Moving Insurance

When Mr. [redacted] purchased his policy online he was offered options of Full Service-All Risk, Total Loss Only, or Full-Service Named Perils. I have attached a copy of the page where these options were given. Mr. [redacted] chose the third option for Full-Service Named Perils. It states,...

“Providing protection against losses incurred ONLY from specific Perils (hazards or events), based on Terms & Conditions” and “This insurance does not provide coverage to losses occurring at time of loading or unloading of the insured goods, whether done by the insureds or by any other party loading or unloading the goods, whether a professional or nonprofessional entity”. Prior to purchasing the policy Mr. [redacted] was asked to read all provisions of the insuring contract, and had to check off in four separate places, before signing electronically, that he read and agreed to these terms. I have attached a copy of this which lists the covered causes of loss. After purchasing the policy, we emailed Mr. [redacted] the following “You have purchased our Full Service Named Perils, Full Replacement Value Selected Inventory policy. This type of coverage will cover your belongings due to a Vehicle Accident, Rollover Accident, Fire, Lightening, Smoke, Theft, or Burglary, only. I have attached this email. As Mr. [redacted] damages were not due to one of the Named Perils listed this is not a covered loss.   Thank You, Jeff H[redacted]Claims Manager

The check was mailed April 24th, 2017. The customer should now have received it. We apologize for the delay.

Revdex.com:
I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID [redacted], and find that this resolution, although not satisfactory, is acceptable.

Complaint: [redacted]
I am rejecting this response because:
1. To blame someone else, allegedly not with the company anymore, is extremely poor business practice. It's not our problem to deal with Moving Insurance incompetent management and routines. Did the person(s) bring the claims with them home when they quit? Where is our claim? We are now also seriously question the lack of security routines for sensitive data and are adding this to our complaint. How about credit card information we used for paying the fees? What are the security routines? We called [redacted] some 5 times and (even [redacted] tried to make her reply) she never once returned the phone calls. Moving Insurance just claimed they never received our claim, AFTER we emailed them about the status of our case. So why would we even begin to believe the poorly managed Moving Insurance Company without involving Revdex.com.2. All of a sudden Moving Insurance admits to receiving our claim after totally denying it earlier. No mail records in an insurance company? That's another proof how mismanaged business it is and that their credibility is zero. They're fast to charge us, but faster to avoid responsibility, typical fraudulent behavior.3. To overcome Revdex.com's file uploading deficiencies I will attach the documents of the claim we mailed to Moving Insurance. NOTE We have tried to attach our claim to this response, but get a 404 Server Error and can't upload anything...4. I will also add that we sent the claim packet to [redacted] (the moving company), but USPS could only leave a notice because "No Authorized Recipient Availble" on Thursday July 10, 2014 12.52 PM. Considering all damage [redacted] caused to our property, it certainly adds insult to injury not even accepting our claim form, since we are supposed to notify them too.5. How on earth are we going to be able to reply to a response at the latest 11/20/14 when we got the Revdex.com email asking for our response on 11/24/14 10.57AM, which after the deadline date? The 10 day lag seems to be a Revdex.com issue and should not be held against us.
Regards,
[redacted]

It wouldn’t let me amend my last statement but I said I would let you know once I received the check that was promised and I got it today.  So this complaint can be closed.  Thank You.  [redacted]

The information included in the complaint is incorrect and not factual. The first notification of claim was actually made July 1, 2014, not June 1, 2014. I have attached a full copy of the insurance certificate that was purchased.The customer did submit photographs and a statement from a...

repair firm that his items were not repairable. Based on the photographs, it was very evident that the items were in fact repairable. We sent in  a professional repair firm, that is a member of the national organization CPPC (Claims Procedure and Prevention Council) to perform an estimate to determine if items were repairable, and if so, the cost.All file information was then submitted to the insurance underwriter for their review.The insurance underwriter allowed the repair cost of all items, and an additional good will offer of $700, for a total amount of $6215 (Six Thousand Two Hundred Fifteen Dollars and 00/100) as evidenced by the signed release attached (which does effectively disallow this person to pursue any further funds for this loss, as he accepted this amount as full and final settlement).I have attached a copy of the release signed accepting this amount, along with our letter with the offer including the good will offer and an offer to arbitrate if he disagreed with the insurance underwriter's position.As the customer accepted the offer, this is a closed file and the insurance carrier will not change their position.

The insurance underwriter has reviewed this file and agrees that the foot board was insured for $150. Per the insurance contract "The settlement based on Full Value Replacement insurance and Replacement insurance will be the lesser of repair costs, replacement value or as stated on the valued...

inventory."Therefore,the maximum amount payable is $150. The insurance underwriter has further agreed that strictly as a gesture of good will, they will cover the repair cost of this item in the amount of $165. After applying the deductible of $100, the underwriter will offer a payment of $65.00.Per exclusion (i) of the insurance contract, sales tax is specifically excluded from coverage:(i) Appraisal fees, estimate or inspection fees, shipping or transportation charges, sales tax, damages caused during assembly or disassembly of items that require third party service, items having no commercial value, items of sentimental value or property damage. A release form reflecting this offer will be sent to the insured for signature.

Ms. [redacted] purchased a Mobile Storage policy from MovingInsurance.com on June 26, 2016. She chose a company called COWs (Containers On Wheels) to move with. They rent containers to pack your belongings in. Once loaded, COWs then transports the container(s) to the destination you request. Our...

customer service spoke to Ms. [redacted] on September 7, 2016. She said she was looking for her goods and stated that COWs is not telling her where the goods are located. She wanted to know if we had the address and we informed her that we don't have the location as we are not part of the moving company, we only have the information that she entered in our system. We contacted COWs and on September 13, 2016 [redacted] from COWs advised us “It is at our Dealers location in Sanford, FL. The customer does not yet have a delivery address in Arizona. As we have multiple locations in AZ, we typically do not send the container until we have a confirmed delivery address”. He provided the following address where the goods were at: [redacted]. Our customer service followed up with Ms. [redacted] September 14, 2016 and made her aware this. She advised she was closing next week and was told she would be able to get delivery within 2 weeks. We advised to make sure she gives the mover as much notice as possible because it must be planned for delivery and then will go on a truck from FL to AZ. On September 28, 2016, Ms. [redacted] called stating that she is still waiting for delivery and cannot reach anyone to get her goods. We provided the phone number where her goods were stored and she said she would contact them. We informed her that her policy ends today, so if she needs to extend coverage to purchase an extension. Ms. [redacted] did purchase an extension. Her items were shipped the following day September 29, 2016, from [redacted]. The same address COWs advised they were at.  I have attached the Bill of Lading showing this. The shipment delivered to Ms. [redacted] on September 6, 2016 (one week after she called requesting delivery). She contacted Moving Insurance September 7, 2016, advising she had a teak dresser that was destroyed. The damage was not found to be due to any of the named perils covered by the policy. It was determined to be from loading/unloading which is not covered. The policy requests “any documentation or official reports from local police or fire department agencies, supporting the claim be provided” because damage occurring due to an accident, fire, theft, etc. should be supported by a police/fire department report. We would not expect a police report filed for the type of damage reported by Ms. [redacted] as it is not the type of damage covered by the policy. Below are the covered named perils: COVERED CAUSES OF LOSS WHILE GOODS ARE TRANSPORTED VIA THE MOBILE STORAGE FACILITY: 1) Vehicle Accident 2) Rollover Accident 3) Fire 4) Lightning 5) Smoke 6) Theft 7) Burglary, except as excluded under Exclusion (e)   COVERED CAUSES OF LOSS WHILE GOODS ARE STORED AT THE MOBILE STORAGE FACILITY: We cover direct loss to the insured property by the following causes of loss, except as otherwise excluded: 8) Fire or Lightning 9) Explosion of Sonic Boom 10) Strikes, Riots or Civil Commotion 11) Aircraft, Self-propelled Missiles or Spacecraft 12) Smoke 13) Falling objects, provided the building is first damaged by such falling objects 14) Vandalism or Malicious Mischief 15) Earthquake or Volcanic Eruption 16) Weight of Ice, Snow or Sleet 17) Sudden Collapse of Buildings or any part thereof 18) Sink hole collapse 19) Burglary, except as excluded under Exclusion (e) In conclusion, we did confirm where the property was located, advised Ms. [redacted] of the whereabouts, and the shipping documents confirm this was where her belongings were stored. Additionally, after advising this to Ms. [redacted] she purchased an extension knowing her items were stored in Florida. As such, there is no reason for a refund, due to Moving Insurance not knowing where the property was at.  Sincerely,[redacted]Claims Manager

This customer came to our website, completed an onlineapplication, and then had to go through the terms and conditions of the policy.All information was disclosed. She actually had to check off in four separateplaces, before signing electronically, that she read and agreed to these terms.She...

purchased insurance for a total of $25,000. Shelisted five individual items that she identified as high value, and theircumulative value totaled $19,000. This left a total amount of coverage foreverything else she owned at $6,000. Almost the entire first page of the terms andconditions was a description of the coverage requirements, and exactly howco-insurance is applied in the event of a claim, including examples. Thiscustomer underinsured her shipment by over 75%.The claim was adjusted per the terms and conditions ofthe contract. She states that our system was down, however, we have confirmedwith the management that carries our servers that there was never any time thesystem was down. We assume this person simply forgot to click “Submit”.At this point I note that when the customer submittedher initial claim online, she was sent a claim packet with full instructions.She was instructed to complete the claim forms fully, and submit these, alongwith photographs of the damaged items and a professional estimate to repair thedamages for any items claimed damaged. She was given 60 days to submit allinformation requested, as was specified in the contract and accepted by herprior to purchasing the coverage. We received claim forms that did not have allfields completed, and photographs. She did not submit the required repairestimates.From the insuring contract, Examination Under Oathbelow, and specifically relevant to this claim (b), (e), (f):EXAMINATION UNDER OATH: Before recovering for any lossyou will, if requested: (a) permit us to inspect the damaged property before itis disposed of or repaired; (b) send us a completed claim packet containing theinformation we request to settle your claim. You must do this within 60 days ofour request or your file will be closed; (c) agree to examinations under anoath at our request; (d) produce others for examination under an oath at ourrequest; (e) provide us with all pertinent records and reports needed to provethe loss; (f) cooperate with us in the investigation or settlement of the loss.Initially we denied furniture items she claimed as shedid not document the damage to these items as is required per the insuringcontract, and also the legal manifest she signed with the moving company, whichis the only way to determine if the damage occurred while the goods were in thepossession of the moving company. She did dispute this, but was unable toprovide any documentation to support her position that she complied with theinsuring contract.   We offeredarbitration to this customer, which she declined.  We then offered her a good will settlement of thereplacement value of all but 2 items (which were two items she packed herselfand specifically excluded from coverage), having applied the co-insurance, asshe must bear her portion of the loss by underinsuring her items and not payingthe full premium. She also declined this.In fact she did state in writing after she declinedthis that she would be either throwing her items away or donating them to “anot for profit that provides fine art mentoring scholarships to homeless andhigh risk children.”Due to the nature of communication she has directed toour company, the matter has been referred to our attorney.

Complaint: [redacted]
I am rejecting this response because: your insurance clearly does not cover container units and there should be a  refunded.  The cows container was damaged but that does not mean that the vehicle was damaged.  Your insurance was not written for container which three independent  companies handle.Your company rules do not seem cover container units such cows or pods.
Regards,
[redacted]

This customer purchased insurance on our website. While going through the online application, she was prompted on three separate pages to list all items to be insured. Additionally, the instructions specified that all items had to be individually listed and valued. Further, the instructions...

specified that any items lumped together in a group would be considered of equal value. The customer actually had to complete all information, then check off in four separate places before signing electronically, that she read and agreed to the terms of the insuring contract.
When she filed her claim notification, she was sent a claim packet with full instructions on how to fill out the forms and return to us for review. This included information identifying each item being claimed with a description of the item, its' corresponding inventory # matching the mover's inventory form, the type of damage sustained, etc. The customer completed these forms and submitted to us for our review.
Regarding the lamp, this customer specifically filled out the documentation identifying a damaged lamp as item# 81 on the mover's inventory form. This item was clearly inventoried as blanket wrapped,, which based on the insuring contract, is NOT adequate protection, and therefore specifically excludes damage to this item. Based on the information available to us, we have no choice but to maintain our position of denial on this item.
Regarding the other items being claimed, unfortunately the customer chose not to follow the instructions of the contract, and did NOT list specific items to be insured. Instead, she lumped together as one category EXACTLY: "China, cut glass, mirrors, crystal, assorted antiques" for a TOTAL value of $2,400. The moving inventory has a total number of items listed under this category totalling 61 individual boxes. Therefore, based on the contract, the maximum value for the contents of any one box was $39.34.
Per the insuring contract, the carrier will not pay out more for an item than it was insured for.
Unfortunately, this customer grossly underinsured their goods; the allowed amount is for the total amount these 3 items were insured for. After applying the deductible the customer selected at the time of purchase, there would be no payment forthcoming.
For an on behalf of Underwriters at Lloyd's, the claim was adjusted based on the contract, and the 3 items that were covered under the contract, the offer included the full amount these items were insured for. Therefore, the offer was fair, and we must maintain our position on these items.
If requested, we do have all documentation supporting our position. All of this information was already provided and explained to the insured.

Terrible service. I would never recommend this company. Run away from them!
They will find excuses for not paying for either damaged or lost items.
Do not recomend it.

The information included in the complaint is incorrect and not factual. The first notification of claim was actually made July 1, 2014, not June 1, 2014. I have attached a full copy of the insurance certificate that was purchased.The customer did submit photographs and a statement from a repair firm...

that his items were not repairable. Based on the photographs, it was very evident that the items were in fact repairable. We sent in  a professional repair firm, that is a member of the national organization CPPC (Claims Procedure and Prevention Council) to perform an estimate to determine if items were repairable, and if so, the cost.All file information was then submitted to the insurance underwriter for their review.The insurance underwriter allowed the repair cost of all items, and an additional good will offer of $700, for a total amount of $6215 (Six Thousand Two Hundred Fifteen Dollars and 00/100) as evidenced by the signed release attached (which does effectively disallow this person to pursue any further funds for this loss, as he accepted this amount as full and final settlement).I have attached a copy of the release signed accepting this amount, along with our letter with the offer including the good will offer and an offer to arbitrate if he disagreed with the insurance underwriter's position.As the customer accepted the offer, this is a closed file and the insurance carrier will not change their position.

If there was a legal way to spam people I'd say they have refined it. I had a cross country move with fine antiques and valuable items. Amanda, my rep there, told me I had to individually list any items over $1000 for them to be insured at replacement cost. I did, I had about 23 items on the list. Other items, such a my shabby chic table and one in a set of 5 antique chairs, I valued around $850 and $650 so I didn't put them on the over $1000 list because I was told not to. It was those two items that were broken/irrepairable and I jumped through all their hoops of getting repair estimates, submitting all moving docs, pics, etc. They came back with a "settlement" numbers far below my $500 deductible and say they owe nothing. Granted I paid over $500 for this policy, to be insured for my antiques and valuables. I have emailed them to discuss but have not gotten a response. I am so disappointed and feel played to have paid so much for a "comprehensive" policy to cover "replacement cost", not cost by weight which was the cheaper way, and to have been given a settlement based on weight. Terrible. Unethical.

I am rejecting this response because:While I did accept their settlement, I told them when I did that I was only doing it because their deadline where if I didn't accept was coming up and otherwise I'd get nothing...and that they'd won a war of attrition with me that was designed to get me to accept a settlement less than what I deserve. I ran out of patience, time, and money to pay for arbitration and legal representation. But that doesn't mean it's a fair settlement. What they do is predatory and anti-consumer. They wait months without responding, take 2-4 weeks sometimes to respond to emails, introduce unnecessary and continued delays, and at the last minute offer a crappy settlement with a few weeks to accept or get nothing. The repairman I hired (at their request) was independent and impartial, and his message/verdict indicated I deserved the full claim. They refused to accept that (why they made me pay for it to begin with is a wonder), and sent their own guy out, who told me on site he agreed with my claim. Then they refuse to share the language of his findings/verdict, only offering me a pittance. Their statement that my dates are inaccurate is wrong...there were a great many dates that I reached out to them throughout the process, more often than not having to reach out 2-4 times to get any response, sometimes not for weeks. I only included three contact dates because that's all your site allows.What they should do to effectively resolve this is pay me the entire sum of my claim. Just because I have accepted their weak claim out of desperation doesn't mean it's actually right or legal, and I stand firm in my complaint to the Revdex.com so that future customers will know that this business is predatory and should be avoided.

I am rejecting this response because:As seen on USPS Tracking page (I made a jpg-file of USPS webpage) the packet we mailed was signed for 1. July 10, 2014, 12:44 pm by [redacted] (USPS to Moving Insurance Tracking Info Pic 7-10-14.jpg)The papers mailed to Moving Insurance contained: 2. CLAIM REPORTING INSTRUCTIONS.pdf This is the address to which the claim packet was sent.3. Claim PRESENTATION OF LOSS filled out.pdf4. Moving Insurance claim 4-10-14 numbered 5-21-14.pdAlso submitted were Invoices for repair of damaged items, but Revdex.com's limited space doesn't allow for more uploads.

All claim mail for our company is received at a UPS Store. I have spoken to the manager, who confirms that one of their employees did in fact sign for your paperwork on July 10, 2014. However, that is where the trail ends. They have no record of turning the package over to an employee of Moving Insurance. As stated previously, if you had simply provided me with the tracking information and name of the person who signed for this package when I originally asked, the package could have possibly been recovered. However, as you refused to provide any information, and the employee since left the UPS store, and so many months have passed, we were unable to do anything. Additionally, you not providing the information via email or fax also prevented us from having any information to review.   At the request of the Revdex.com, I am including them in my response to you. We have completed a full review of the claim information that you submitted through the Revdex.com office, and we have adjusted your claim based on the insuring contract you accepted prior to purchasing the coverage.   Please note that we are legally obligated to adjust all claims based on the contract.   Please carefully review the information included in the letter.

The photo of the mattress provided by Ms. [redacted] shows the mover with her mattress at origin and it was not packed in a mattress carton as required by condition (ab) of the policy. Ms. [redacted] signed and agreed top these terms an conditions prior to purchasing the policy and based on the photo she was aware the mover was not transporting her mattress as required. We require mattress be packed in a mattress carton as when they are only wrapped in plastic, it gets torn and due to most mattresses being white they stain easily. Especially when they are being taken out of the home and put on a truck with other items such as lawnmowers, BBQ grills, etc. WE did not need to send anyone to Ms. [redacted]'s home as the mattress was not packed in a mattress carton as  required, the bookshelf and desk are made or particleboard which is not covered per exclusion (g), and no exceptions were made for any damage to owner packed boxes at the time of delivery as required per Exclusion (a). We require this as when a customer packs their own cartons we no knowledge of the contents ,the condition of the contents, or the method of packing. As such, we are unable to assume liability for damaged contents of owner packed items without evidence of mishandling to the carton. We regret the claim cannot be resolved as requested and hope this clarifies the basis for our claim settlement position.

Complaint: [redacted]
I am rejecting this response because:The mattresses did not show any drag stains, I would like to see the photographs. I photographed the same issues the movers found as they picked up my content, see attached - it showed the mattress covered in a plastic cover. This was the only damage this mattress had, a hole in the liner in the back, you need to see the hole now and the spring box from the queen mattress also the stains. Both mattresses left my house clean and intact, besides on small hole. I offered the moving insurance multiple time to come to my home to assess the damage, but they didn't bother it appears the person that pays for the insurance is found guilty and the company that did the damage is the one the insurance company wants to believe, I guess I don't have to wonder why. Please email me the pictures with the stains and the holes as the pickup movers noted the stains. I don't know what they have in their reports, I would like to see this as well, so I can file fraud charges against the moving company. Also my cleaning women arrived after the movers just had moved the 2 cabinets into the moving truck. She is a witness how both of my mattress looked before the move, she has been cleaning for me for the past 2 years and she was shocked as she saw them after I moved into my new home. She said she would file a law suit against this moving company. Also as the movers delivered the boxes to my house I showed them everything they delivered broken including the boxes. They didn't care just walked away and kept on dumping my furniture into my new home. 
Regards,
[redacted]

Review: I purchased moving insurance to protect my belongings from damage. Some things were damaged and although I was properly insured and submitted everything that they asked for they are denying the claim anyway.Desired Settlement: To have my claim legitimately settled and paid to me.

Business

Response:

When this customer purchased the insurance, they had to go through an online application. Before being able to purchase the insurance the customer actually checked off in four separate places, that she read and agreed to the terms of the contract. We are legally required to adjust all claims based on the contract, and apply the terms equally to all insured's.I have attached the insurance contract that was signed prior to the insurance being purchased, along with the settlement letter. The settlement letter identifies each item that was claimed, along with the relevant terms and conditions of the contract that apply. As you will see, two items were denied. Both of the relevant clauses of the contract that apply to these items was actually bolded in the contract to be further brought to the attention of the insured. Also part of the contract, and again pointed out to the customer was that they had a maximum of 60 days to submit all requested information in order to settle the claim. As a courtesy we actually gave a week extension for the customer to submit the information. We requested repair estimates for the damaged furniture, which were never submitted. Therefore, the insurance underwriter made an appearance allowance. Because the customer under-insured her shipment, the co-insurance clause of the contract was applied. Essentially because items were undervalued, the customer did not pay for full coverage; per the contract, the insurance carrier penalizes the insured in the settlement by the same percentage they under-insured their shipment for. Again, this is detailed in the settlement proposal. We have offered arbitration if the customer feels that the claim was not adjusted based on the contract she signed prior to actually purchasing the coverage. As we have to adjust the claims based on the contract in order to be in compliance with Dept. of Insurance requirements, we are not in a position to make any adjustments.