[To assist us in bringing this matter to a close, you must give us a reason why you are rejecting the response. If no reason is received your complaint will be closed Administratively Resolved]
Complaint: 12805173
I am rejecting this response because:if it is icy conditions it should not be at fault, I was not speeding, drinking, taking drugs nor did I hit another vehicle, the reason we have insurance is for accidents, not to be penalized after you have had one so they can price gauze the costumer to get the money back that the costumer is already paying them, I want them to take the points off my account, point blank period.
Regards,
Joclyn [redacted]
[A default letter is provided here which indicates your acceptance of the business's response. If you wish, you may update it before sending it.]
Revdex.com:
I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID 12383307, and find that this resolution is satisfactory to me.
Regards,
Robert [redacted]
The
Revdex.com of Northwest North Carolina
119
Brookstown Avenue, Suite 304
Winston,
Salem, NC 27101
Attention:
Johana Diaz
RE: Revdex.com ID:...
[redacted]
Dear
Ms. Diaz:
Thank you
for your email of July 17, 2015. The
company conducted an additional investigation into our insured’s loss due to varying
statements obtained and the fact that some of the damages appeared to be
inconsistent with the facts of loss as reported. This included an investigation conducted by
our Special Investigative Unit and obtaining an impact analysis from an
independent Accident Reconstructionist.
On July 17,
2015 the company concluded our investigation and we are moving forward with all
repairs listed in the original estimate and the supplemental estimate received. The shop completing the repairs was informed
of the same and it is our understanding that our insured returned his vehicle
to the shop on July 23, 2015. Once the company
receives the final invoice upon completion of repairs payment will be remitted
accordingly.
Sincerely,
T. Ray
Executive Customer Relations
National General Insurance
I am rejecting this response because: They are liars. They never sent me a letter or let me know that they needed proof of my prior insurance. Nothing on their website told me any such information. The website wouldn't even let me print my insurance ID card. They had to email it to me after I complained. They pulled a typical "bait and switch" tactic trying to get me to pay more than they quoted for my policy after I paid the down payment.
Regards,
[redacted]
On December 27, 2017, the company was notified that the complainant had struck a parked and unoccupied vehicle in an effort to avoid hitting a dog. That same day, the Claims Representative took recorded statements from both the complainant and the claimant. On January 5, 2018, the Claims...
Representative spoke with the complainant. When asked about residents of the household, the complainant disclosed that their 16 year old son lived in the home and was unlicensed. On January 12, 2018, the estimate for the complainant’s vehicle was completed. On January 16, 2018, the complainant was advised that coverage was being investigated due to their son not being disclosed on their application for coverage. They were advised that it would be decided at a meeting on January 25, 2018. In the Applicant’s Statement on the application for coverage that the complainant signed on March 24, 2017, it states: “…I further agree that ALL persons of eligible driving age or permit age who live with me, as well as ALL operators who regularly operate my vehicles and do not reside in my household, are shown above…I understand that I have a continuing duty to notify the insurance company of any changes concerning…members of my household of eligible driving age or permit age…I understand that the insurance company may rescind this policy and deny coverage if I fail to notify the company of these changes”. In addition, the complainant responded “YES” to the Applicant’s Statement question of “Have you disclosed all household members 14 years and older on the application?” despite not having their 16 year old son listed. Please note that the question does not ask about license status, as unlicensed drivers must be disclosed and listed as an excluded driver on the policy. All of this information was mailed to the complainant in a Reservation of Rights letter on January 16, 2018. While company can appreciate the complainant’s concerns around a potential lack of coverage for their claim, we must advise that their claim is being handled properly as per the coverage contract they signed. The need to disclose all household members age 14 and over was outlined in writing, and acknowledged by the complainant’s signature. As such, the company respectfully maintains that the complainant’s claim is being handled appropriately, and any perceived delays are required for the company to conduct the required coverage investigation. Tell us why here...
[To assist us in bringing this matter to a close, you must give us a reason why you are rejecting the response. If no reason is received your complaint will be closed Administratively Resolved]
Complaint: 12370448
I am rejecting this response because:Dear Melissa,I wish my this situation was as straight forward as this assistant makes it sound. I have left several messages for Rachel, Sabrina, Greg and not one has ever called me back. The word "cosmetic" is not a word I'm going to hear when I trade my vehicle and offered less because of there insured actions. I gave them the dimished value report within 24 hours of me being advised of the process. The $1442.00 is a fair estime of the diminshed value and it's my hope this company quit playing games and give me the diminsged value on my vehicle. This company is a scam and do every thing to make people a victim again after an accident. I have explained to Rachel and Sabrina about my daughter and they don't show any kind of empathy or even care. I feel sorry for anyone that make a mistake and choose this company as there insurance provider. I don't understand how they have a A- and cannot even handle a claim. Please help me and my daughter get the fair treatment we deserve. Please find out why they want me and my family to be a victim again. I hope this assistant can read a police report, I don't think a hit and run is the same as a sideswipe. She must work for National General and Sabrina before she made up her response. PLEASE HELP ME AND TWIN 13 YEAR OLD GIRLS THAT WERE IN THE CAR..
Regards,
Richard [redacted]
[To assist us in bringing this matter to a close, you must give us a reason why you are rejecting the response. If no reason is received your complaint will be closed Administratively Resolved]
Complaint: 12468242
I am rejecting this response because:This is not an accurate account of events. Read the letter your company mailed to my home. I'm not insured with your company. I am insured with a reputable insurance company.Your insured member hit my car. Your representative authorized my rental. You have my mailing address. Your company owes me in excess of 800 dollars.
Regards,
Dawn [redacted]
April 3, 2017 The Revdex.com of Northwest North Carolina119 Brookstown Avenue, Suite 304Winston, Salem, NC 27101 Attention: [redacted] RE: Revdex.com ID: 12062140 Dear Ms. Diaz: Thank you for your letter of...
March 28, 2017. The company appreciates the opportunity to respond to the applicant’s concerns related to her experience in obtaining a new policy with our company. During the normal process of underwriting a new business policy the company reviews various consumer reports to ensure the accuracy of information provided by an applicant, and to properly rate a risk. Upon the activation of the applicant’s new business policy on March 27, 2017, effective on April 13, 2017, one of the reports indicated there was a possible additional person residing in the complainant’s household. Our agent questioned the applicant and learned the additional person listed on the report was her adult son, but was unable to get a clear answer as to whether or not he lived with the applicant as she advised that he has “his own space”, stated she didn’t care if he had other insurance, and hinted that had a poor driving record. In concluding the process of binding a new policy, and obtaining payment, our agent advised the applicant that we needed her to complete an exclusion form for her son. At this time the applicant advised her son did not live with her and requested to cancel the newly issued policy. The agent submitted the applicant’s request to cancel and in the interim the applicant called the company several times to express her concerns, which was escalated to a manager who attempted to return her call that evening without answer. The company apologizes for the applicant’s frustration resulting from what appears to be a misunderstanding and we regret we lost her business as a result. The policy was cancelled flat the same day as she requested, and payment was credit back to the credit card provided on March 29, 2017. Thank you again for allowing the company to respond. Sincerely,T. RayExecutive Customer RelationsNational General Insurance
I am rejecting this response because:
Regards,
[redacted] I know they wont rememberce me any but im not making an additional payment.That is WAY TO MUCH FOR 9 DAYS OF INSURANCE.
The
Revdex.com of Northwest North Carolina
119
Brookstown Avenue, Suite 304
Winston,
Salem, NC 27101
Attention:
Johana Diaz
RE: Revdex.com ID:...
[redacted]
Dear
Ms. Diaz:
Thank you
for your letter of April 11, 2016. The
company appreciates the opportunity to respond to the complainant’s concerns.
The
company apologizes for any frustration the complainant has experienced as a
result of our liability determination.
Our records indicate that one of our claim managers was able to review
and discuss how we arrived at our liability decision with the complainant. The company determined that our insured was
primarily at-fault, 80%, due to an improper and unsafe lane change upon
entering an intersection. The company
also determined that the complainant contributed to this loss, 20%, as she had
a greater duty to yield when making a right turn into said intersection from a
stop sign.
The
complainant also expressed concerns regarding damage to her car not included in
our estimate. The company advised her
that we would assess any supplemental damage to determine if it is related to
the loss and to have the shop completing the repairs to contact us regarding
this matter.
Thank you
again for allowing the company to respond.
Sincerely,
T. [redacted]
Executive Customer Relations
National
General Insurance
Thank you for your letter of November 14, 2016. The company is sorry to hear of our insured’s dissatisfaction and we appreciate the opportunity to resolve her concerns. Please note our insured resides in California and this complaint involves a loss occurring in California as well....
On October 25, 2016 our insured’s vehicle was struck while it was parked and unoccupied. The adverse driver left the scene and was later apprehended by the police, this is not in dispute. The company ordered the police report so that we could obtain information on the adverse driver and we began the process of evaluating our insured’s loss. The company inspected our insured’s vehicle on October 27, 2016 and determined the vehicle to be total loss. The company completed a total loss settlement offer and was prepared to extend the same to our insured on October 31, 2016. Several messages were left for our insured regarding our offer with no response until November 10, 2016. On November 10, 2016 our insured advised that she wanted to pursue her total loss through the adverse driver’s carrier and not trough us. She also requested that we stop calling her. The company respectfully disagrees with our insured’s statements to the bureau that we have refused to help her and are attempting to defraud her to collect her deductible. Please be advised the company has confirmed that the adverse driver did not have insurance at the time of loss and is considered an uninsured motorist; therefore, our insured’s Collision Deductible Waiver coverage applies. In accordance with our California policy relating to Collision Deductible Waiver coverage, the insured’s deductible is waived as her vehicle was struck by an uninsured motorist. We have reached out to our insured, advised her of the same, and are proceeding with the settlement of her total loss. Thank you again for allowing the company to respond. Sincerely, T. Ray Executive Customer Relations
Imperial Fire and Casualty Insurance Company has received your correspondence as it relates to the complainant, and we thank you for the opportunity to provide a response.Mr. [redacted] purchased a policy on-line with Imperial for the term of 03/13/2016 - 09/13/2016. In the rating and quoting...
process, Mr. [redacted] indicated that he had coverage with another insurer prior to purchasing the Imperial policy. This allowed him to receive a discount on his premium. Accordingly, on 02/27/2016, policy no. [redacted] was issued to him with a total premium of $460.00. However, in order for the discount to be allowed, Mr. [redacted] was required to submit proof of such prior coverage. A letter advising such was issued to him, also on 02/27/2016.There was no information provided to Imperial evidencing such prior insurance. Therefore, on 04/03/2016, Mr. [redacted]'s policy was amended to remove the prior coverage discount previously allowed. This resulted in his premium being increased to $592.00 for the same term of 03/13/2016 - 09/13/2016.If Mr. [redacted] were to provide the needed information in order to grant the prior coverage discount as requested, the discount would then be granted back to him. This information, if available, should be provided in short order in order to best serve him.If you should have any further questions, please do not hesitate to contact me.
On April 20, 2017, the complainant’s vehicle was inspected by a Field Claims Representative, who provided her with a copy of the estimate. Printed on every estimate is a section labeled “NOTE TO VEHICLE OWNER”, which advises of the preferred network of shops as follows: “National General Insurance does business with collision repair shops in your area and has developed a preferred network of shops with proven, high standards. We recognize that you, the vehicle owner, have the right to select the repair facility of your choice and are under no obligation to use any of the shops on the list. We will pay the amount we determine payable under the policy regardless of the repair facility chosen. We will attempt to get an agreed cost of repairs with the shop of your choice. If this is not possible, we will extend a fair and reasonable offer to repair the loss related damage to your vehicle based on industry repair standards and prevailing market rates. If there are loss related damages that were not visible at the time of the initial estimate, or damages not included in the original estimate, the additional damage will be considered for a supplemental repair estimate.” After receiving her copy of the estimate, the complainant advised the Field Claims Representative of her shop of choice. The company respectfully maintains that we are not responsible for the quality of repairs made by a non-preferred repair facility. On December 6, 2017, the Casualty Claims Representative called the complainant and left her a voicemail requesting her to return the call. That same day, a letter was mailed to the claimant listing the Casualty Claims Representative’s direct phone number, email address and fax number. We are more than happy to assist the claimant and her boyfriend with their bodily injury claims once the requested documentation is received. As the claimant is advising her forms are “getting lost in the mail”, she is welcome to fax or email the forms directly to the Casualty Claims Representative. After reviewing the complainant’s rebuttal, we have verified that our phone system is functioning properly, and that the Casualty Claims Representative’s voicemail is capable of accepting a message. Our phone lines are set up to forward the call to another Casualty Claims Representative if the assigned Representative is unavailable, so the complainant should be able to reach someone. We encourage her to try calling during the Casualty Claims Representative’s business hours of 9AM to 5PM Eastern Standard Time, Monday through Friday. While we understand the complainant’s frustration with the delay in her claim, we must respectfully advise that the company has taken appropriate steps in attempting to obtain the information required to complete the claim. Multiple contact attempts via different contact methods have been made, and the Casualty Claims Representative awaits information from the complainant to resolve the claim. Tell us why here...
On October 10, 2017, the complainant contacted the company to advise our insured vehicle had rear-ended them. When the Claims Representative tried to contact the complainant later that day for details around the accident, they received a recorded message that stated “The person you are trying to...
call is not available”, and there was no option to leave a voicemail. On October 11, 2017, the Claims Representative was able to contact the complainant. The complainant provided their account of the accident, and the Claims Representative reminded them of their option to file a claim through their own insurance as coverage was pending investigation through our company. The Claims Representative provided the complainant a link where they could upload photos of the damage to their vehicle for review. On October 17, 2017, the complainant called the Claims Representative and advised they were having issues submitting their photos. The Claims Representative resent the link, and advised during the call that coverage was still pending the outcome of the claims investigation. On November 22, 2017, when no photos were received and no additional contact was made by the complainant, the claim was closed due to lack of interest. On November 30, 2017, the complainant contacted the Claims Representative to advise they wanted their vehicle repaired through [redacted] National Insurance Company. The Claims Representative advised that photos of the vehicle were never received, and as such no estimate had been completed. The Claims Representative resent the link to the complainant for their vehicle photos. On December 2, 2017, photos of the complainant’s vehicle were received. On December 5, 2017, the estimate for the complainant’s damages was completed. A copy of the estimate was mailed to the complainant. On December 6, 2017, a check was mailed to the complainant matching the estimate amount. On January 2, 2018, the complainant contacted the Claims Representative regarding a rental vehicle. The complainant was advised that rental vehicles were not paid for, but were reimbursed by the company up to a specified amount for a period of days. The complainant was advised to send any rental car receipts in to the Claims Representative for reimbursement. On January 9, 2018, a supplemental estimate was mailed to the complainant. That same day, a check was mailed for the estimate amount to the body shop completing the complainant’s repairs. On January 10, 2018, the complainant’s rental invoice was received. A check for the full amount was mailed to the complainant on January 22, 2018. While the company can appreciate the complainant’s frustration with the time line of their claim being resolved, we respectfully advise that the company could take no action without photos of the complainant’s vehicle, which were received at the start of December. Once photos were received, payments were issued for the repairs of the complainant’s vehicle. The complainant was also reimbursed for their use of a rental vehicle once the company received the invoice. Tell us why here...
Thank you for your letter of November 14, 2016. The company appreciates the opportunity to respond to the complainant’s concerns concerning an accident occurring on October 14, 2016 and resulting claim. Please note the complainant is the third party claimant claiming damages...
against our insured. The company was made aware of the loss occurring on October 14, 2016 by [redacted], the complainant’s insurance carrier. Statements regarding the loss were obtained from both the claimant and our insured; however, there were conflicting statements regarding the facts of loss which required an additional investigation on our part. Despite our best efforts we are having difficulty obtaining full cooperation from our insured which has resulted in delays. As a result we are handling the loss under a full reservation of rights as additional information from our insured is needed to determine liability. The company understands and shares the complainant’s frustration in this matter and appreciates their patience as we work toward completing our investigation. Thank you again for allowing the company to respond. Sincerely, T. Ray Executive Customer Relations
January 18, 2018 Melissa Neal The Revdex.com serving Northwest North Carolina 100 S Marshall St, Suite 1 Winston Salem, NC 27101 RE: Case #: 12600957...
Complainant Role: Third Party Claimant Date of Loss: December 12, 2017 Underwriting Company: National General Insurance Company-NAIC 23728 Dear Ms. Neal: Thank you for your email of January 8, 2017. The company appreciates the opportunity to respond to the complainant’s concerns regarding the handling of her claim. The complainant reported the referenced claim to the company on Friday, December 15, 2017, and our records indicate we obtained her recorded statement the following Wednesday, December 20, 2017. We then called and met with the complainant the following Tuesday, December 26, 2017, to inspect and photograph the damage to her vehicle. Throughout the same time the company made several attempts to obtain a statement from our insured without success. Our insured did not return our calls until January 3, 2018, to provide her statement, and the complainant was informed of the same on January 4, 2018. The insured vehicle was inspected on January 9, 2018, and we concluded our investigation into the referenced loss. Please be advised we have an obligation to our insured to confirm the loss, and we were unable to proceed until we spoke with our insured. Upon conclusion of our investigation on January 9, 2018, we deemed our insured at fault for the referenced loss and payment $740.56 was issued to the complainant on the same day. While we understand the complainant’s frustration with perceived delays, it is our position that we completed our due diligence in obtaining a statement from our insured, and settled the complainant’s loss in as timely a manner as possible. Thank you again for allowing the company to respond. Sincerely, T. [redacted] Executive Customer Relations National General Insurance
Thank you for forwarding the complainant’s concerns to our attention. We appreciate the opportunity to respond. A renewal policy was issued to the complainant effective on May 11, 2016 at an annual premium of $1,765.39 including fees. A down payment in the amount of $179.55, which...
included a $3.00 installment fee, was drafted via automatic payment on May 12, 2016. On May 20, 2016 the complainant’s policy was cancelled at her request and earned premium was computed on a Short Rate basis. 10% of the total premium is considered earned premium as the policy was in force for nine days in accordance with the North Carolina Personal Auto Manual. Please note the earned premium calculated Short Rate is calculated by coverage and includes recoupment and fees are fully earned. In review the earned premium calculation is correct outstanding balance owed of $38.80 is valid as shown below: $ 175.35 Earned Premium 5/11/2016 – 5/20/2016 [Short Rate at 10% of total premium, by coverage, includes recoupment] $ 40.00 Pay Plan Setup Charge $ 3.00 Installment Fee $ (179.55) Payment received $ 38.80 Remaining Balance Due Thank you again for allowing the company to respond. Sincerely, T. Ray Executive Customer Relations National General Insurance
Imperial Fire and Casualty Insurance Company has received your correspondence as it relates to the complainant, and we thank you for the opportunity to provide a response.The claim presented by the complainant, [redacted], has been denied because the automobile insurance policy of the insured...
under which the claim was filed was not in-force on the date of the incident in question. That is, the insured's policy was effectively canceled prior to the date of the loss. This information was conveyed to Mr. [redacted] verbally and in writing.Further, there was some delay in the handling of this claim as the file had been internally transferred from one adjuster to the other. However, this did not impact the result of the claim.
On December 13, 2017, the complainant reported an accident involving our insured’s vehicle that occurred on December 1, 2017. The Claims Representative took a recorded statement from the complainant the same day. On December 15, 2017, a payment was issued to the complainant for the Property...
Damage claim. The Claims Representative attempted to contact the complainant, but was unable to leave a voicemail as the complainant’s voicemail box was full. The complainant contacted the Claims Representative later that day, and they discussed the vehicle being dropped off at a repair facility on a Monday or Tuesday. They also reviewed the timeframe for repairs being two days, and the process for any supplemental work that arose during the initial repairs. On December 18, 2017, the Claims Representative contacted the complainant and advised that once the repairs were scheduled, a rental vehicle could be set up. The complainant advised that she would call the Claims Representative once the work was scheduled with the repair facility. On January 4, 2018, the Claims Representative reached out to the complainant for an update. The complainant advised the vehicle was to be dropped off the following Monday (January 8, 2018) for repairs. The Claims Representative advised that he would set up the rental reservation for January 8, 2018. On January 8, 2018, the Claims Representative contacted the complainant with the rental reservation confirmation number. The complainant was reminded of the supplemental process, and advised on how to extend the rental vehicle if necessary. While company can appreciate the complainant’s concerns around their vehicle being out of service for repairs, we must advise that her claim is being handled properly. Once the vehicle was brought into the repair facility, a rental vehicle was provided. The Claims Representative was in contact with the complainant on several occasions in regards to the claim status and next steps. As such, the company respectfully maintains that the necessary level of contact with the complainant was maintained throughout the claims process. Tell us why here...
I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID 11013942, and find that this resolution is satisfactory to me.
Regards,
[redacted]
[To assist us in bringing this matter to a close, you must give us a reason why you are rejecting the response. If no reason is received your complaint will be closed Administratively Resolved]
Complaint: 12805173
I am rejecting this response because:if it is icy conditions it should not be at fault, I was not speeding, drinking, taking drugs nor did I hit another vehicle, the reason we have insurance is for accidents, not to be penalized after you have had one so they can price gauze the costumer to get the money back that the costumer is already paying them, I want them to take the points off my account, point blank period.
Regards,
Joclyn [redacted]
[A default letter is provided here which indicates your acceptance of the business's response. If you wish, you may update it before sending it.]
Revdex.com:
I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID 12383307, and find that this resolution is satisfactory to me.
Regards,
Robert [redacted]
July
27, 2014
The
Revdex.com of Northwest North Carolina
119
Brookstown Avenue, Suite 304
Winston,
Salem, NC 27101
Attention:
Johana Diaz
RE: Revdex.com ID:...
[redacted]
Dear
Ms. Diaz:
Thank you
for your email of July 17, 2015. The
company conducted an additional investigation into our insured’s loss due to varying
statements obtained and the fact that some of the damages appeared to be
inconsistent with the facts of loss as reported. This included an investigation conducted by
our Special Investigative Unit and obtaining an impact analysis from an
independent Accident Reconstructionist.
On July 17,
2015 the company concluded our investigation and we are moving forward with all
repairs listed in the original estimate and the supplemental estimate received. The shop completing the repairs was informed
of the same and it is our understanding that our insured returned his vehicle
to the shop on July 23, 2015. Once the company
receives the final invoice upon completion of repairs payment will be remitted
accordingly.
Sincerely,
T. Ray
Executive Customer Relations
National General Insurance
I am rejecting this response because: They are liars. They never sent me a letter or let me know that they needed proof of my prior insurance. Nothing on their website told me any such information. The website wouldn't even let me print my insurance ID card. They had to email it to me after I complained. They pulled a typical "bait and switch" tactic trying to get me to pay more than they quoted for my policy after I paid the down payment.
Regards,
[redacted]
On December 27, 2017, the company was notified that the complainant had struck a parked and unoccupied vehicle in an effort to avoid hitting a dog. That same day, the Claims Representative took recorded statements from both the complainant and the claimant. On January 5, 2018, the Claims...
Representative spoke with the complainant. When asked about residents of the household, the complainant disclosed that their 16 year old son lived in the home and was unlicensed. On January 12, 2018, the estimate for the complainant’s vehicle was completed. On January 16, 2018, the complainant was advised that coverage was being investigated due to their son not being disclosed on their application for coverage. They were advised that it would be decided at a meeting on January 25, 2018. In the Applicant’s Statement on the application for coverage that the complainant signed on March 24, 2017, it states: “…I further agree that ALL persons of eligible driving age or permit age who live with me, as well as ALL operators who regularly operate my vehicles and do not reside in my household, are shown above…I understand that I have a continuing duty to notify the insurance company of any changes concerning…members of my household of eligible driving age or permit age…I understand that the insurance company may rescind this policy and deny coverage if I fail to notify the company of these changes”. In addition, the complainant responded “YES” to the Applicant’s Statement question of “Have you disclosed all household members 14 years and older on the application?” despite not having their 16 year old son listed. Please note that the question does not ask about license status, as unlicensed drivers must be disclosed and listed as an excluded driver on the policy. All of this information was mailed to the complainant in a Reservation of Rights letter on January 16, 2018. While company can appreciate the complainant’s concerns around a potential lack of coverage for their claim, we must advise that their claim is being handled properly as per the coverage contract they signed. The need to disclose all household members age 14 and over was outlined in writing, and acknowledged by the complainant’s signature. As such, the company respectfully maintains that the complainant’s claim is being handled appropriately, and any perceived delays are required for the company to conduct the required coverage investigation. Tell us why here...
[To assist us in bringing this matter to a close, you must give us a reason why you are rejecting the response. If no reason is received your complaint will be closed Administratively Resolved]
Complaint: 12370448
I am rejecting this response because:Dear Melissa,I wish my this situation was as straight forward as this assistant makes it sound. I have left several messages for Rachel, Sabrina, Greg and not one has ever called me back. The word "cosmetic" is not a word I'm going to hear when I trade my vehicle and offered less because of there insured actions. I gave them the dimished value report within 24 hours of me being advised of the process. The $1442.00 is a fair estime of the diminshed value and it's my hope this company quit playing games and give me the diminsged value on my vehicle. This company is a scam and do every thing to make people a victim again after an accident. I have explained to Rachel and Sabrina about my daughter and they don't show any kind of empathy or even care. I feel sorry for anyone that make a mistake and choose this company as there insurance provider. I don't understand how they have a A- and cannot even handle a claim. Please help me and my daughter get the fair treatment we deserve. Please find out why they want me and my family to be a victim again. I hope this assistant can read a police report, I don't think a hit and run is the same as a sideswipe. She must work for National General and Sabrina before she made up her response. PLEASE HELP ME AND TWIN 13 YEAR OLD GIRLS THAT WERE IN THE CAR..
Regards,
Richard [redacted]
[To assist us in bringing this matter to a close, you must give us a reason why you are rejecting the response. If no reason is received your complaint will be closed Administratively Resolved]
Complaint: 12468242
I am rejecting this response because:This is not an accurate account of events. Read the letter your company mailed to my home. I'm not insured with your company. I am insured with a reputable insurance company.Your insured member hit my car. Your representative authorized my rental. You have my mailing address. Your company owes me in excess of 800 dollars.
Regards,
Dawn [redacted]
April 3, 2017 The Revdex.com of Northwest North Carolina119 Brookstown Avenue, Suite 304Winston, Salem, NC 27101 Attention: [redacted] RE: Revdex.com ID: 12062140 Dear Ms. Diaz: Thank you for your letter of...
March 28, 2017. The company appreciates the opportunity to respond to the applicant’s concerns related to her experience in obtaining a new policy with our company. During the normal process of underwriting a new business policy the company reviews various consumer reports to ensure the accuracy of information provided by an applicant, and to properly rate a risk. Upon the activation of the applicant’s new business policy on March 27, 2017, effective on April 13, 2017, one of the reports indicated there was a possible additional person residing in the complainant’s household. Our agent questioned the applicant and learned the additional person listed on the report was her adult son, but was unable to get a clear answer as to whether or not he lived with the applicant as she advised that he has “his own space”, stated she didn’t care if he had other insurance, and hinted that had a poor driving record. In concluding the process of binding a new policy, and obtaining payment, our agent advised the applicant that we needed her to complete an exclusion form for her son. At this time the applicant advised her son did not live with her and requested to cancel the newly issued policy. The agent submitted the applicant’s request to cancel and in the interim the applicant called the company several times to express her concerns, which was escalated to a manager who attempted to return her call that evening without answer. The company apologizes for the applicant’s frustration resulting from what appears to be a misunderstanding and we regret we lost her business as a result. The policy was cancelled flat the same day as she requested, and payment was credit back to the credit card provided on March 29, 2017. Thank you again for allowing the company to respond. Sincerely,T. RayExecutive Customer RelationsNational General Insurance
I am rejecting this response because:
Regards,
[redacted] I know they wont rememberce me any but im not making an additional payment.That is WAY TO MUCH FOR 9 DAYS OF INSURANCE.
April
13, 2016
The
Revdex.com of Northwest North Carolina
119
Brookstown Avenue, Suite 304
Winston,
Salem, NC 27101
Attention:
Johana Diaz
RE: Revdex.com ID:...
[redacted]
Dear
Ms. Diaz:
Thank you
for your letter of April 11, 2016. The
company appreciates the opportunity to respond to the complainant’s concerns.
The
company apologizes for any frustration the complainant has experienced as a
result of our liability determination.
Our records indicate that one of our claim managers was able to review
and discuss how we arrived at our liability decision with the complainant. The company determined that our insured was
primarily at-fault, 80%, due to an improper and unsafe lane change upon
entering an intersection. The company
also determined that the complainant contributed to this loss, 20%, as she had
a greater duty to yield when making a right turn into said intersection from a
stop sign.
The
complainant also expressed concerns regarding damage to her car not included in
our estimate. The company advised her
that we would assess any supplemental damage to determine if it is related to
the loss and to have the shop completing the repairs to contact us regarding
this matter.
Thank you
again for allowing the company to respond.
Sincerely,
T. [redacted]
Executive Customer Relations
National
General Insurance
Thank you for your letter of November 14, 2016. The company is sorry to hear of our insured’s dissatisfaction and we appreciate the opportunity to resolve her concerns. Please note our insured resides in California and this complaint involves a loss occurring in California as well....
On October 25, 2016 our insured’s vehicle was struck while it was parked and unoccupied. The adverse driver left the scene and was later apprehended by the police, this is not in dispute. The company ordered the police report so that we could obtain information on the adverse driver and we began the process of evaluating our insured’s loss. The company inspected our insured’s vehicle on October 27, 2016 and determined the vehicle to be total loss. The company completed a total loss settlement offer and was prepared to extend the same to our insured on October 31, 2016. Several messages were left for our insured regarding our offer with no response until November 10, 2016. On November 10, 2016 our insured advised that she wanted to pursue her total loss through the adverse driver’s carrier and not trough us. She also requested that we stop calling her. The company respectfully disagrees with our insured’s statements to the bureau that we have refused to help her and are attempting to defraud her to collect her deductible. Please be advised the company has confirmed that the adverse driver did not have insurance at the time of loss and is considered an uninsured motorist; therefore, our insured’s Collision Deductible Waiver coverage applies. In accordance with our California policy relating to Collision Deductible Waiver coverage, the insured’s deductible is waived as her vehicle was struck by an uninsured motorist. We have reached out to our insured, advised her of the same, and are proceeding with the settlement of her total loss. Thank you again for allowing the company to respond. Sincerely, T. Ray Executive Customer Relations
Imperial Fire and Casualty Insurance Company has received your correspondence as it relates to the complainant, and we thank you for the opportunity to provide a response.Mr. [redacted] purchased a policy on-line with Imperial for the term of 03/13/2016 - 09/13/2016. In the rating and quoting...
process, Mr. [redacted] indicated that he had coverage with another insurer prior to purchasing the Imperial policy. This allowed him to receive a discount on his premium. Accordingly, on 02/27/2016, policy no. [redacted] was issued to him with a total premium of $460.00. However, in order for the discount to be allowed, Mr. [redacted] was required to submit proof of such prior coverage. A letter advising such was issued to him, also on 02/27/2016.There was no information provided to Imperial evidencing such prior insurance. Therefore, on 04/03/2016, Mr. [redacted]'s policy was amended to remove the prior coverage discount previously allowed. This resulted in his premium being increased to $592.00 for the same term of 03/13/2016 - 09/13/2016.If Mr. [redacted] were to provide the needed information in order to grant the prior coverage discount as requested, the discount would then be granted back to him. This information, if available, should be provided in short order in order to best serve him.If you should have any further questions, please do not hesitate to contact me.
On April 20, 2017, the complainant’s vehicle was inspected by a Field Claims Representative, who provided her with a copy of the estimate. Printed on every estimate is a section labeled “NOTE TO VEHICLE OWNER”, which advises of the preferred network of shops as follows: “National General Insurance does business with collision repair shops in your area and has developed a preferred network of shops with proven, high standards. We recognize that you, the vehicle owner, have the right to select the repair facility of your choice and are under no obligation to use any of the shops on the list. We will pay the amount we determine payable under the policy regardless of the repair facility chosen. We will attempt to get an agreed cost of repairs with the shop of your choice. If this is not possible, we will extend a fair and reasonable offer to repair the loss related damage to your vehicle based on industry repair standards and prevailing market rates. If there are loss related damages that were not visible at the time of the initial estimate, or damages not included in the original estimate, the additional damage will be considered for a supplemental repair estimate.” After receiving her copy of the estimate, the complainant advised the Field Claims Representative of her shop of choice. The company respectfully maintains that we are not responsible for the quality of repairs made by a non-preferred repair facility. On December 6, 2017, the Casualty Claims Representative called the complainant and left her a voicemail requesting her to return the call. That same day, a letter was mailed to the claimant listing the Casualty Claims Representative’s direct phone number, email address and fax number. We are more than happy to assist the claimant and her boyfriend with their bodily injury claims once the requested documentation is received. As the claimant is advising her forms are “getting lost in the mail”, she is welcome to fax or email the forms directly to the Casualty Claims Representative. After reviewing the complainant’s rebuttal, we have verified that our phone system is functioning properly, and that the Casualty Claims Representative’s voicemail is capable of accepting a message. Our phone lines are set up to forward the call to another Casualty Claims Representative if the assigned Representative is unavailable, so the complainant should be able to reach someone. We encourage her to try calling during the Casualty Claims Representative’s business hours of 9AM to 5PM Eastern Standard Time, Monday through Friday. While we understand the complainant’s frustration with the delay in her claim, we must respectfully advise that the company has taken appropriate steps in attempting to obtain the information required to complete the claim. Multiple contact attempts via different contact methods have been made, and the Casualty Claims Representative awaits information from the complainant to resolve the claim. Tell us why here...
On October 10, 2017, the complainant contacted the company to advise our insured vehicle had rear-ended them. When the Claims Representative tried to contact the complainant later that day for details around the accident, they received a recorded message that stated “The person you are trying to...
call is not available”, and there was no option to leave a voicemail. On October 11, 2017, the Claims Representative was able to contact the complainant. The complainant provided their account of the accident, and the Claims Representative reminded them of their option to file a claim through their own insurance as coverage was pending investigation through our company. The Claims Representative provided the complainant a link where they could upload photos of the damage to their vehicle for review. On October 17, 2017, the complainant called the Claims Representative and advised they were having issues submitting their photos. The Claims Representative resent the link, and advised during the call that coverage was still pending the outcome of the claims investigation. On November 22, 2017, when no photos were received and no additional contact was made by the complainant, the claim was closed due to lack of interest. On November 30, 2017, the complainant contacted the Claims Representative to advise they wanted their vehicle repaired through [redacted] National Insurance Company. The Claims Representative advised that photos of the vehicle were never received, and as such no estimate had been completed. The Claims Representative resent the link to the complainant for their vehicle photos. On December 2, 2017, photos of the complainant’s vehicle were received. On December 5, 2017, the estimate for the complainant’s damages was completed. A copy of the estimate was mailed to the complainant. On December 6, 2017, a check was mailed to the complainant matching the estimate amount. On January 2, 2018, the complainant contacted the Claims Representative regarding a rental vehicle. The complainant was advised that rental vehicles were not paid for, but were reimbursed by the company up to a specified amount for a period of days. The complainant was advised to send any rental car receipts in to the Claims Representative for reimbursement. On January 9, 2018, a supplemental estimate was mailed to the complainant. That same day, a check was mailed for the estimate amount to the body shop completing the complainant’s repairs. On January 10, 2018, the complainant’s rental invoice was received. A check for the full amount was mailed to the complainant on January 22, 2018. While the company can appreciate the complainant’s frustration with the time line of their claim being resolved, we respectfully advise that the company could take no action without photos of the complainant’s vehicle, which were received at the start of December. Once photos were received, payments were issued for the repairs of the complainant’s vehicle. The complainant was also reimbursed for their use of a rental vehicle once the company received the invoice. Tell us why here...
Thank you for your letter of November 14, 2016. The company appreciates the opportunity to respond to the complainant’s concerns concerning an accident occurring on October 14, 2016 and resulting claim. Please note the complainant is the third party claimant claiming damages...
against our insured. The company was made aware of the loss occurring on October 14, 2016 by [redacted], the complainant’s insurance carrier. Statements regarding the loss were obtained from both the claimant and our insured; however, there were conflicting statements regarding the facts of loss which required an additional investigation on our part. Despite our best efforts we are having difficulty obtaining full cooperation from our insured which has resulted in delays. As a result we are handling the loss under a full reservation of rights as additional information from our insured is needed to determine liability. The company understands and shares the complainant’s frustration in this matter and appreciates their patience as we work toward completing our investigation. Thank you again for allowing the company to respond. Sincerely, T. Ray Executive Customer Relations
January 18, 2018 Melissa Neal The Revdex.com serving Northwest North Carolina 100 S Marshall St, Suite 1 Winston Salem, NC 27101 RE: Case #: 12600957...
Complainant Role: Third Party Claimant Date of Loss: December 12, 2017 Underwriting Company: National General Insurance Company-NAIC 23728 Dear Ms. Neal: Thank you for your email of January 8, 2017. The company appreciates the opportunity to respond to the complainant’s concerns regarding the handling of her claim. The complainant reported the referenced claim to the company on Friday, December 15, 2017, and our records indicate we obtained her recorded statement the following Wednesday, December 20, 2017. We then called and met with the complainant the following Tuesday, December 26, 2017, to inspect and photograph the damage to her vehicle. Throughout the same time the company made several attempts to obtain a statement from our insured without success. Our insured did not return our calls until January 3, 2018, to provide her statement, and the complainant was informed of the same on January 4, 2018. The insured vehicle was inspected on January 9, 2018, and we concluded our investigation into the referenced loss. Please be advised we have an obligation to our insured to confirm the loss, and we were unable to proceed until we spoke with our insured. Upon conclusion of our investigation on January 9, 2018, we deemed our insured at fault for the referenced loss and payment $740.56 was issued to the complainant on the same day. While we understand the complainant’s frustration with perceived delays, it is our position that we completed our due diligence in obtaining a statement from our insured, and settled the complainant’s loss in as timely a manner as possible. Thank you again for allowing the company to respond. Sincerely, T. [redacted] Executive Customer Relations National General Insurance
Thank you for forwarding the complainant’s concerns to our attention. We appreciate the opportunity to respond. A renewal policy was issued to the complainant effective on May 11, 2016 at an annual premium of $1,765.39 including fees. A down payment in the amount of $179.55, which...
included a $3.00 installment fee, was drafted via automatic payment on May 12, 2016. On May 20, 2016 the complainant’s policy was cancelled at her request and earned premium was computed on a Short Rate basis. 10% of the total premium is considered earned premium as the policy was in force for nine days in accordance with the North Carolina Personal Auto Manual. Please note the earned premium calculated Short Rate is calculated by coverage and includes recoupment and fees are fully earned. In review the earned premium calculation is correct outstanding balance owed of $38.80 is valid as shown below: $ 175.35 Earned Premium 5/11/2016 – 5/20/2016 [Short Rate at 10% of total premium, by coverage, includes recoupment] $ 40.00 Pay Plan Setup Charge $ 3.00 Installment Fee $ (179.55) Payment received $ 38.80 Remaining Balance Due Thank you again for allowing the company to respond. Sincerely, T. Ray Executive Customer Relations National General Insurance
Imperial Fire and Casualty Insurance Company has received your correspondence as it relates to the complainant, and we thank you for the opportunity to provide a response.The claim presented by the complainant, [redacted], has been denied because the automobile insurance policy of the insured...
under which the claim was filed was not in-force on the date of the incident in question. That is, the insured's policy was effectively canceled prior to the date of the loss. This information was conveyed to Mr. [redacted] verbally and in writing.Further, there was some delay in the handling of this claim as the file had been internally transferred from one adjuster to the other. However, this did not impact the result of the claim.
On December 13, 2017, the complainant reported an accident involving our insured’s vehicle that occurred on December 1, 2017. The Claims Representative took a recorded statement from the complainant the same day. On December 15, 2017, a payment was issued to the complainant for the Property...
Damage claim. The Claims Representative attempted to contact the complainant, but was unable to leave a voicemail as the complainant’s voicemail box was full. The complainant contacted the Claims Representative later that day, and they discussed the vehicle being dropped off at a repair facility on a Monday or Tuesday. They also reviewed the timeframe for repairs being two days, and the process for any supplemental work that arose during the initial repairs. On December 18, 2017, the Claims Representative contacted the complainant and advised that once the repairs were scheduled, a rental vehicle could be set up. The complainant advised that she would call the Claims Representative once the work was scheduled with the repair facility. On January 4, 2018, the Claims Representative reached out to the complainant for an update. The complainant advised the vehicle was to be dropped off the following Monday (January 8, 2018) for repairs. The Claims Representative advised that he would set up the rental reservation for January 8, 2018. On January 8, 2018, the Claims Representative contacted the complainant with the rental reservation confirmation number. The complainant was reminded of the supplemental process, and advised on how to extend the rental vehicle if necessary. While company can appreciate the complainant’s concerns around their vehicle being out of service for repairs, we must advise that her claim is being handled properly. Once the vehicle was brought into the repair facility, a rental vehicle was provided. The Claims Representative was in contact with the complainant on several occasions in regards to the claim status and next steps. As such, the company respectfully maintains that the necessary level of contact with the complainant was maintained throughout the claims process. Tell us why here...
I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID 11013942, and find that this resolution is satisfactory to me.
Regards,
[redacted]