Rental Insurance Services Inc

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,
*** ***

Complaint: ***
I am rejecting this response because:RIS did not contact me to fix my car until the Revdex.com was contactedThat offer still left me $short to fix my car that was damaged by
their driverI have never been offered a replacement vehicle while mine was in the shop to be fixedSo I'm still going to be out $to fix my car if their offer is accepted and it took months and days to even get offer
Sincerely,
*** ***

Initial Business Response /* (1000, 5, 2015/07/01) */
Contact Name and Title: *** *** Manager
Contact Phone: XXX-XXX-XXXX
Contact Email: ***@erac.com
Payment was issued to Complainant on June 30,

The party has been contacted and her concerns have been addressed.

RIS has been in contact with complainant [redacted] regarding settlement of her claim.

Rental Insurance Services (RIS) spoke with the consumer on
3/2/16 and advised her that the approved estimate for repairs to her vehicle
came to $829.67.  Payment was then promptly issued to the consumer for
that amount.  The consumer was instructed
to find a body shop of her...

choosing to complete the repairs based on the
approved estimate for $829.67.
 
On 3/8/16, RIS received an email from the consumer letting us
know that she had chosen a body shop and planned on dropping her vehicle off
for repairs the following Monday.  RIS called the consumer’s body shop and
confirmed with them that there were no issues and they would be starting
repairs as planned on Monday 3/14/16.  RIS then set up a rental car for the consumer
for 3 days, starting on Monday 3/14/16.
 
On Wednesday 3/16/16, RIS spoke with both the consumer and
the body shop owner.  At that time, it was brought to our attention that
the shop owner was disputing the estimate for $829.67.  The shop owner
also confirmed that repairs had not yet been started on the consumer’s vehicle. 
Both the consumer and the shop owner were made aware that RIS was not agreeing
to pay anything above and beyond the approved estimate amount of $829.67. 
RIS requested that the shop submit the disputed items as a supplement so that they
could be reviewed.  Given that repairs had not begun and there was a
dispute, RIS recommended that the shop hold off on starting repairs and that
the consumer pick up her vehicle from the shop while the dispute was being
worked out.
 
On 3/18/16, RIS was made aware that the consumer chose to
leave her vehicle at the body shop.  RIS
then sent an independent appraiser out to the shop to inspect the additional
damage/items that were being disputed. 
The appraiser arrived at the shop only to find that the consumer’s
vehicle was already being repaired.
 
RIS was not given the opportunity to inspect the additional
damage being claimed prior to repairs being completed.  Because of this, RIS was unable to determine
if there was in fact additional damage and if the alleged damage was in fact related
to the accident.  Accordingly, RIS was
unable to approve any additional repairs on the consumer’s vehicle.

An accident occurred on April 22, 2015 involving the
complainant and a rental vehicle.  The
claim was reported to our office on April 23, 2015 at which time we began an
investigation regarding the claim being presented. During this investigation,
we requested proof of ownership from the...

complainant for the date of loss along
with any documentation pertaining to his loss of use claim. 
 
On August 11, 2015, we received a registration for the
damaged vehicle that began on August 3, 2015; however we have not received any
documentation supporting that the complainant was the owner of the damaged
vehicle on the date of loss, April 22, 2015.
 
As mentioned, the complainant is also presenting a claim for
loss of use of the damaged vehicle.  At
this time he has not provided any documentation to support this claim.  Without any documentation, this cannot be
considered.
 
We are currently waiting on the complainant to provide us
with the proper documentation to prove his claim.

Initial Business Response /* (1000, 7, 2015/07/24) */
This is a response to Revdex.com Case #XXXXXXX. Rental Insurance Services Inc. handles supplemental liability insurance claims on behalf of Empire Fire and Marine Insurance Company involving vehicles rented through ELRAC, LLC d/b/a...

[redacted].
This claim was reported on 05/05/2015. At that time, we were not in possession of the consumers' identity. We were contacted by the consumers' attorney on 05/20/2015 but were not provided with any contact information. The attorney informed us consumer's vehicle had been in storage since the accident, but did not have any location information for the vehicle. We advised the attorney that his client has a duty to mitigate his damages and requested that the consumer remove the vehicle from storage.
We were contacted by the consumer on 05/26/2015. The consumer's vehicle remained in storage. The initial invoice stated that storage was $15/day for the first to third calendar days and $17/day for each following day. When we contacted the storage facility, they stated that the prior invoice was incorrect and provided additional pricing of various amounts up to $50/day. An offer was made to the storage facility for $1488.73 based on the initial invoice. This offer covered charges from the date of loss even though the consumer had not mitigated damages. The storage facility refused to honor the rates stated on their initial invoice and provided no reasoning behind the multiple invoices and pricing.
An independent appraiser was assigned on 5/26/2015 to assess vehicle damages. The claimant vehicle was deemed a constructive total loss. While we spoke with the consumer on multiple occasions, he has been less responsive to recent follow up. Efforts to resolve the storage and total less settlement continue. Should you have any questions, please feel free to contact the undersigned at the (XXX)-XXX-XXXX.

Initial Business Response /* (1000, 5, 2016/01/26) */
Contact Name and Title: [redacted]
Contact Phone: XXX-XXX-XXXX
We are in receipt of Ms. [redacted]' complaint. To date we have not received the appraisal and photos from [redacted] to enable us to review their subrogation (we have only received...

a cover letter from [redacted] As their cover letter does reference Ms. [redacted]' $500.00 deductible, we will proceed with issuing her a reimbursement check in that amount at this time.

Business response attached.