured continuously throughout the claim to inform him of each action as it became aware to us. We agree that we owe for the plastic toys in the basement and for the electronics’ cleaning as quoted by ERS for $1,337.58. We are willing to consider the food items that were listed on Daily Exteriors content estimate in addition to the plastic toys and ERS cleaning recommendation. Please contact the undersigned if you have any further questions or concerns. Sincerely, Joy MatchAVP Division Claims ManagerPhone: 614-445-2967Cell: 614-230-9794

I reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID [redacted], and find the resolution is satisfactory to me. It’s a shame that insurance companies can try to take advantage of customers this way and that it takes a complaint to the Revdex.com for them to follow their own policy.

In response to your correspondence received May 13, 2015, I have reviewed the above captionedclaim and respond accordingly.Grange Insurance inspected [redacted]'s 2010 Toyota Corolla on April 8, 2015 and determinedthe vehicle to be a total loss. A settlement offer was made to [redacted] the next...

day by claimrepresentative [redacted]  requested we reconsider our decision that hervehicle was a total loss and repair her vehicle. [redacted] obtained a signed contract of repairwith a body shop of her choice to repair the vehicle.Due to the fact that there is currently a lien on [redacted]'s Toyota Corolla, we have a duty toprotect the lien holder when there is a claim for damages where coverage applies. [redacted] hasbeen in regular contact with the lien holder and is following all requirements made by them. GMFinancial is the lien holder and they have instructed Grange that we must issue a two party checkfor the repairs. A two party check was issued in [redacted]'s name and [redacted] on May12, 2015 immediately after we were given their approval to proceed with payment.While we understand that [redacted] has been inconvenienced by her motor vehicle accident,we do not feel Grange Insurance is responsible for the delay and won't refund her deductible.If you have any questions, please contact me at ###-###-####.[redacted]

The estimate provided by [redacted] was a reasonable estimate for the repairs. Grange only is willing to cover $123 to paint my bathroom, walls & trim, This includes paint. My whole house is painted with Sherwin Williams Paint & it will cost me about $80 just for the paint in that bathroom which leaves me with $43 in labor to paint the bathroom. They only will cover 1 coat of paint in all of my rooms. This is the case with every line item in their estimate. They only have about $250 in the estimate for the drywall damage. I couldn't get a drywaller out here, as it will take them 3-4 trips, for $250 with the amount of drywall repair that is needed. My insurance agent, [redacted], reviewed an estimate, from [redacted] Insurance, from damages which occurred on his home a year ago for a waterline break & damage caused & every category was significantly higher than the estimate Grange Provided me. He also spoke to the head of this department at [redacted] & they explained their minimum pricing on things, etc, which was significantly higher than that of Grange. I've attached the estimate from 1 contractor & I'm getting another estimate from a 2nd contractor, which I should receive today or tomorrow. 
Regards, [redacted]

I feel Grange raised my insurance and then canceled me because I made a claim. Mr. C[redacted] has been very patient with my questions. I read his response but feel they are bogus. I have attached photos of the said tree limbs hanging over the property. I was only able to attach 4 so I will have to send the next 2 later. Mr. C[redacted] said they raised my insurance due to no fire hydrant within 1000 feet. I live in a rural setting. we are all on wells. There are no fire hydrant anywhere on my road. I have lived here over 24 years and this has not been a problem. My agent has been to my property and never mentioned this. So does Grange raise everyones insurance who live in a rural  environment? Once again I have been a faithful customer for over 31 and have spent thousands of dollars in coverage with no claims. I take care of my property and make yearly upgrades to keep things running smoothly and minor problems I fix without making a claim. Now I have a refund check that Mr. C[redacted] was mailed on 3/22/17, but I have not received it. So it is up to me to call Grange Customer Care Center after 4/11/17 and have it reissued. Granges lack of communication from the adjuster to my agent, how vengeful the adjuster was to make the bogus claims about the tree limbs only because I made a claim and was not happy how he tried to handle it, and the laziness of not involving me the customer sooner has lead to all this mess. This is not how a business should be ran. 
Regards, [redacted]

We reviewed the rejection to our response. We called and spoke to the customer and explained that our position remains unchanged. She understood and agreed that she would send the paperwork as soon as she gets it in the mail.

Grange Life Insurance Company (“Grange”) has determined that payment of the death benefit is appropriate for the policies in question. The initial determination to deny the claims was based on the fact that these policies were in the contestable period after lapsing and being reinstated after premium payments were received after the 60 day grace period. A requirement of reinstatement is a new two year contestability period as noted in both the Agreement and Authorization section of the reinstatement application and the confirmation letter sent to the policy owner upon approval of reinstatement. However, Grange has decided to waive the contestability period requirement due to several premium payment and billing issues that the customer experienced that ultimately contributed to the lapsing of the policies. The cooperation and patience of the complainant and the Revdex.com during the review of this complaint is greatly appreciated.

Thank you for allowing Grange Life Insurance Company ("Grange") the opportunity torespond to this inquiry. The complainant indicated that she has not received responsesto messages she left with Grange. Grange's claims manager recently retired and duringthe transition, all of his voice mail messages...

were accidentally deleted. Since the timethe complaint was submitted, the new manager has been in contact with thecomplainant.As noted in the complaint, the insured had four policies with Grange. Claims have beenpaid on two of the four policies. However, the remaining two policies lapsed and weresubsequently reinstated in April of 2016, which means that the insured passed duringthe contestability period. All contestable claims require additional research to ensurethat all pertinent information was disclosed on the application for reinstatement. Whenreinstatement was approved, confirmation letters were sent to the policy owner thatincluded the following statement: Please note that the two-year contestability periodhas restarted as a result of the reinstatement of your policy. The complainant hasindicated that she believes the contestability period should have been waived. Incommunications with the claims manager during the week of December 26th, thecomplainant stated that she will be sending documentation to demonstrate why thecontestability period should be waived.Once the documents noted above are received the claims manager will conduct areview and will advise the complainant of the company's decision or next steps in atimely manner.Sincerely,Sean A[redacted]

Thank you for allowing Grange Mutual Casualty Company the opportunity to respond to Ms. [redacted] inquiry.It is customary for our adjusters to complete a property inspection when reviewing a loss to ensure there are no condition or liability hazards present which may impact policy rating and/or...

eligibility. On 11/2/2016, our Underwriting department reviewed a property inspection submitted by the Claims adjuster. It was determine that tree limbs were overhanging the dwelling and outbuilding. Additionally, the adjuster was unable to determine the approximate age of the dwelling roof which is used as a rating factor. After the inspection was reviewed, the Underwriter contacted Ms. [redacted] agent to provide documentation that any branches overhanging the property had been trimmed back to mitigate any future losses and to confirm the age of the dwelling roof. No response was received by the requested follow-up date and therefore, the policy was set up for non-renewal. Ms. [redacted] agent has indicated that he received the request from Underwriting regarding the trees and roof. However, he did not reach out to the insured right away as the weather was cold and assumed that the insured wouldn’t be able to remove them until the weather warmed up in the spring. The agent advised that he planned on speaking with Ms. [redacted] about removing the trees in early March. However, before he had a chance to speak with her about the inspection, he was informed that she was moving her insurance to another carrier. Our records show that Ms. [redacted] policy was cancelled on 3/22/2017 with an effective date of 3/5/2017. After speaking with Ms. [redacted] agent, it was determine that the 3/5/2017 effective date was due to an entry error. We apologize for this error and are revising the effective date of the cancellation to 3/3/2017 as Ms. [redacted] has requested. Sincerely, Jonathan C[redacted]

[redacted]
Insured: [redacted]
Complainant: [redacted]
Date of Loss: 4/24/15
We have reviewed Mr. [redacted]s response and the fact he does not accept our offer. Over the past few months we have made what we believe to be a fair offer for the damage to his vehicle. While we respect his position we are unable to modify our offer at this time. We would like to thank the Revdex.com for their assistance in this matter.
Please contact me @ ###-###-#### with any questions.
Sincerely,
Eric F[redacted]
Fax: ###-###-####
[redacted]

Contrary to Mr. F[redacted]'s assertion, Grange never revised the CCC One appraisal report to reflect my three Craigslist ad comparables for 1998 Camry vehicles listed for sale by private individuals that would not be subject to Grange's $659 deduction for dealer condition adjustment that they made to the three dealer vehicles used in report #[redacted]  The Craigslist ad vehicles would only be subject to an adjustment for comparable mileage and would result in adjusted value of approx.  $2400 for my vehicle.  I am emailing a copy of CCC One appraisal report #[redacted] separately as I cannot attach it as a file to this response for some unknown reason.  My vehicle was not for sale at the time of the accident and it also was not owned by a dealer at that time.  Accordingly, the dealer condition subtraction of $659 is not applicable to my craigslist comparables for used 1998 Camry vehicles listed for sale by private individuals.  The value of my vehicle is approx. $2400 based on my craigslist comparables adjusted for mileage differences.As I indicated above, I am providing a copy of CCC One appraisal report # [redacted] as evidence that Grange did not utilize my Craigslist comparables of privately-owned vehicles listed for sale in making a good faith appraisal and valuation of my totaled 1998 Camry vehicle.  Thank you for your assistance in this matter.
Regards,
[redacted]

This letter is in response to a complaint filed by [redacted] regarding the total lossvalue of his 1998 Toyota Camry. His vehicle was deemed a total loss from an autoaccident on April 24, 2015.Grange Insurance initially inspected Mr. [redacted]'s vehicle on April 24, 2015 and anof $1855.8.80 was...

wrirten along with an unrelated prior damage estimate for the windshield of $313.03. The vehicle was deemed a total loss with an actual cash value of$1500. The value was determined by CCC ONE Market Valuation Report 54627297.Grange Insurance contacted Mr .[redacted] and an offer was presented less 50% of theunrelated prior damage.Mr. [redacted] submitted additional comparable vehicles for consideration and these werecalled into CCC ONE to obtain an updated value. A revised CCC ONE MarketValuation Report 54780213 was completed and a new actual cash value of $1775 waspresented to Mr. [redacted] less 50% of the unrelated prior damage. A copy of the revisedCCC ONE Market Valuation Report was sent to Mr. [redacted] for his reference.Mr. [redacted] sent an email to the Claims Representative addressing his concerns andrejecting our new offer. Grange Insurance reviewed Mr. [redacted] concerns and made amanual adjustment to the actual cash value and increased the value to $1873. This offerwas presented to Mr. [redacted] less 50% of the unrelated prior damage and was declined.Grange Insurance feels the evaluation of [redacted]'s 1998 Toyota Camry is fairconsidering the mileage, options and condition. Mr. [redacted] would also be eligible toreceive sales tax reimbursement per state of Ohio guidelines (3901-1-54) if he purchasesa replacement vehicle and can substantiate such purchase. If Mr. [redacted] wishes toowner retain the salvage a deduction of $449.52 will be applied to the overall settlement.Please contact me @ ###-###-#### with any questions.Sincerely,Eric F[redacted]Fax: ###-###-####[redacted]

March 14, 2018Enclosed is my letter from the ODI and thank you for your help and may God Bless you for who you are to myself and the others who will need you for your assistance. I will let you know when my credit record is cleared. Maybe like you said the end of May 2018.Sincerely,[redacted]