Revised answer sent 11/21/at 11:am - Second paragraph, second sentence should read 9/24/vs 9/24/16; see below [redacted] Response date: 11/21/16On 7/22/15, a letter was sent to [redacted] informing him that Sikorsky Credit Union had been notified that the insurance policy for his collateral (Yamaha Motorcycle) had been cancelled effective 7/5/The letter requested [redacted] submit a copy of the replacement policy showing an effective date of 7/5/or earlier The letter stated if Sikorsky Credit Union did not receive acceptable proof of the required insurance the Credit Union would purchase a Collateral Protection Insurance certificate at the Member’s expenseThe Credit Union explained to [redacted] by written communication that this coverage is designed to protect the Credit Union’s interest in the collateral; and it does not afford any liability protection to the Member; and would not provide coverage for any claims made by the Member.A Final Notice was sent to [redacted] on 8/19/informing him that Sikorsky Credit Union had not received proof of coverageOn 9/24/a Notice of Placement of Insurance was sent to the Member for insurance coverage for the period of 7/5/to 7/5/in the amount of $1,[redacted] submitted a certificate of insurance coverage for the period of 9/2/to 9/2/ He was given a refund for the unearned premium of the forced placed policy calculated in the amount of $1, [redacted] was charged for a true lapse of coverage for the period of 7/5/to 9/2/calculated in the amount of $
[redacted] Response date: 11/21/On 7/22/15, a letter was sent to [redacted] informing him that Sikorsky Credit Union had been notified that the insurance policy for his collateral (Yamaha Motorcycle) had been cancelled effective 7/5/The letter requested [redacted] submit a copy of the replacement policy showing an effective date of 7/5/or earlier The letter stated if Sikorsky Credit Union did not receive acceptable proof of the required insurance the Credit Union would purchase a Collateral Protection Insurance certificate at the Member’s expenseThe Credit Union explained to [redacted] by written communication that this coverage is designed to protect the Credit Union’s interest in the collateral; and it does not afford any liability protection to the Member; and would not provide coverage for any claims made by the MemberA Final Notice was sent to [redacted] on 8/19/informing him that Sikorsky Credit Union had not received proof of coverageOn 9/24/a Notice of Placement of Insurance was sent to the Member for insurance coverage for the period of 7/5/to 7/5/in the amount of $1, [redacted] submitted a certificate of insurance coverage for the period of 9/2/to 9/2/ He was given a refund for the unearned premium of the forced placed policy calculated in the amount of $1, [redacted] was charged for a true lapse of coverage for the period of 7/5/to 9/2/calculated in the amount of $
Complaint: [redacted] I am rejecting this response because:I had been retroactively charged for a service (Insurance at over $1,a year compared to $a year) that was never providedDuring that lapse of insurance there was no coverage on the motorcycleNo coverage by any third party, nothingIn comparison this is 20% of my vehicle cost, my record is clean and this is also very bad business practice, particularly when, in the same week they offer me a mailer inviting me to lower insurance rates! Only after receiving the first and only letter indicating they were placing me on their third party insurance (at which time I discovered the lapse, I already placed full coverage insurance on the vehicle), did they inform me they would be charging me for a service that I never receivedThey offered a refund from that point as statedBottom line is, the vehicle was not protected during the lapse, they are profiteering at the expense of the lienholderNo insurance was provided during this timeTheir effort to collect retroactively for a service not provided is bad business practiceThis was done by their third party which they indicated they have little control of Sincerely, [redacted]
All NSF fees have been credited back to member as he requestedDue to oversight of a review process the funds from the overdraft protection were not transferredThis issue has been resolved
Revdex.com: I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID [redacted] and find that this resolution is satisfactory to me Sincerely, [redacted]
Revdex.com:
I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID ***, and find that this resolution is satisfactory to me
Sincerely,
*** ***
Member stated in his application for an Advantage mortgage loan he was refinancing a single family residenceHe paid the non-refundable application fee of $and signed disclosures that the fee was not refundable
The appraisal revealed the property was actually a two family dwelling in
"fair" conditionSCU does not offer Advantage mortgages for 2-family dwellings. If member disclosed it was a two family dweling SCU would not have accepted the application and fee, rather have member apply for a different type of mortgage product
Also, SCU denies mortgage loans where collateral is less than "average" as industry standard practiceSCU will not refund the $fee
Revised answer sent 11/21/16 at 11:30 am - Second paragraph, second sentence should read 9/24/15 vs 9/24/16; see below[redacted]Response date: 11/21/16On 7/22/15, a letter was sent to [redacted] informing him that Sikorsky Credit Union had been notified that the insurance policy for his collateral (2014 Yamaha Motorcycle) had been cancelled effective 7/5/15. The letter requested [redacted] submit a copy of the replacement policy showing an effective date of 7/5/15 or earlier. The letter stated if Sikorsky Credit Union did not receive acceptable proof of the required insurance the Credit Union would purchase a Collateral Protection Insurance certificate at the Member’s expense. The Credit Union explained to [redacted] by written communication that this coverage is designed to protect the Credit Union’s interest in the collateral; and it does not afford any liability protection to the Member; and would not provide coverage for any claims made by the Member.A Final Notice was sent to [redacted] on 8/19/15 informing him that Sikorsky Credit Union had not received proof of coverage. On 9/24/15 a Notice of Placement of Insurance was sent to the Member for insurance coverage for the period of 7/5/15 to 7/5/16 in the amount of $1,918.00.[redacted] submitted a certificate of insurance coverage for the period of 9/2/15 to 9/2/16. He was given a refund for the unearned premium of the forced placed policy calculated in the amount of $1,352.19. [redacted] was charged for a true lapse of coverage for the period of 7/5/15 to 9/2/15 calculated in the amount of $566.
[redacted] [redacted] Response date: 11/21/16 On 7/22/15, a letter was sent to [redacted] informing him that Sikorsky Credit Union had been notified that the insurance policy for his collateral (2014 Yamaha Motorcycle) had been cancelled effective 7/5/15. The letter requested...
[redacted] submit a copy of the replacement policy showing an effective date of 7/5/15 or earlier. The letter stated if Sikorsky Credit Union did not receive acceptable proof of the required insurance the Credit Union would purchase a Collateral Protection Insurance certificate at the Member’s expense. The Credit Union explained to [redacted] by written communication that this coverage is designed to protect the Credit Union’s interest in the collateral; and it does not afford any liability protection to the Member; and would not provide coverage for any claims made by the Member. A Final Notice was sent to [redacted] on 8/19/15 informing him that Sikorsky Credit Union had not received proof of coverage. On 9/24/16 a Notice of Placement of Insurance was sent to the Member for insurance coverage for the period of 7/5/15 to 7/5/16 in the amount of $1,918.00. [redacted] submitted a certificate of insurance coverage for the period of 9/2/15 to 9/2/16. He was given a refund for the unearned premium of the forced placed policy calculated in the amount of $1,352.19. [redacted] was charged for a true lapse of coverage for the period of 7/5/15 to 9/2/15 calculated in the amount of $566.
Revdex.com:
I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID [redacted] and find that this resolution is satisfactory to me.
Sincerely,
[redacted]
Complaint: [redacted]
I am rejecting this response because:I had been retroactively charged for a service (Insurance at over $1,900 a year compared to $350 a year) that was never provided. During that lapse of insurance there was no coverage on the motorcycle. No coverage by any third party, nothing. In comparison this is 20% of my vehicle cost, my record is clean and this is also very bad business practice, particularly when, in the same week they offer me a mailer inviting me to lower insurance rates! Only after receiving the first and only letter indicating they were placing me on their third party insurance (at which time I discovered the lapse, I already placed full coverage insurance on the vehicle), did they inform me they would be charging me for a service that I never received. They offered a refund from that point as stated. Bottom line is, the vehicle was not protected during the lapse, they are profiteering at the expense of the lienholder. No insurance was provided during this time. Their effort to collect retroactively for a service not provided is bad business practice. This was done by their third party which they indicated they have little control of.
Sincerely,
[redacted]
All NSF fees have been credited back to member as he requested. Due to oversight of a review process the funds from the overdraft protection were not transferred. This issue has been resolved.
Revised answer sent 11/21/at 11:am - Second paragraph, second sentence should read 9/24/vs 9/24/16; see below [redacted] Response date: 11/21/16On 7/22/15, a letter was sent to [redacted] informing him that Sikorsky Credit Union had been notified that the insurance policy for his collateral (Yamaha Motorcycle) had been cancelled effective 7/5/The letter requested [redacted] submit a copy of the replacement policy showing an effective date of 7/5/or earlier The letter stated if Sikorsky Credit Union did not receive acceptable proof of the required insurance the Credit Union would purchase a Collateral Protection Insurance certificate at the Member’s expenseThe Credit Union explained to [redacted] by written communication that this coverage is designed to protect the Credit Union’s interest in the collateral; and it does not afford any liability protection to the Member; and would not provide coverage for any claims made by the Member.A Final Notice was sent to [redacted] on 8/19/informing him that Sikorsky Credit Union had not received proof of coverageOn 9/24/a Notice of Placement of Insurance was sent to the Member for insurance coverage for the period of 7/5/to 7/5/in the amount of $1,[redacted] submitted a certificate of insurance coverage for the period of 9/2/to 9/2/ He was given a refund for the unearned premium of the forced placed policy calculated in the amount of $1, [redacted] was charged for a true lapse of coverage for the period of 7/5/to 9/2/calculated in the amount of $
[redacted] Response date: 11/21/On 7/22/15, a letter was sent to [redacted] informing him that Sikorsky Credit Union had been notified that the insurance policy for his collateral (Yamaha Motorcycle) had been cancelled effective 7/5/The letter requested [redacted] submit a copy of the replacement policy showing an effective date of 7/5/or earlier The letter stated if Sikorsky Credit Union did not receive acceptable proof of the required insurance the Credit Union would purchase a Collateral Protection Insurance certificate at the Member’s expenseThe Credit Union explained to [redacted] by written communication that this coverage is designed to protect the Credit Union’s interest in the collateral; and it does not afford any liability protection to the Member; and would not provide coverage for any claims made by the MemberA Final Notice was sent to [redacted] on 8/19/informing him that Sikorsky Credit Union had not received proof of coverageOn 9/24/a Notice of Placement of Insurance was sent to the Member for insurance coverage for the period of 7/5/to 7/5/in the amount of $1, [redacted] submitted a certificate of insurance coverage for the period of 9/2/to 9/2/ He was given a refund for the unearned premium of the forced placed policy calculated in the amount of $1, [redacted] was charged for a true lapse of coverage for the period of 7/5/to 9/2/calculated in the amount of $
Complaint: [redacted] I am rejecting this response because:I had been retroactively charged for a service (Insurance at over $1,a year compared to $a year) that was never providedDuring that lapse of insurance there was no coverage on the motorcycleNo coverage by any third party, nothingIn comparison this is 20% of my vehicle cost, my record is clean and this is also very bad business practice, particularly when, in the same week they offer me a mailer inviting me to lower insurance rates! Only after receiving the first and only letter indicating they were placing me on their third party insurance (at which time I discovered the lapse, I already placed full coverage insurance on the vehicle), did they inform me they would be charging me for a service that I never receivedThey offered a refund from that point as statedBottom line is, the vehicle was not protected during the lapse, they are profiteering at the expense of the lienholderNo insurance was provided during this timeTheir effort to collect retroactively for a service not provided is bad business practiceThis was done by their third party which they indicated they have little control of Sincerely, [redacted]
All NSF fees have been credited back to member as he requestedDue to oversight of a review process the funds from the overdraft protection were not transferredThis issue has been resolved
Revdex.com: I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID [redacted] and find that this resolution is satisfactory to me Sincerely, [redacted]
Revdex.com:
I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID ***, and find that this resolution is satisfactory to me
Sincerely,
*** ***
Member stated in his application for an Advantage mortgage loan he was refinancing a single family residenceHe paid the non-refundable application fee of $and signed disclosures that the fee was not refundable
The appraisal revealed the property was actually a two family dwelling in
"fair" conditionSCU does not offer Advantage mortgages for 2-family dwellings. If member disclosed it was a two family dweling SCU would not have accepted the application and fee, rather have member apply for a different type of mortgage product
Also, SCU denies mortgage loans where collateral is less than "average" as industry standard practiceSCU will not refund the $fee
Revised answer sent 11/21/16 at 11:30 am - Second paragraph, second sentence should read 9/24/15 vs 9/24/16; see below[redacted]Response date: 11/21/16On 7/22/15, a letter was sent to [redacted] informing him that Sikorsky Credit Union had been notified that the insurance policy for his collateral (2014 Yamaha Motorcycle) had been cancelled effective 7/5/15. The letter requested [redacted] submit a copy of the replacement policy showing an effective date of 7/5/15 or earlier. The letter stated if Sikorsky Credit Union did not receive acceptable proof of the required insurance the Credit Union would purchase a Collateral Protection Insurance certificate at the Member’s expense. The Credit Union explained to [redacted] by written communication that this coverage is designed to protect the Credit Union’s interest in the collateral; and it does not afford any liability protection to the Member; and would not provide coverage for any claims made by the Member.A Final Notice was sent to [redacted] on 8/19/15 informing him that Sikorsky Credit Union had not received proof of coverage. On 9/24/15 a Notice of Placement of Insurance was sent to the Member for insurance coverage for the period of 7/5/15 to 7/5/16 in the amount of $1,918.00.[redacted] submitted a certificate of insurance coverage for the period of 9/2/15 to 9/2/16. He was given a refund for the unearned premium of the forced placed policy calculated in the amount of $1,352.19. [redacted] was charged for a true lapse of coverage for the period of 7/5/15 to 9/2/15 calculated in the amount of $566.
[redacted] [redacted] Response date: 11/21/16 On 7/22/15, a letter was sent to [redacted] informing him that Sikorsky Credit Union had been notified that the insurance policy for his collateral (2014 Yamaha Motorcycle) had been cancelled effective 7/5/15. The letter requested...
[redacted] submit a copy of the replacement policy showing an effective date of 7/5/15 or earlier. The letter stated if Sikorsky Credit Union did not receive acceptable proof of the required insurance the Credit Union would purchase a Collateral Protection Insurance certificate at the Member’s expense. The Credit Union explained to [redacted] by written communication that this coverage is designed to protect the Credit Union’s interest in the collateral; and it does not afford any liability protection to the Member; and would not provide coverage for any claims made by the Member. A Final Notice was sent to [redacted] on 8/19/15 informing him that Sikorsky Credit Union had not received proof of coverage. On 9/24/16 a Notice of Placement of Insurance was sent to the Member for insurance coverage for the period of 7/5/15 to 7/5/16 in the amount of $1,918.00. [redacted] submitted a certificate of insurance coverage for the period of 9/2/15 to 9/2/16. He was given a refund for the unearned premium of the forced placed policy calculated in the amount of $1,352.19. [redacted] was charged for a true lapse of coverage for the period of 7/5/15 to 9/2/15 calculated in the amount of $566.
Revdex.com:
I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID [redacted] and find that this resolution is satisfactory to me.
Sincerely,
[redacted]
Complaint: [redacted]
I am rejecting this response because:I had been retroactively charged for a service (Insurance at over $1,900 a year compared to $350 a year) that was never provided. During that lapse of insurance there was no coverage on the motorcycle. No coverage by any third party, nothing. In comparison this is 20% of my vehicle cost, my record is clean and this is also very bad business practice, particularly when, in the same week they offer me a mailer inviting me to lower insurance rates! Only after receiving the first and only letter indicating they were placing me on their third party insurance (at which time I discovered the lapse, I already placed full coverage insurance on the vehicle), did they inform me they would be charging me for a service that I never received. They offered a refund from that point as stated. Bottom line is, the vehicle was not protected during the lapse, they are profiteering at the expense of the lienholder. No insurance was provided during this time. Their effort to collect retroactively for a service not provided is bad business practice. This was done by their third party which they indicated they have little control of.
Sincerely,
[redacted]
All NSF fees have been credited back to member as he requested. Due to oversight of a review process the funds from the overdraft protection were not transferred. This issue has been resolved.