We acknowledge receipt of your inquiry in our officeThe policy under which claim hasbeen presented is Homeowner's policy issued to [redacted] The insured'scomplaint is referencing separate claims.Ms [redacted] reported a fire claim on June 3, which was handled under ClaimX1080379-FI The insured was contacted and an inspection commenced on June 5,with the insured's contractor; [redacted] Over the course of theclaim proceedings; several payments based upon covered damages sustainedThepayments were issued as follows:IJune 4, - issued $1,to insured for an initial out of pocket advanceJune 11,- Issued $20,to insured and [redacted] for buildingrepair advanceJune 10, - Issued $2,to insured for an additional out of pocket advanceJuly 2, - Issued $2,to insured for an additional out of pocket advanceJuly 14,- Issued $2,to insured and Julia [redacted] for the 1st monthsrentJuly 17,- Issued $2,contents advanceJuly 20, - Issued $70,to insured and [redacted] Builders fora 2nd Building repair advanceAugust 17,- Issued $2,to insured and [redacted] Builders for Emergency services completedAugust 27, - Issued $34,to insured and [redacted] Builders for Personal property pack-out, storage, cleaning and repairSeptember 4, - Issued S15,to named insured towards the Actual CashValue payment for personal property lost.IISeptember 28,- Issued $to named insured for additional personalproperty cleaningOctober 28,- Issued $to named insured which represented theActual Cash Value difference minus all advances issued to dateOctober 28, - Issued $to named insured which represented the Barrebuild supplementNovember 2, - Issued $1,to named insured and [redacted] for Personal property dry-cleaning supplement.ISNovember 2, - Issued $ 25,to named insured and [redacted] for the Final building paymentNovember 12,- issued $to Insured for food expensesNovember 13, - Issued $10,to insured for personal property purchasedJanuary 7, - Issued $1,to named insured and [redacted] for landscaping[redacted] completed the pack-out and inventory of both salvageableand unsalvageable personal propertyWe sent the inventory to [redacted] services in order to verify, confirm and finalize the like, kind and quality items per localpricingThe insured was advised of the process in order to recover the depreciationwithheld and asked to review the inventory for accuracyThe insured had concerns withsome of the personal property replacement cost values and requested increases forselected items.We requested further documentation to help support the increase in replacement costvaluesNeither Badger Mutual Insurance Company nor [redacted] servicesreceived any additional information to help support the insureds request for highervalues [redacted] services confirmed the like, kind and quality items peraverage local pricingThe insured's hired contractor continues to complete repairs pertheir signed contract with the insuredOn April 14, 2015, the contractor advised us thatthe insured has not allowed them in the property to perform the building inspectorinspections.With regard to Ms [redacted] second concern, she reported a roof damage claim onAugust 27, with an August 22,date of lossThis loss was handled underClaim #: [redacted] The loss location was inspected with the insured's contractorpresent, ( [redacted] ) [redacted] The inspection did not reveal any hail, windnor storm related damage to the roof, siding, nor other exposed exterior surfaces of thehome or garageFurther, the dwelling and garage roof shingles were found to be heavilydeteriorated and well beyond their useful lifeThe insured was sent a Denial letter and thefile was closed.With regard to the non-renewal of the policy, prior to offering a homeowner renewal,Badger Mutual reviews all policiesUpon reviewing Ms [redacted] ' policy we becameaware of her recent claim activityMs [redacted] ' claims history includes overflow fromsump pump losses on June 7, 2008, July 14,and July 20, hail losses on May12,and August 22,and a fire loss on June 3, Because of these claims,we were unable to offer a renewalAs required by Wisconsin insurance statute, enclosedis a copy of the nonrenewal and its proof of mailing
We acknowledge receipt of your inquiry in our office.The policy under which claim has been presented is a homeowner's policy issued to Ms[redacted] [redacted] submitted a pipe leak/water damage claim to our office onOctober 22, with an October 21, date of loss.~002In order to properly evaluate and assess the damages being claimed, Badger MutualInsurance Co hired [redacted] to perform an inspection of the loss location.Our discussion of the facts of this claim and the information obtained from this inspectionrevealed the shower was leaking in two separate areas from a recent remodel that wasperformedThe insureds new contractor, [redacted] , confinned a leak at the valve andthe shower drain.The insured was advised that the policy would not provide coverage for the plumbingrepairs as they were workmanship/installation relatedAn estimate was prepared for thewater damages resulting from this lossThe agreed scope and estimate of repair for thewater damage totaled $2,There is a $1,policy deductible giving us a netclaim of$1,A copy of the estimate prepared was sent with the payment onNovember 5, 2014.On November 21, 2014, [redacted] received a phone call from the insured indicatingher contractor is recommending fully removing and replacing the shower/remodeledareas in order to properly repair the areaA re-inspection of the premises with theinsured's contractor is being arranged.Attached is the letter sent to the insured regarding coverage and the re-inspectionShouldyou have any further questions, please contact me
Ms [redacted] contacted our office on July 29, and reported that she had a pipe leaking in the kitchen for about a month and had a pipe in the basement that had been leaking for over monthsAs these occurred in different areas and at different times, she was advised at that time that this would be considered losses.An independent adjuster was assigned to inspect the lossesA contractor was contacted to prepare an estimate on the covered damages (see attached) Coverage is provided to access the pipes, repair the water damage and repair the area that was torn outThe only item not covered was the cost to repair the actual leaking pipes, as that is considered wear/tear and not covered by the insurance contractThe covered damages to the basement fell below Ms ***'s $1,deductibleAfter application of the deductible for the kitchen damage, the loss amounted to $945.85On October 27, 2014, correspondence was sent to Ms [redacted] asking if she wished to pursue these claims (see attached)No response was ever received and as such these files were closedAs Ms [redacted] has indicated in her letter to your office that she wishes payment for the covered damages, we have issued our payment for the kitchen damages in the amount of $
We acknowledge your follow up inquiry in our office.The water damage was the result of deteriorated caulking where the 1st story addition ties into the siding/brick (see photograph attached)This is not related to hail damage.With regard to the hail damage, her contractor advised that she had roof damage subsequent to the water damage inspectionThe independent adjuster who inspected the water damage claim, [redacted] of [redacted] again inspected the home and found no damage to the roof, but impacts to the gutters, downspouts, awning and siding (see attached photos)Ms [redacted] 's contractor agreed with the damage assessmentAs these are two unrelated incidents, two deductibles would apply
The policy under which the claims have been presented is a HO-Homeowner policy issued to Ms [redacted] Ms [redacted] reported a roof leak claim to Badger Mutual Insurance Company on April 9, 2015.An inspection was conducted by an independent adjusting firm, [redacted] on April 13, The inspection found water leaking in the SW corner of the home where the 1st story addition ties into the siding/brickThe flashing along this area has deteriorated and caused water to leak into the homeHail damage was not mentioned when the claim was reported nor during the inspectionThis claim amounted to $2,After applying the $policy deductible, payment of $2,was issued on April 20, 2015.On May 1, 2015, the insured reported another claim advising that she had a contractor inspect the roof and they advised that she had hail damage from a storm occurring May 20, Another inspection was conducted by [redacted] on May 8, No damage was found to the roof but hail impacts were found to the soft metals such as gutters, downspouts, awnings, roof vents and sidingThis claim amounted to $6,After deduction of depreciation of $1,and the policyholders 20% hail deductible ($854.27), payment was issued to the policyholder for $3,on May 12, 2015.Since these are two separate losses, two deductibles would applyShould you have any questions with regard to this, please feel free to contact me
We acknowledge receipt of your inquiry in our office.The policy under which claim has been presented is a homeowners policyBadger Mutual InsuranceCompany received the claim on May 29, with the submitted date of loss being May 3, 2015.In order to properly assess the damages being claimed,
Badger Mutual hired Syndicate Claims toperform an inspection of the loss locationThis inspection took place on June 5, The inspectionrevealed minor wind damage to the dwelling front roof slopeAreas of hail damage were discovered aswell to the dwelling's soft metal areas including window wraps, metal roof vents, and downspout areas.An agreement was reached with the insured's contractor for the covered damages in the amount of$2,After application of the $1,policy deductible payment was issued to the policyholder for$1,This amount was issued and mailed to the insured with a letter explaining coverage on June12,2015.With regard to her policy, letters were sent to the policyholder on July 1, and October 5, 2015requesting that the roof be replaced or the policy would be non-renewed as of April 2, As oftoday, no documentation has been provided indicating that these repairs were completed.In addition, the adjuster found areas of curling shingles along with signs of extensive wear and tear, age,deterioration and latent/mechanical defectThe policy does not provide coverage for thesemaintenance related issues so we were unable to pay for replacing the entire roof.Sincerely,
Again, Ms*** is
asking that we remove a claim from our system and we are unable to do thatThe
claim relating to her leaking pipe in the basement was closed and no payment
was issued as these damages fell below her $1,deductibleWith regard to her
2nd claim (leaking pipe in the kitchen), payment on that file was
issued on November 1,
Dear Ms***, our records indicate a refund check in the amount of $was mailed to *** *** on August 14, 2017. The check was cashed on August 29, 2017. Please contact our office if you have any questions
This file has been resolvedMr*** has agreed to a settlement of $7,A release hasbeen sent to him and upon receipt, we will issue our payment.If you have any questions regarding this matter please contact me at ###-###-####
We acknowledge receipt of your inquiry in our office.The policy under which claim has been presented is an HO·3 Homeowner's policy issuedto Ms. leura. Ms. leura reported a wind damage claim to Badger Mutual InsuranceCompany on September 8,2015 with a September 8, 2015 date of loss.The insured was...
contacted on September 8,2015 and due to the alleged damagessustained, we assigned the independent adjusting firm Cullen & Associates to completean inspection of the property. The inspection took place September 14, 2015 with theinsured present. Minor wind damage was found to the roof (approximately 30 missingshingles). An estimate was written to repair the direct areas of damage totaling$444.57. Since the damages fell under the insured's deductible of $1,000.00, we sentthe insured a letter advising of our findings and closed the claim accordingly. In additionto the wind damage, the adjuster also found signs of extensive wear and tear, age, anddeterioration. Unfortunately, the policy does not provide coverage for these conditions.On January 6, 2016, the insured contacted our office and advised she had now sustainedhail damage and requested that her claim be re-opened. The insured was advised that anew claim would need to be established for any new damage. The insured advised shewould have her contractor call us to discuss further. On January 11, 2016, we discussedthe claim and the new damages with the contractor and advised that if the insuredwanted to submit a new claim, we would re-inspect. As of today, the insured has notsubmitted a new claim.Should you have any questions with regard to thi s, please feel free to contact me
Revdex.com:
I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID [redacted], and have determined that this does not resolve my complaint. For your reference, details of the offer I reviewed appear below.
[To assist us in bringing this matter to a close, we would like to know your view on the matter.]Now they tell me they are closing my claims without payment? What does that mean? I have no idea? What does the close mean? What does without payment mean? So after all this writing back and forth to finally settle this I get this as an answer? So are they telling me to bad so sad we will do nothing despite your "claim" that we will now do nothing about. Way to go. So does the one check that I finally got for my "one claim" is that still mine? or are they taking that back too? I have been waiting for their response so I can take this check out of the cabinet and cash it and this is the response? Oh you don't get the money now too ? What in Gods name is going on? What kind of company is this that they lack such common sense, service and ethics. Hello Better Business please help me with this issue.
Regards,
[redacted]
We acknowledge receipt of your inquiry in our office.The policy under which claim has been presented is a homeowner's policy issued to Ms.[redacted] submitted a pipe leak/water damage claim to our office onOctober 22, 2014 with an October 21, 2014 date of loss.~002In order to properly...
evaluate and assess the damages being claimed, Badger MutualInsurance Co hired [redacted] to perform an inspection of the loss location.Our discussion of the facts of this claim and the information obtained from this inspectionrevealed the shower was leaking in two separate areas from a recent remodel that wasperformed. The insureds new contractor, [redacted], confinned a leak at the valve andthe shower drain.The insured was advised that the policy would not provide coverage for the plumbingrepairs as they were workmanship/installation related. An estimate was prepared for thewater damages resulting from this loss. The agreed scope and estimate of repair for thewater damage totaled $2,104.70. There is a $1,000 policy deductible giving us a netclaim of$1,104.70. A copy of the estimate prepared was sent with the payment onNovember 5, 2014.On November 21, 2014, [redacted] received a phone call from the insured indicatingher contractor is recommending fully removing and replacing the shower/remodeledareas in order to properly repair the area. A re-inspection of the premises with theinsured's contractor is being arranged.Attached is the letter sent to the insured regarding coverage and the re-inspection. Shouldyou have any further questions, please contact me.
Ms.
[redacted]'s vehicle was damaged when her son was involved in an accident with our
policyholder. In this accident her vehicle sustained extensive damage and was
deemed a total loss.The vehicle
that was involved in the accident was a 2004 Honda Civic with 132,000 miles. We
made an offer of...
$5,207.30 which represents the value of $4,666 for her car,
plus sales tax (261.30) and loss of use ($280). We have attached the paperwork
to support this offer along with the emails and letter that have been sent
reiterating our position. We are sorry that Ms. [redacted] does not agree with our
offer, but we feel this is fair based upon the age and condition of her
vehicle. In addition, we advised her that she could file this claim with her
own carrier and we would respond to their subrogation demand.Should
you have any questions with regard to this, please feel free to contact me.
[A default letter is provided here which indicates your acceptance of the business's response. If you wish, you may update it before sending it.]
I disagree with Badger Mutual Insurance’s offer of $5,207.30
as it fails to cover the associated costs of replacing my vehicle. It specifically excludes title, license
plates, and dealer fees as well as an unrealistic market replacement value for
a comparable car that was totaled by their insured. Using the information below outlining the replacement cost, I will be forced
to absorb a $1,279.62 loss in order to replace my vehicle that was totaled on
October 1, 2015 by their insured as I can no longer wait for the claim money for the car replacement
My numerous responses to Badger Mutual Insurance provided real time
fair market values , supported by documentation for external car sites , WI DMV fees and Edmunds car buying information on fees that are representative of the current car environment to replace my
vehicle. Using the insurance company’s
definition and basis for loss compensation, the fair market price for my vehicle
is $5,561, plus tax, title, license and dealer fees and rental reimbursement.
Car Value $5,561.00
Tax 311.42
Title 69.50
License 75.00
Dealer Fees 190.00
Car Rental 280
Total Replacement Cost $6,486.92
Difference of
$1,279.62
Each response at every level within Badger Mutual Insurance,
including executive management, has repeatedly ignored the total costs
associated with the purchase of a vehicle in their responses, such as dealer
fees, title and license plates and the fair market value. Their responses have been up to three weeks later
and only when a message is left with the Company President. Badger Mutual Insurance’s responses intentionally fail to
address my submitted information, which details the replacement value of the
car and associated costs, which uses their definition of what constitutes the
use of replacement value as the “hypothetical most probable price that could be
obtained for a property by average, informed purchasers.” Badger Mutual Insurance has exhibited bad faith efforts in
handling this claim, with repeated delays and ignores the facts surrounding it
with their pre-determined offer that is not representative of the cost of replacing
a vehicle. I hope that current and future customers, as well as insurance
brokers, agents and consumers carefully consider the bad faith dealings, delays
and practices that Badger Mutual Insurance has exhibited and repeatedly engaged
in with my claim that seems to seep through every level in their company, when they
evaluate their insurance needs and what they are willing and can financially
loose in the event they need to file a claim with Badger Mutual Insurance. I deal with insurance on a personal and professional level and have never experienced this sub-standard level of
customer service, professionalism and accountability demonstrated by Badger
Mutual Insurance in dealing with my claim.
Revdex.com:
I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID [redacted], and find that this resolution is satisfactory to me.
Regards,
[redacted]
Mr. [redacted]'s 2011 trailer was damaged by our insured while it was parked on the side of theroadway. Mr. [redacted] supplied us with estimates and photos of the damaged unit on November 5,2014. An inspection of the unit was conducted and the appraisal revealed the cost to repair thetrailer would be in excess...
ofS7,OOO which exceeds the value of the trailer, deeming it a totalloss.The market valuation report indicated the market value of the vehicle was $5,975.00 (seeattached paperwork). An offer of settlement was made to Mr. [redacted] on November 11,2014which included the market value of the vehicle less salvage ofSl,195.00 (if he opted to retain theunit) plus 10 days of loss of use. Mr. [redacted] disagreed with the market valuation informing us hewas of the opinion he was entitled to a brand new 2014 trailer. We advised Mr. [redacted] our legalobligation is to put him back in the same position he was in prior to the loss. An offer andrelease was sent to Mr. [redacted] on November 17, 2014 outlining our offer of settlement. Uponreceipt of the signed release we will issue payment to Mr. [redacted]. We advised Mr. [redacted] that if hedisagreed with our valuation, he could pursue this through his own carrier but he advises he doesnot have insurance on the trailer.If you have any questions or need any additional information please feel free to call. Sincerely[redacted]
We acknowledge receipt of your inquiry in our office. The policy under which claim hasbeen presented is Homeowner's policy issued to [redacted]. The insured'scomplaint is referencing 2 separate claims.Ms. [redacted] reported a fire claim on June 3, 2014 which was handled under ClaimX1080379-FI7....
The insured was contacted and an inspection commenced on June 5,2014 with the insured's contractor; [redacted]. Over the course of theclaim proceedings; several payments based upon covered damages sustained. Thepayments were issued as follows:I. June 4, 2014 - issued $1,500 to insured for an initial out of pocket advance.2. June 11,2014 - Issued $20,000 to insured and [redacted] for buildingrepair advance.3. June 10, 2014 - Issued $2,500 to insured for an additional out of pocket advance.4. July 2, 2014 - Issued $2,500 to insured for an additional out of pocket advance.5. July 14,2014 - Issued $2,500 to insured and Julia [redacted] for the 1st monthsrent6. July 17,2014 - Issued $2,500 contents advance7. July 20, 2014 - Issued $70,000 to insured and [redacted] Builders fora 2nd Building repair advance.8. August 17,2014 - Issued $2,965.00 to insured and [redacted]Builders for Emergency services completed.9. August 27, 2014 - Issued $34,165 .10 to insured and [redacted]Builders for Personal property pack-out, storage, cleaning and repair.10. September 4, 2014 - Issued S15,000 to named insured towards the Actual CashValue payment for personal property lost.II. September 28,2014 - Issued $344.75 to named insured for additional personalproperty cleaning.12. October 28,2014 - Issued $436.29 to named insured which represented theActual Cash Value difference minus all advances issued to date.13. October 28, 2014 - Issued $862.67 to named insured which represented the Barrebuild supplement.14. November 2, 2014 - Issued $1,003.04 to named insured and [redacted] for Personal property dry-cleaning supplement.IS. November 2, 2014 - Issued $ 25,402.98 to named insured and [redacted] for the Final building payment.16. November 12,2014 - issued $900.00 to Insured for food expenses17. November 13, 2014 - Issued $10,000 to insured for personal property purchased.18. January 7, 2015 - Issued $1,050.00 to named insured and [redacted]for landscaping.[redacted] completed the pack-out and inventory of both salvageableand unsalvageable personal property. We sent the inventory to [redacted]services in order to verify, confirm and finalize the like, kind and quality items per localpricing. The insured was advised of the process in order to recover the depreciationwithheld and asked to review the inventory for accuracy. The insured had concerns withsome of the personal property replacement cost values and requested increases forselected items.We requested further documentation to help support the increase in replacement costvalues. Neither Badger Mutual Insurance Company nor [redacted] servicesreceived any additional information to help support the insureds request for highervalues. [redacted] services confirmed the like, kind and quality items peraverage local pricing. The insured's hired contractor continues to complete repairs pertheir signed contract with the insured. On April 14, 2015, the contractor advised us thatthe insured has not allowed them in the property to perform the building inspectorinspections.With regard to Ms. [redacted] second concern, she reported a roof damage claim onAugust 27, 2014 with an August 22,2014 date of loss. This loss was handled underClaim #: [redacted]. The loss location was inspected with the insured's contractorpresent, ([redacted]. The inspection did not reveal any hail, windnor storm related damage to the roof, siding, nor other exposed exterior surfaces of thehome or garage. Further, the dwelling and garage roof shingles were found to be heavilydeteriorated and well beyond their useful life. The insured was sent a Denial letter and thefile was closed.With regard to the non-renewal of the policy, prior to offering a homeowner renewal,Badger Mutual reviews all policies. Upon reviewing Ms. [redacted]' policy we becameaware of her recent claim activity. Ms. [redacted]' claims history includes overflow fromsump pump losses on June 7, 2008, July 14,2010 and July 20, 2010 hail losses on May12,2014 and August 22,2014 and a fire loss on June 3, 2014. Because of these claims,we were unable to offer a renewal. As required by Wisconsin insurance statute, enclosedis a copy of the nonrenewal and its proof of mailing.
Revdex.com:
I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID [redacted], and have determined that this does not resolve my complaint. For your reference, details of the offer I reviewed appear below.
[To assist us in bringing this matter to a close, we would like to know your view on the matter.]
Regards,
[redacted]
Ms. [redacted]
contacted our office on July 29, 2014 and reported that she had a pipe leaking
in the kitchen for about a month and had a pipe in the basement that had been
leaking for over 6 months. As these occurred in different areas and at
different times, she was advised at that time that this...
would be considered 2
losses.An
independent adjuster was assigned to inspect the losses. A contractor was
contacted to prepare an estimate on the covered damages (see attached).
Coverage is provided to access the pipes, repair the water damage and repair
the area that was torn out. The only item not covered was the cost to repair
the actual leaking pipes, as that is considered wear/tear and not covered by
the insurance contract. The covered damages to the basement fell below Ms.
[redacted]'s $1,000 deductible. After application of the deductible for the kitchen
damage, the loss amounted to $945.85On October 27, 2014, correspondence was sent
to Ms. [redacted] asking if she wished to pursue these claims (see attached). No
response was ever received and as such these files were closed. As Ms. [redacted]
has indicated in her letter to your office that she wishes payment for the
covered damages, we have issued our payment for the kitchen damages in the
amount of $945.85.
We acknowledge your follow up inquiry in our office.Please be advised,
we received the signed title from Ms. [redacted] on December 29, 2015 and have
issued our payment in full for $5,207.30.Please contact us should you have any further questions.
I have sent information to get the company to re quote with proper trailer they have not sent the info to there appraisal company and the appraisal company can not change quote without proper documentation and will not allow me to send directly to the appraisal company we just keep going in circles please send all documentation that I have sent to badger over to [redacted] so they can properly quote my trailer with the exact same trailer that was damaged
We acknowledge receipt of your inquiry in our officeThe policy under which claim hasbeen presented is Homeowner's policy issued to [redacted] The insured'scomplaint is referencing separate claims.Ms [redacted] reported a fire claim on June 3, which was handled under ClaimX1080379-FI The insured was contacted and an inspection commenced on June 5,with the insured's contractor; [redacted] Over the course of theclaim proceedings; several payments based upon covered damages sustainedThepayments were issued as follows:IJune 4, - issued $1,to insured for an initial out of pocket advanceJune 11,- Issued $20,to insured and [redacted] for buildingrepair advanceJune 10, - Issued $2,to insured for an additional out of pocket advanceJuly 2, - Issued $2,to insured for an additional out of pocket advanceJuly 14,- Issued $2,to insured and Julia [redacted] for the 1st monthsrentJuly 17,- Issued $2,contents advanceJuly 20, - Issued $70,to insured and [redacted] Builders fora 2nd Building repair advanceAugust 17,- Issued $2,to insured and [redacted] Builders for Emergency services completedAugust 27, - Issued $34,to insured and [redacted] Builders for Personal property pack-out, storage, cleaning and repairSeptember 4, - Issued S15,to named insured towards the Actual CashValue payment for personal property lost.IISeptember 28,- Issued $to named insured for additional personalproperty cleaningOctober 28,- Issued $to named insured which represented theActual Cash Value difference minus all advances issued to dateOctober 28, - Issued $to named insured which represented the Barrebuild supplementNovember 2, - Issued $1,to named insured and [redacted] for Personal property dry-cleaning supplement.ISNovember 2, - Issued $ 25,to named insured and [redacted] for the Final building paymentNovember 12,- issued $to Insured for food expensesNovember 13, - Issued $10,to insured for personal property purchasedJanuary 7, - Issued $1,to named insured and [redacted] for landscaping[redacted] completed the pack-out and inventory of both salvageableand unsalvageable personal propertyWe sent the inventory to [redacted] services in order to verify, confirm and finalize the like, kind and quality items per localpricingThe insured was advised of the process in order to recover the depreciationwithheld and asked to review the inventory for accuracyThe insured had concerns withsome of the personal property replacement cost values and requested increases forselected items.We requested further documentation to help support the increase in replacement costvaluesNeither Badger Mutual Insurance Company nor [redacted] servicesreceived any additional information to help support the insureds request for highervalues [redacted] services confirmed the like, kind and quality items peraverage local pricingThe insured's hired contractor continues to complete repairs pertheir signed contract with the insuredOn April 14, 2015, the contractor advised us thatthe insured has not allowed them in the property to perform the building inspectorinspections.With regard to Ms [redacted] second concern, she reported a roof damage claim onAugust 27, with an August 22,date of lossThis loss was handled underClaim #: [redacted] The loss location was inspected with the insured's contractorpresent, ( [redacted] ) [redacted] The inspection did not reveal any hail, windnor storm related damage to the roof, siding, nor other exposed exterior surfaces of thehome or garageFurther, the dwelling and garage roof shingles were found to be heavilydeteriorated and well beyond their useful lifeThe insured was sent a Denial letter and thefile was closed.With regard to the non-renewal of the policy, prior to offering a homeowner renewal,Badger Mutual reviews all policiesUpon reviewing Ms [redacted] ' policy we becameaware of her recent claim activityMs [redacted] ' claims history includes overflow fromsump pump losses on June 7, 2008, July 14,and July 20, hail losses on May12,and August 22,and a fire loss on June 3, Because of these claims,we were unable to offer a renewalAs required by Wisconsin insurance statute, enclosedis a copy of the nonrenewal and its proof of mailing
We acknowledge receipt of your inquiry in our office.The policy under which claim has been presented is a homeowner's policy issued to Ms[redacted] [redacted] submitted a pipe leak/water damage claim to our office onOctober 22, with an October 21, date of loss.~002In order to properly evaluate and assess the damages being claimed, Badger MutualInsurance Co hired [redacted] to perform an inspection of the loss location.Our discussion of the facts of this claim and the information obtained from this inspectionrevealed the shower was leaking in two separate areas from a recent remodel that wasperformedThe insureds new contractor, [redacted] , confinned a leak at the valve andthe shower drain.The insured was advised that the policy would not provide coverage for the plumbingrepairs as they were workmanship/installation relatedAn estimate was prepared for thewater damages resulting from this lossThe agreed scope and estimate of repair for thewater damage totaled $2,There is a $1,policy deductible giving us a netclaim of$1,A copy of the estimate prepared was sent with the payment onNovember 5, 2014.On November 21, 2014, [redacted] received a phone call from the insured indicatingher contractor is recommending fully removing and replacing the shower/remodeledareas in order to properly repair the areaA re-inspection of the premises with theinsured's contractor is being arranged.Attached is the letter sent to the insured regarding coverage and the re-inspectionShouldyou have any further questions, please contact me
Ms [redacted] contacted our office on July 29, and reported that she had a pipe leaking in the kitchen for about a month and had a pipe in the basement that had been leaking for over monthsAs these occurred in different areas and at different times, she was advised at that time that this would be considered losses.An independent adjuster was assigned to inspect the lossesA contractor was contacted to prepare an estimate on the covered damages (see attached) Coverage is provided to access the pipes, repair the water damage and repair the area that was torn outThe only item not covered was the cost to repair the actual leaking pipes, as that is considered wear/tear and not covered by the insurance contractThe covered damages to the basement fell below Ms ***'s $1,deductibleAfter application of the deductible for the kitchen damage, the loss amounted to $945.85On October 27, 2014, correspondence was sent to Ms [redacted] asking if she wished to pursue these claims (see attached)No response was ever received and as such these files were closedAs Ms [redacted] has indicated in her letter to your office that she wishes payment for the covered damages, we have issued our payment for the kitchen damages in the amount of $
We acknowledge your follow up inquiry in our office.The water damage was the result of deteriorated caulking where the 1st story addition ties into the siding/brick (see photograph attached)This is not related to hail damage.With regard to the hail damage, her contractor advised that she had roof damage subsequent to the water damage inspectionThe independent adjuster who inspected the water damage claim, [redacted] of [redacted] again inspected the home and found no damage to the roof, but impacts to the gutters, downspouts, awning and siding (see attached photos)Ms [redacted] 's contractor agreed with the damage assessmentAs these are two unrelated incidents, two deductibles would apply
The policy under which the claims have been presented is a HO-Homeowner policy issued to Ms [redacted] Ms [redacted] reported a roof leak claim to Badger Mutual Insurance Company on April 9, 2015.An inspection was conducted by an independent adjusting firm, [redacted] on April 13, The inspection found water leaking in the SW corner of the home where the 1st story addition ties into the siding/brickThe flashing along this area has deteriorated and caused water to leak into the homeHail damage was not mentioned when the claim was reported nor during the inspectionThis claim amounted to $2,After applying the $policy deductible, payment of $2,was issued on April 20, 2015.On May 1, 2015, the insured reported another claim advising that she had a contractor inspect the roof and they advised that she had hail damage from a storm occurring May 20, Another inspection was conducted by [redacted] on May 8, No damage was found to the roof but hail impacts were found to the soft metals such as gutters, downspouts, awnings, roof vents and sidingThis claim amounted to $6,After deduction of depreciation of $1,and the policyholders 20% hail deductible ($854.27), payment was issued to the policyholder for $3,on May 12, 2015.Since these are two separate losses, two deductibles would applyShould you have any questions with regard to this, please feel free to contact me
We acknowledge receipt of your inquiry in our office.The policy under which claim has been presented is a homeowners policyBadger Mutual InsuranceCompany received the claim on May 29, with the submitted date of loss being May 3, 2015.In order to properly assess the damages being claimed,
Badger Mutual hired Syndicate Claims toperform an inspection of the loss locationThis inspection took place on June 5, The inspectionrevealed minor wind damage to the dwelling front roof slopeAreas of hail damage were discovered aswell to the dwelling's soft metal areas including window wraps, metal roof vents, and downspout areas.An agreement was reached with the insured's contractor for the covered damages in the amount of$2,After application of the $1,policy deductible payment was issued to the policyholder for$1,This amount was issued and mailed to the insured with a letter explaining coverage on June12,2015.With regard to her policy, letters were sent to the policyholder on July 1, and October 5, 2015requesting that the roof be replaced or the policy would be non-renewed as of April 2, As oftoday, no documentation has been provided indicating that these repairs were completed.In addition, the adjuster found areas of curling shingles along with signs of extensive wear and tear, age,deterioration and latent/mechanical defectThe policy does not provide coverage for thesemaintenance related issues so we were unable to pay for replacing the entire roof.Sincerely,
Again, Ms*** is
asking that we remove a claim from our system and we are unable to do thatThe
claim relating to her leaking pipe in the basement was closed and no payment
was issued as these damages fell below her $1,deductibleWith regard to her
2nd claim (leaking pipe in the kitchen), payment on that file was
issued on November 1,
Dear Ms***, our records indicate a refund check in the amount of $was mailed to *** *** on August 14, 2017. The check was cashed on August 29, 2017. Please contact our office if you have any questions
This file has been resolvedMr*** has agreed to a settlement of $7,A release hasbeen sent to him and upon receipt, we will issue our payment.If you have any questions regarding this matter please contact me at ###-###-####
We acknowledge receipt of your inquiry in our office.The policy under which claim has been presented is an HO·3 Homeowner's policy issuedto Ms. leura. Ms. leura reported a wind damage claim to Badger Mutual InsuranceCompany on September 8,2015 with a September 8, 2015 date of loss.The insured was...
contacted on September 8,2015 and due to the alleged damagessustained, we assigned the independent adjusting firm Cullen & Associates to completean inspection of the property. The inspection took place September 14, 2015 with theinsured present. Minor wind damage was found to the roof (approximately 30 missingshingles). An estimate was written to repair the direct areas of damage totaling$444.57. Since the damages fell under the insured's deductible of $1,000.00, we sentthe insured a letter advising of our findings and closed the claim accordingly. In additionto the wind damage, the adjuster also found signs of extensive wear and tear, age, anddeterioration. Unfortunately, the policy does not provide coverage for these conditions.On January 6, 2016, the insured contacted our office and advised she had now sustainedhail damage and requested that her claim be re-opened. The insured was advised that anew claim would need to be established for any new damage. The insured advised shewould have her contractor call us to discuss further. On January 11, 2016, we discussedthe claim and the new damages with the contractor and advised that if the insuredwanted to submit a new claim, we would re-inspect. As of today, the insured has notsubmitted a new claim.Should you have any questions with regard to thi s, please feel free to contact me
Revdex.com:
I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID [redacted], and have determined that this does not resolve my complaint. For your reference, details of the offer I reviewed appear below.
[To assist us in bringing this matter to a close, we would like to know your view on the matter.]Now they tell me they are closing my claims without payment? What does that mean? I have no idea? What does the close mean? What does without payment mean? So after all this writing back and forth to finally settle this I get this as an answer? So are they telling me to bad so sad we will do nothing despite your "claim" that we will now do nothing about. Way to go. So does the one check that I finally got for my "one claim" is that still mine? or are they taking that back too? I have been waiting for their response so I can take this check out of the cabinet and cash it and this is the response? Oh you don't get the money now too ? What in Gods name is going on? What kind of company is this that they lack such common sense, service and ethics. Hello Better Business please help me with this issue.
Regards,
[redacted]
We acknowledge receipt of your inquiry in our office.The policy under which claim has been presented is a homeowner's policy issued to Ms.[redacted] submitted a pipe leak/water damage claim to our office onOctober 22, 2014 with an October 21, 2014 date of loss.~002In order to properly...
evaluate and assess the damages being claimed, Badger MutualInsurance Co hired [redacted] to perform an inspection of the loss location.Our discussion of the facts of this claim and the information obtained from this inspectionrevealed the shower was leaking in two separate areas from a recent remodel that wasperformed. The insureds new contractor, [redacted], confinned a leak at the valve andthe shower drain.The insured was advised that the policy would not provide coverage for the plumbingrepairs as they were workmanship/installation related. An estimate was prepared for thewater damages resulting from this loss. The agreed scope and estimate of repair for thewater damage totaled $2,104.70. There is a $1,000 policy deductible giving us a netclaim of$1,104.70. A copy of the estimate prepared was sent with the payment onNovember 5, 2014.On November 21, 2014, [redacted] received a phone call from the insured indicatingher contractor is recommending fully removing and replacing the shower/remodeledareas in order to properly repair the area. A re-inspection of the premises with theinsured's contractor is being arranged.Attached is the letter sent to the insured regarding coverage and the re-inspection. Shouldyou have any further questions, please contact me.
Ms.
[redacted]'s vehicle was damaged when her son was involved in an accident with our
policyholder. In this accident her vehicle sustained extensive damage and was
deemed a total loss.The vehicle
that was involved in the accident was a 2004 Honda Civic with 132,000 miles. We
made an offer of...
$5,207.30 which represents the value of $4,666 for her car,
plus sales tax (261.30) and loss of use ($280). We have attached the paperwork
to support this offer along with the emails and letter that have been sent
reiterating our position. We are sorry that Ms. [redacted] does not agree with our
offer, but we feel this is fair based upon the age and condition of her
vehicle. In addition, we advised her that she could file this claim with her
own carrier and we would respond to their subrogation demand.Should
you have any questions with regard to this, please feel free to contact me.
[A default letter is provided here which indicates your acceptance of the business's response. If you wish, you may update it before sending it.]
I disagree with Badger Mutual Insurance’s offer of $5,207.30
as it fails to cover the associated costs of replacing my vehicle. It specifically excludes title, license
plates, and dealer fees as well as an unrealistic market replacement value for
a comparable car that was totaled by their insured. Using the information below outlining the replacement cost, I will be forced
to absorb a $1,279.62 loss in order to replace my vehicle that was totaled on
October 1, 2015 by their insured as I can no longer wait for the claim money for the car replacement
My numerous responses to Badger Mutual Insurance provided real time
fair market values , supported by documentation for external car sites , WI DMV fees and Edmunds car buying information on fees that are representative of the current car environment to replace my
vehicle. Using the insurance company’s
definition and basis for loss compensation, the fair market price for my vehicle
is $5,561, plus tax, title, license and dealer fees and rental reimbursement.
Car Value $5,561.00
Tax 311.42
Title 69.50
License 75.00
Dealer Fees 190.00
Car Rental 280
Total Replacement Cost $6,486.92
Difference of
$1,279.62
Each response at every level within Badger Mutual Insurance,
including executive management, has repeatedly ignored the total costs
associated with the purchase of a vehicle in their responses, such as dealer
fees, title and license plates and the fair market value. Their responses have been up to three weeks later
and only when a message is left with the Company President. Badger Mutual Insurance’s responses intentionally fail to
address my submitted information, which details the replacement value of the
car and associated costs, which uses their definition of what constitutes the
use of replacement value as the “hypothetical most probable price that could be
obtained for a property by average, informed purchasers.” Badger Mutual Insurance has exhibited bad faith efforts in
handling this claim, with repeated delays and ignores the facts surrounding it
with their pre-determined offer that is not representative of the cost of replacing
a vehicle. I hope that current and future customers, as well as insurance
brokers, agents and consumers carefully consider the bad faith dealings, delays
and practices that Badger Mutual Insurance has exhibited and repeatedly engaged
in with my claim that seems to seep through every level in their company, when they
evaluate their insurance needs and what they are willing and can financially
loose in the event they need to file a claim with Badger Mutual Insurance. I deal with insurance on a personal and professional level and have never experienced this sub-standard level of
customer service, professionalism and accountability demonstrated by Badger
Mutual Insurance in dealing with my claim.
Revdex.com:
I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID [redacted], and find that this resolution is satisfactory to me.
Regards,
[redacted]
Mr. [redacted]'s 2011 trailer was damaged by our insured while it was parked on the side of theroadway. Mr. [redacted] supplied us with estimates and photos of the damaged unit on November 5,2014. An inspection of the unit was conducted and the appraisal revealed the cost to repair thetrailer would be in excess...
ofS7,OOO which exceeds the value of the trailer, deeming it a totalloss.The market valuation report indicated the market value of the vehicle was $5,975.00 (seeattached paperwork). An offer of settlement was made to Mr. [redacted] on November 11,2014which included the market value of the vehicle less salvage ofSl,195.00 (if he opted to retain theunit) plus 10 days of loss of use. Mr. [redacted] disagreed with the market valuation informing us hewas of the opinion he was entitled to a brand new 2014 trailer. We advised Mr. [redacted] our legalobligation is to put him back in the same position he was in prior to the loss. An offer andrelease was sent to Mr. [redacted] on November 17, 2014 outlining our offer of settlement. Uponreceipt of the signed release we will issue payment to Mr. [redacted]. We advised Mr. [redacted] that if hedisagreed with our valuation, he could pursue this through his own carrier but he advises he doesnot have insurance on the trailer.If you have any questions or need any additional information please feel free to call. Sincerely[redacted]
We acknowledge receipt of your inquiry in our office. The policy under which claim hasbeen presented is Homeowner's policy issued to [redacted]. The insured'scomplaint is referencing 2 separate claims.Ms. [redacted] reported a fire claim on June 3, 2014 which was handled under ClaimX1080379-FI7....
The insured was contacted and an inspection commenced on June 5,2014 with the insured's contractor; [redacted]. Over the course of theclaim proceedings; several payments based upon covered damages sustained. Thepayments were issued as follows:I. June 4, 2014 - issued $1,500 to insured for an initial out of pocket advance.2. June 11,2014 - Issued $20,000 to insured and [redacted] for buildingrepair advance.3. June 10, 2014 - Issued $2,500 to insured for an additional out of pocket advance.4. July 2, 2014 - Issued $2,500 to insured for an additional out of pocket advance.5. July 14,2014 - Issued $2,500 to insured and Julia [redacted] for the 1st monthsrent6. July 17,2014 - Issued $2,500 contents advance7. July 20, 2014 - Issued $70,000 to insured and [redacted] Builders fora 2nd Building repair advance.8. August 17,2014 - Issued $2,965.00 to insured and [redacted]Builders for Emergency services completed.9. August 27, 2014 - Issued $34,165 .10 to insured and [redacted]Builders for Personal property pack-out, storage, cleaning and repair.10. September 4, 2014 - Issued S15,000 to named insured towards the Actual CashValue payment for personal property lost.II. September 28,2014 - Issued $344.75 to named insured for additional personalproperty cleaning.12. October 28,2014 - Issued $436.29 to named insured which represented theActual Cash Value difference minus all advances issued to date.13. October 28, 2014 - Issued $862.67 to named insured which represented the Barrebuild supplement.14. November 2, 2014 - Issued $1,003.04 to named insured and [redacted] for Personal property dry-cleaning supplement.IS. November 2, 2014 - Issued $ 25,402.98 to named insured and [redacted] for the Final building payment.16. November 12,2014 - issued $900.00 to Insured for food expenses17. November 13, 2014 - Issued $10,000 to insured for personal property purchased.18. January 7, 2015 - Issued $1,050.00 to named insured and [redacted]for landscaping.[redacted] completed the pack-out and inventory of both salvageableand unsalvageable personal property. We sent the inventory to [redacted]services in order to verify, confirm and finalize the like, kind and quality items per localpricing. The insured was advised of the process in order to recover the depreciationwithheld and asked to review the inventory for accuracy. The insured had concerns withsome of the personal property replacement cost values and requested increases forselected items.We requested further documentation to help support the increase in replacement costvalues. Neither Badger Mutual Insurance Company nor [redacted] servicesreceived any additional information to help support the insureds request for highervalues. [redacted] services confirmed the like, kind and quality items peraverage local pricing. The insured's hired contractor continues to complete repairs pertheir signed contract with the insured. On April 14, 2015, the contractor advised us thatthe insured has not allowed them in the property to perform the building inspectorinspections.With regard to Ms. [redacted] second concern, she reported a roof damage claim onAugust 27, 2014 with an August 22,2014 date of loss. This loss was handled underClaim #: [redacted]. The loss location was inspected with the insured's contractorpresent, ([redacted]. The inspection did not reveal any hail, windnor storm related damage to the roof, siding, nor other exposed exterior surfaces of thehome or garage. Further, the dwelling and garage roof shingles were found to be heavilydeteriorated and well beyond their useful life. The insured was sent a Denial letter and thefile was closed.With regard to the non-renewal of the policy, prior to offering a homeowner renewal,Badger Mutual reviews all policies. Upon reviewing Ms. [redacted]' policy we becameaware of her recent claim activity. Ms. [redacted]' claims history includes overflow fromsump pump losses on June 7, 2008, July 14,2010 and July 20, 2010 hail losses on May12,2014 and August 22,2014 and a fire loss on June 3, 2014. Because of these claims,we were unable to offer a renewal. As required by Wisconsin insurance statute, enclosedis a copy of the nonrenewal and its proof of mailing.
Revdex.com:
I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID [redacted], and have determined that this does not resolve my complaint. For your reference, details of the offer I reviewed appear below.
[To assist us in bringing this matter to a close, we would like to know your view on the matter.]
Regards,
[redacted]
Ms. [redacted]
contacted our office on July 29, 2014 and reported that she had a pipe leaking
in the kitchen for about a month and had a pipe in the basement that had been
leaking for over 6 months. As these occurred in different areas and at
different times, she was advised at that time that this...
would be considered 2
losses.An
independent adjuster was assigned to inspect the losses. A contractor was
contacted to prepare an estimate on the covered damages (see attached).
Coverage is provided to access the pipes, repair the water damage and repair
the area that was torn out. The only item not covered was the cost to repair
the actual leaking pipes, as that is considered wear/tear and not covered by
the insurance contract. The covered damages to the basement fell below Ms.
[redacted]'s $1,000 deductible. After application of the deductible for the kitchen
damage, the loss amounted to $945.85On October 27, 2014, correspondence was sent
to Ms. [redacted] asking if she wished to pursue these claims (see attached). No
response was ever received and as such these files were closed. As Ms. [redacted]
has indicated in her letter to your office that she wishes payment for the
covered damages, we have issued our payment for the kitchen damages in the
amount of $945.85.
We acknowledge your follow up inquiry in our office.Please be advised,
we received the signed title from Ms. [redacted] on December 29, 2015 and have
issued our payment in full for $5,207.30.Please contact us should you have any further questions.
I have sent information to get the company to re quote with proper trailer they have not sent the info to there appraisal company and the appraisal company can not change quote without proper documentation and will not allow me to send directly to the appraisal company we just keep going in circles please send all documentation that I have sent to badger over to [redacted] so they can properly quote my trailer with the exact same trailer that was damaged