Denied collision coverage

[Robert Warsheski]

Jurisdiction

Massachusetts

In august of 2020 I changed insurance companies. When doing so I stated I wanted the same full coverage I had with my previous company ( as I've had going back 20 years with binders to show that I have). We were buying a new car. Due to a increase in my premium because of the new car. I called the new insurance company and spent a couple hours on the phone going over everything. I was confident in the fact I would have full coverage. December I had a accident due to weather and no fault of mine. They are claiming I had no collision on one of my vehicles. The vehicle I was using. Here is my question. Or statement. I had a lien against my vehicle and in the state of Massachusetts I have to have full coverage. So how do they say I did not have coverage or that I'm not covered. Where as in the state of Massachusetts I have to have full coverage. After the accident I requested for them to review my case and sent letters explaining my case. And even filed a complaint against them with the DOI. ( they suggested I take them to court and that during the discovery process the truth would come out). The day after I called and put collision on my vehicle they contacted the bank to inform them in had full coverage (4 months after I started with them) I need help. Total damage to my vehicle 15.000 plus. And due to values going up the truck is worth more now then when the accident happened. The truck has been at the collision repair shop since the accident. Approximately 13,000 plus in storage fees. I've called GEICO and asked about not putting collision on my vehicle if it has a lien and they stated that I have to have it in Massachusetts. Even if I put up a big stink and demanded not to have collision on my vehicle I would need a letter from the bank stating I do not need it. The insurance company never contacted the bank to inform them they took over as my insurance company. I told them I had a lien. Oh and the only keep recordings 60-90 days. When asked for transcripts or a copy of the recording from my initial phone conversation when signing up.

 

[army judge]

they suggested I take them to court and that during the discovery process the truth would come out

There you have it, mate.

Take the ALLEGED, LYING, SCHEMING, DENYING insurer to court.

You'll have no problem PROVING your allegations and damages, will you???

I need help.

I agree, it appears you do require help.

No problem, hire yourself one of the hundreds of outstanding lawfirms ready to help citizens in all manner of legal distress!!!

Bonne chance, Good luck,Veel success, Buena suerte, Viel Glück, Paç fat, がんばろ, 祝你好运 [zhù nǐ hǎo yùn], בהצלחה, حظا طيبا وفقك الله [hza tayibana wafaqak allah], or Bahati njema.

 

[flyingron]

You seem to have been misinformed. I do not believe Massachusetts mandates you ever to have anything other than liability coverage. Finance contracts ALWAYS requires you to insure the car against loss and usually put in that they will force a policy ($$$) if they find out that you discontinued or otherwise lost your coverage.

You're also mistaken about "not your fault do to the weather." Insurance companies will nearly always charge a weather-related accident against the driver. The state only bars a small amount of accidents from being held against the driver (mostly due to actions of others such as accidents stemming from other driver's DUI).

You should have examined your coverage the moment you received it.

 

[Redemptionman]

to add to what has been said, we you change insurance companies and they send you a declaration page did you not read it fully? They are only on the hook for you if you have what you said you have. Good Luck with it

 

[adjusterjack]

Robert, here is where I clear up your misconceptions.

I stated I wanted the same full coverage I had with my previous company

There is no such thing as "full coverage." There is only "coverage" of various types in your policy. Read your policy. You will not find the phrase "full coverage" in it.

You "stated." You were changing companies. Did you provide the new agent or new company with a copy of your "declarations" page? That's the part of your policy that's typically the first page that summarizes the coverage.

I was confident in the fact I would have full coverage.

You changed companies in August and had the claim in December. When you got the new policy in August DID YOU LOOK AT the declarations page to make sure that the word "collision" appeared next to the description of the car?

I'm guessing not.

Had you looked, you would have seen that it wasn't there and could have had it corrected.

I had a lien against my vehicle and in the state of Massachusetts I have to have full coverage. So how do they say I did not have coverage or that I'm not covered. Where as in the state of Massachusetts I have to have full coverage.

Massachusetts does not require you to have any coverage for damage to your own car. See:

Basics of Auto Insurance | Mass.gov

Your lender requires it and also requires that the lender's name appears on your policy as "loss payable."

Does it?

If you fail to have the coverage for damage to your car, that's between you and the lender.

After the accident I requested for them to review my case and sent letters explaining my case.

During all that did you even once look at your policy to see if you bought coverage for damage to your car?

Look at the policy you bought in August and tell me if that car has collision coverage on it.

Despite Army Judge's obvious disdain for the insurance industry, it's up to you, the buyer of insurance, to check your policy and make sure you have the coverage you wanted.

 

[army judge]

Despite Army Judge's obvious disdain for the insurance industry, it's up to you, the buyer of insurance, to check your policy and make sure you have the coverage you wanted.

I have no disdain for or towards any insurance company with which I have dealt.

I have nothing against the insurance industry.

Take the ALLEGED, LYING, SCHEMING, DENYING insurer to court.

You'll have no problem PROVING your allegations and damages, will you???

The words I typed are very clear in their meaning.

Punctuation properly used helps clarify sentences.

 

[Zigner]

An option that you could consider would be to contact your finance company and see if they added coverage retroactively due to your failure to maintain the contractually required insurance. If they did, then you may have coverage there. Of course, then you'll be on the hook for a large payment to them for the coverage.

 

[Redemptionman]

@adjusterjack is probably referring to me, I HATE em.

Like the one I have now but it takes only one company screwing you over to put a bad taste in your mouth. If I was you I would let the ride go back to the bank and say screw em, better luck next time. When a company doesn't do what it says it will do then stick it to em any way you can. They play games, act like nothing happened and want you to have to spend all your time and money fighting them. I have a good one now but pay a lot for them and will never leave. When you have a good one it is nice to have them on your side. You have to steer clear of the low cost providers cause well they are that way for a reason.

Some insurance companies will not pay no matter what you do, some will. Do business with the ones who will.

 

[Zigner]

@adjusterjack is probably referring to me, I HATE em.

Like the one I have now but it takes only one company screwing you over to put a bad taste in your mouth. If I was you I would let the ride go back to the bank and say screw em, better luck next time. When a company doesn't do what it says it will do then stick it to em any way you can. They play games, act like nothing happened and want you to have to spend all your time and money fighting them. I have a good one now but pay a lot for them and will never leave. When you have a good one it is nice to have them on your side. You have to steer clear of the low cost providers cause well they are that way for a reason.

Some insurance companies will not pay no matter what you do, some will. Do business with the ones who will.

I think it's a horrendous suggestion that the OP default on his loan with the finance company as a way of "getting back" at them. It won't hurt the finance company, while it can have serious consequences for the OP.

 

[adjusterjack]

@adjusterjack is probably referring to me, I HATE em.

Not necessarily. I've had two recent experiences with insurance companies that made me mad as hell so I can certainly sympathize with those who get screwed over.

If I was you I would let the ride go back to the bank and say screw em, better luck next time.

That works for people who are already at the bottom of the credit barrel. But for most people, doing that would trash their credit and get them sued by the bank.

When a company doesn't do what it says it will do then stick it to em any way you can.

In Robert's case, we don't know whether the insurance company did anything wrong. Could have just as easily been from his end.

I have a good one now but pay a lot for them and will never leave. When you have a good one it is nice to have them on your side. You have to steer clear of the low cost providers cause well they are that way for a reason.

Lotta truth in both sides of that comment.

 

[Redemptionman]

I think it's a horrendous suggestion that the OP default on his loan with the finance company as a way of "getting back" at them. It won't hurt the finance company, while it can have serious consequences for the OP.

What consequences? Taking back a wrecked vehicle that won't be worth as much as it was before anyway because the insurance company is playing games and not covering their insured. The way insurance companies are these days you are better served by purchasing a Surety Bond for 30k plus and self insuring your self like California does. Look forward to that becoming the norm soon in almost all states. Companies flush with cash self insure so they don't have to deal with crappy insurance companies.

Credit these days don't really matter. You can get a VA loan with a bankruptcy within the past 3 years or so and on top of that there are no real penalties for major accidents. The system is screwed and lots of people know how to play it especially the ones rolling around with state min insurance in 80-100 k rides. They can go total their crap out on you and yours and leave you only being able to recover state mins. They created the rules and REAP what they SOW.

 

[Redemptionman]

That works for people who are already at the bottom of the credit barrel. But for most people, doing that would trash their credit and get them sued by the bank.

LOL housing go off of ability to pay and not credit since the new rules. Anyone with a 610+ credit score can get almost any new car they want.

In Robert's case, we don't know whether the insurance company did anything wrong. Could have just as easily been from his end.

True we don't but based upon the OP stated then he was supposed to have Comprehensive full coverage and the car had a loan on it. No way that they should not have matched his limits with at least half the value into the vehicle he was driving. So if he had 50K bodily injury usually then will have 25k collision/ comprehensive.

 

[adjusterjack]

you are better served by purchasing a Surety Bond for 30k plus and self insuring your self like California does.

Most, or all, states allow that as part of their financial responsibility statutes.

That you might be better served by it is a myth because a bonding company is going to charge as much as, or more, than it would cost to buy insurance, and the bonded person would still have to pay back the bonding company in the event of a claim.

You can stop a thousand people on the street and ask if they have a surety bond instead of an auto policy. I'd be surprised if you found even one.

Here's an explanation of how surety bonds work and how much they could cost and why, as a practical matter, it's not going to happen for most of the insurance buying public.

[Education] Surety Bonds vs Auto Insurance Risk vs Reward? - AutoInsureSavings.org

If you think that's the solution why don't you have one for yourself? Eh?

the ones rolling around with state min insurance in 80-100 k rides.

You keep spouting that BS as if it were true. Find me one person with an 80k to 100k ride who carries minimum liability limits. Show me their title and their policy for verification and I'll never again challenge anything you write.

 

[Robert Warsheski]

to add to what has been said, we you change insurance companies and they send you a declaration page did you not read it fully? They are only on the hook for you if you have what you said you have. Good Luck with it

The declaration page I have from them states they are taking Over said policy abc123. The previous police had full coverage (collision, liability for uninsured, medical and the 500.$ deductible on all three vehicles. I never received a hard paper copy. And when I left the conversation I specifically ask if I had 500.$ deductible on my three vehicles with collision. And that's why I asked for the transcripts and or the recording. Thank you all for responding. When I left the conversation I believed that I had( full) 500.$ deductible on my three vehicles. Yes if I had received the copy of the coverage and I looked at it I would have caught it.

 

[Robert Warsheski]

An option that you could consider would be to contact your finance company and see if they added coverage retroactively due to your failure to maintain the contractually required insurance. If they did, then you may have coverage there. Of course, then you'll be on the hook for a large payment to them for the coverage.

Thank you I have. And when I switched compan insurance companies the lender was never contacted. By them or my self.

 

[Robert Warsheski]

In august of 2020 I changed insurance companies. When doing so I stated I wanted the same full coverage I had with my previous company ( as I've had going back 20 years with binders to show that I have). We were buying a new car. Due to a increase in my premium because of the new car. I called the new insurance company and spent a couple hours on the phone going over everything. I was confident in the fact I would have full coverage. December I had a accident due to weather and no fault of mine. They are claiming I had no collision on one of my vehicles. The vehicle I was using. Here is my question. Or statement. I had a lien against my vehicle and in the state of Massachusetts I have to have full coverage. So how do they say I did not have coverage or that I'm not covered. Where as in the state of Massachusetts I have to have full coverage. After the accident I requested for them to review my case and sent letters explaining my case. And even filed a complaint against them with the DOI. ( they suggested I take them to court and that during the discovery process the truth would come out). The day after I called and put collision on my vehicle they contacted the bank to inform them in had full coverage (4 months after I started with them) I need help. Total damage to my vehicle 15.000 plus. And due to values going up the truck is worth more now then when the accident happened. The truck has been at the collision repair shop since the accident. Approximately 13,000 plus in storage fees. I've called GEICO and asked about not putting collision on my vehicle if it has a lien and they stated that I have to have it in Massachusetts. Even if I put up a big stink and demanded not to have collision on my vehicle I would need a letter from the bank stating I do not need it. The insurance company never contacted the bank to inform them they took over as my insurance company. I told them I had a lien. Oh and the only keep recordings 60-90 days. When asked for transcripts or a copy of the recording from my initial phone conversation when signing up.

Thank you all. Serious reply's or not. I have more information that helps me to understand a lot more of this situation. Tho it's not what I wanted it helps. Thank you.

 

[Redemptionman]

The declaration page I have from them states they are taking Over said policy abc123. The previous police had full coverage (collision, liability for uninsured, medical and the 500.$ deductible on all three vehicles. I never received a hard paper copy. And when I left the conversation I specifically ask if I had 500.$ deductible on my three vehicles with collision. And that's why I asked for the transcripts and or the recording. Thank you all for responding. When I left the conversation I believed that I had( full) 500.$ deductible on my three vehicles. Yes if I had received the copy of the coverage and I looked at it I would have caught it.

So you have a letter that states that they are matching your current policy which almost all insurance companies do. I find it hard to believe though that if this wasn't a large company then they would not have a way to sign in online or via an app and look right at the Dec page.

@adjusterjack, many large companies do and I would imagine if you have the means to then you would just self insure. As far as the other it happens all the time and I promise you it does but while it shouldn't you have people out there who know how to work the system. Again, on paper you can look like you have nothing but have good credit and get what you want. Just the way it is. Now when it comes to having assets or buying a house that is a different story because you have to prove income. All it takes to buy a car is on time payments and good credit.

 

[adjusterjack]

"Ask." "Tell." A lot of things can be misunderstood in a telephone conversation.

I never received a hard paper copy. Yes if I had received the copy of the coverage and I looked at it I would have caught it.

Here's your lesson for the future. Any time you change coverage ask for the document to be emailed to you and follow up frequently until you get it. Also go online and view your policy documents on the company's website. GEICO gives you that ability.

So you have a letter that states that they are matching your current policy which almost all insurance companies do.

I would love to see a copy of that letter.

. I find it hard to believe though that if this wasn't a large company then they would not have a way to sign in online or via an app and look right at the Dec page.

Exactly my point.

@adjusterjack, many large companies do and I would imagine if you have the means to then you would just self insure.

No, I would not self-insure. I'd be really stupid to risk my substantial retirement savings when insurance is cheap in comparison.

As far as the other it happens all the time and I promise you it does

I repeat. Find me one person with an expensive vehicle and minimum limits (title and policy) or it's BS. You're delusional if you really believe that people with expensive cars are self-insuring, buying bonds, or carrying minimum limits. I guess there's no sense in me arguing with a delusion.

 

[Robert Warsheski]

I think it's a horrendous suggestion that the OP default on his loan with the finance company as a way of "getting back" at them. It won't hurt the finance company, while it can have serious consequences for the OP.

I agree. I would not default. I paid the loan. I was believing I had a good possibility of a case here and well I now know I don't appreciate all the info. Good bad or sarcastic. It is all appreciated. Thanks.