Veronica's Insurance Services

Dear [redacted] , We are in response to the complaint filed by customer [redacted] ***, we were unable to upload the response via web and are using this method instead In response to insureds complaint about not obtaining $10,in liability property damage but instead was given $5,At time of the transaction the insured was offered $10,in property damage but refused itAll of our customers receive three options for coverage in writingThe insured signed the option for $15,000/$30,000/$5,and rejected the alternative optionsAccording to her complaint, insured has a misconception of what this coverage protectsProperty damage of $10,is for Liability coverage meaning that this is coverage is for a "third party" and not for the insured's vehicle as she claimed in her complaintThe insured's vehicle was covered for it's full value less a $1,deductible (just as requested in writing by her) Although it was agreed in writing that the broker’s fee was not refundable, as a courtesy to the insured we issued her a refund of $146.25; which was successfully processed back to her card on March 06, Copy of refund receipt is available upon request If you need further assistance or require additional documentation please do not hesitate to contact the undersigned Sincerely, [redacted] ###-###-####

Initial Business Response /* (1000, 17, 2016/03/25) */
Dear Mr***,
We are in response to the complaint filed against our company
On February 03, Mr*** ("the insured") applied for automobile insurance through the carrier Anchor General Insurance Company ("Anchor"); all the
information provided by the insured was printed in an insurance application for his review, insured signed and agreed that all the information provided was truthful and correctIn the violations/Accident section insured confirmed that there were no violations or accidents for any of the rated drivers, giving him a good driver discountAnchor as many of the insurance company have access to a report called C.L.U.E.; such report *** contain accidents that were not reported to a law enforcement agency but were however reported to an insurance companyC.L.U.Ereport is not available to brokers like our company, we merely rely on the information reported by our customers or the Department of Motor Vehicle ("DMV")After the application was submitted to Anchor , a C.L.U.Ereport was pulled for all drivers in this policy, the results indicated that at fault accidents for Driver *** *** had been missed to be reported in the application, therefore insured no longer qualified for a good driver discountThe removal of such discount caused the increase in the monthly payment; Veronica's works very hard in trying to provide our customers with the best service at the lowest price, the new price given by Anchor is the corrected amount based in the information foundWe are sorry to hear that the insured has not been provided with a copy of his insurance applications, our records do not show that a request has been placedCopy of the insurance application is being mailed via USPS to the insured's address
If you need additional information or documentation , do not hesitate contact me at (XXX)XXX-XXXX
*** ***
Initial Consumer Rebuttal /* (3000, 21, 2016/04/07) */
(The consumer indicated he/she DID NOT accept the response from the business.)
They need to refund my money since I never agreed to any new terms it is not my error if they did not do their due diligence before the payment plan I received was signed since I never agreed to any new terms they need to refund my money as I went and got my insurance elsewhere I feel this was and is a bait and switch I demand the refund to all my down payment money since I did not carry my insurance with them after they notified me of different terms that I never agreed to or signed for

Dear *** ***, We are in response to the complaint filed by customer *** ***, we were unable to upload the response via web and are using this method instead. In response to insureds
complaint about not obtaining $10,in liability property damage but instead was given $5,At time of the transaction the insured was offered $10,in property damage but refused itAll of our customers receive three options for coverage in writingThe insured signed the option for $15,000/$30,000/$5,and rejected the alternative optionsAccording to her complaint, insured has a misconception of what this coverage protectsProperty damage of $10,is for Liability coverage meaning that this is coverage is for a "third party" and not for the insured's vehicle as she claimed in her complaintThe insured's vehicle was covered for it's full value less a $1,deductible (just as requested in writing by her) Although it was agreed in writing that the broker’s fee was not refundable, as a courtesy to the insured we issued her a refund of $146.25; which was successfully processed back to her card on March 06, Copy of refund receipt is available upon request If you need further assistance or require additional documentation please do not hesitate to contact the undersigned. Sincerely, *** *** ###-###-####

Veronica's Insurance *** * *** *** *** ** ***
***