Selco Insurance Svc

Hi there, I just received the complaint today This is not a SELCO Insurance Services Matter This is more properly a SELCO Community Credit Union compliant Please extend the time for response And, please know that I do not think days is nearly adequate enough for research and responseI leave out of state tomorrow for a week I will begin doing research and respond after my return Please see copy of complaint attached hereto for your convenience

Complaint: [redacted] I am rejecting this response because: SELCO is saying they provided adequate notification they did NOTI never received any letters or emails before the first notification I received in mid NovemberI was never given any opportunity to rectify any issuesSELCO was able to call me to 'congratulate' me on my purchase as well as call and send unsolicited letters and emails attempting to sell me optional gap coverage on my vehicles valuation but was unable to let me know there was a problem regarding the 'terms and conditions' of my loan?? Furthermore I do not believe I EVER signed ANY paperwork with SELCO in regards to this particular loan, so if possible I would like to review a copy of the terms and conditions with my signature on itSELCO's letter to which I attempted to respond stated they *may [redacted] purchase coverage, it did not state SELCO *will [redacted] purchase coverageI was charged $in December to cover 'assets' for the past, the car did not leave my garage and I would still be willing to show a current odometer reading that will be within miles of date of purchase (car was driven home from Washington), speaking again with [redacted] they again state they *could [redacted] have fixed the problem had they been notified earlier than when it came to my (and their attention) they again affirm that they NEVER had ANY contact from SELCO, again stating that is unheard of in their line of work, they stated that ANY new (or used/new to me) vehicle purchased by me would automatically be covered for the first days without any policy changes necessary and that the coverage's would reflect my the coverage 'required' by SELCO , therefore (hypothetically speaking of course because there were no issues with the vehicle from September to November) any issues (claims, collisions, loss) WOULD have been fully covered under my [redacted] policy Therefore at a minimum at least days of SELCO's exorbitant coverage should be refunded to meSuggesting that this is all my mistake is not acceptable, SELCO has a due diligence before charging me $, a simple second telephone call to me would have resolved all of this, apparently it was easier to purchase this policy (so much work was required on SELCO's end they charged me a $fee to take out the policy) not to mention the money was rolled onto my loan so it is accruing interest for SELCOThere is absolutely zero reason I would not have had insurance on the vehicle, I have had vehicle loans through SELCO without issue and money was not an issue (as suggested by a representative at SELCO who said 'maybe you couldn't afford it) as I have over $20,in my account throughout the entire period in questionTo try and shame me into believing SELCO bears zero responsibility and I should someone feel sorry for the other members is ridiculous , charging $(plus interest) for an intangible product to cover a hypothetical 'what if' in the past is shamefulMy wife (who has multiple sclerosis) and myself work VERY hard for what little bit we have and despite the fact I own a Corvette it is a large burden , all for something that with seconds of basic fair business practices and customer service could have been preventedI would be happy to have a correct address/department to correspond with in future dealings as I also have a concurrent case with the Oregon Department of Justice and will be pursuing small claims court next unless someone decides to attempt to make this rightAgain a signed copy of my loan and any tangible proof of correspondence regarding this issue would be appreciated

With due respect, as I indicated in my previous email I would instruct a SELCO employee to send copies of loan documents.  Mr. [redacted] has or should have the very documents within his hands, but I am happy to resend and that request has been made.  I do not think a semantic argument regarding whether Mr. [redacted] signed documents with SELCO directly or SELCO purchased a dealer contract changes anything.  The dealer contract was lawfully assigned to SELCO and SELCO has the same rights and expectations as would any other lender, including the dealer.  I urge Mr. [redacted] to carefully review the materials that will be in the mail soon as they should be enlightening as to this matter.  Mr. [redacted] himself emailed from his email address to [redacted], the same email address [redacted] sent notices to.  Mr. [redacted] makes a lot out of not having a personal phone call.  I do not believe that expectation is reasonable and is not one that is required or provided for other members similarly situated.  A phone call might have been nice, but it was not required and I submit Mr. [redacted] as sufficiently on notice and had a duty to confirm his vehicle was adequately covered. As to the insurance, I am quite confident that Mr. [redacted] did not receive a new policy card confirming coverage as he did not have coverage.  The lack of a new insurance card should have been sufficient in itself to put Mr. [redacted] on notice that he was not covered.  At a minimum, the lack of anything from [redacted] should have been a bit concerning.  Mr. [redacted] indicates the amount was too much and he was covered for at least the first 30 days.  I disagree.  First, I previously spoke to the amount of insurance so I will not address it in detail again.  the fact is, the rate is competitive for that type of insurance as was approved by the state.  SELCO has nothing whatever to do with the rates.  Second, Mr. [redacted] was not covered for the first 30 days or [redacted] would have indicated the policy [redacted] issued would have reflected that coverage was in place for the first thirty days; rather, the policy issued by [redacted] in fact effective well beyond the first 30 days.  I understand that most insurance carriers will provide a grace period to place insurance and will generally cover a loss within the first 30 days; however, it is clear insurance was not obtained within this grace period.  As with most grace periods, they expire.  Any grace period Mr. [redacted] might have enjoyed expired before he placed insurance.  Accordingly, [redacted] is unwilling to issue a policy that evidences Mr. [redacted]'s collateral was covered during the first 30 days of the loan.  If Mr. [redacted] is able to obtain confirmation of such coverage, then he should do so and provide to SELCO and SELCO will investigate whether a partial refund is available.  I do not expect to continue with this dialogue.  SELCO simply disagrees with Mr. [redacted]'s position and I am confident SELCO's read is accurate.  I trust this latest response resolves this matter in the eyes of the Revdex.com.  People can simply agree to disagree.

Complaint: [redacted]
I am rejecting this response because: SELCO is saying they provided adequate notification they did NOT. I never received any letters or emails before the first notification I received in mid November. I was never given any opportunity to rectify any issues. SELCO was able to call me to 'congratulate' me on my purchase as well as call and send unsolicited letters and emails attempting to sell me optional gap coverage on my vehicles valuation but was unable to let me know there was a problem regarding the 'terms and conditions' of my loan?? Furthermore I do not believe I EVER signed ANY paperwork with SELCO in regards to this particular loan, so if possible I would like to review a copy of the terms and conditions with my signature on it. SELCO's letter to which I attempted to respond stated they *may* purchase coverage, it did not state SELCO *will* purchase coverage. I was charged $1000 in December to cover 'assets' for the past, the car did not leave my garage and I would still be willing to show a current odometer reading that will be within 200 miles of date of purchase (car was driven home from Washington), speaking again with [redacted] they again state they *could* have fixed the problem had they been notified earlier than when it came to my (and their attention) they again affirm that they NEVER had ANY contact from SELCO, again stating that is unheard of in their line of work, they stated that ANY new (or used/new to me) vehicle purchased by me would automatically be covered for the first 30 days without any policy changes necessary and that the coverage's would  reflect my the coverage 'required' by SELCO , therefore (hypothetically speaking of course because there were no issues with the vehicle from September to November) any issues (claims, collisions, loss) WOULD have been fully covered under my [redacted] policy.  Therefore at a minimum at least 30 days of SELCO's  exorbitant coverage should be refunded to me. Suggesting that this is all my mistake is not acceptable, SELCO has a due diligence before charging me $1000 , a simple 30 second telephone call to me would have resolved all of this, apparently it was easier to purchase this policy (so much work was required on SELCO's end they charged me a $50 fee to take out the policy) not to mention the money was rolled onto my loan so it is accruing interest for SELCO. There is absolutely zero reason I would not have had insurance on the vehicle, I have had 5 vehicle loans through SELCO without issue and money was not an issue (as suggested by a representative at SELCO who said 'maybe you couldn't afford it) as I have over $20,000 in my account throughout the entire period in question. To try and shame me into believing SELCO bears zero responsibility and I should someone feel sorry for the other members is ridiculous , charging $1000 (plus interest) for an intangible product to cover a hypothetical 'what if' in the past is shameful. My wife (who has multiple sclerosis) and myself work VERY hard for what little bit we have and despite the fact I own a Corvette it is a large burden , all for something that with 30 seconds of basic fair business practices and customer service could have been prevented. I would be happy to have a correct address/department to correspond with in future dealings as I also have a concurrent case with the Oregon Department of Justice and will be pursuing small claims court next unless someone decides to attempt to make this right. Again a signed copy of my loan and any tangible proof of correspondence  regarding this issue would be appreciated.

Complaint: [redacted]
I am rejecting this response because: Mr M[redacted] continues to speak in hypothetical's but only hypothetical's that benefit SELCO. The vehicle would have been covered for ANY claim that arose during the first 30 days *IF* the need had arisen, *IF* the need had arisen after the grace period that is another story, I cannot speculate as it is all subterfuge. Mr M[redacted] continues to assert that I have been or will be provided sufficient evidence to satisfy my requests of both the terms of the loan and of any factual proof that SELCO attempted to contact me by ANY means what so ever in regards to this issue, I have received nothing except overly confident borderline cocky replies on here from Mr M[redacted]. Not a single shred of legal evidence has been produced other than Mr M[redacted]'s  opinion and aforementioned over confidence. Customer service (or lack thereof) is the very heart of this matter and there is a rampant continuation of the prevailing theme that SELCO simply does NOT care. SELCO is willing to admit inconsistencies , borderline inaccuracies , speaks in what if's and hypothetical's and assumes ZERO responsibility quite the opposite pinning it squarely on myself and alluding to [redacted]'s implicitness  , while [redacted] certainly bears some wrong doing also they have not financially wronged me, they are not the ones charging me an exorbitant amount rolled into an interest bearing account and charging me an extra 'bend over' fee to ice their crooked cake.While Mr M[redacted] appears well versed in reassignment of blame business 101 is apparently not his forte , the entire disagreement for SELCO owning their share of the mistake would be the equivalent of myself fighting to the death over a penny. In the grand scheme of business SELCO has undoubtedly made THOUSANDS off of me already and would be poised to make THOUSANDS more in the future, however it is apparently more fulfilling to sit in ones ivory tower and quibble with the plebs...........................

Hi there,  I just received the complaint today.  This is not a SELCO Insurance Services Matter.  This is more properly a SELCO Community Credit Union compliant.  Please extend the time for response.  And, please know that I do not think 7 days is nearly adequate enough for...

research and response. I leave out of state tomorrow for a week.  I will begin doing research and respond after my return.  Please see copy of complaint attached hereto for your convenience.