Geico Corporation

Review: I hold a Geico auto insurance policy with policy # [redacted] as of today (Feb 22, 2013). On Sept 19, 2012 I was involved in an accident. In an intersection to a school entrance the driver behind me was trying to pass my car and cut into my lane, at which time the other party's car hit my car. The other driver was at fault because it violated [redacted] law that no passing is allowed within an intersection. Also I stopped when I saw a car was passing me while the other party was keeping moving, which resulted in the accident. I outlined necessary information with detailed diagram to show the movement of both cars and why the other party was at fault. I provided video which showed clearly that the other party was driving from behind and hit my car. However, Geico's adjuster was extremely inexperienced and misrepresented the information and made wrong judgement. Their wrong conclusion resulted in a payout from my insurance policy which resulted in a premium increase. I have disputed their interim judgement multiple times with additional reports. However, they never paid attention to my diagram and viewed the full picture with all factors considered. They didn't even notify me their final judgement and the payout in writing. It was only after 4 months that I found out they had made the final decision against the facts. Then I discussed with an adjuster named [redacted] on Feb 22, 2013, who was extremely rude and would not listen to me. And after such a long time, it was difficult to take any necessary action to immediately rectify that inappropriate judgement.Desired Settlement: reduce my premium to previous level. rectify their inappropriate judgement and revise the report.

Business

Response:

March 14, 2013

Revdex.com of Metropolitan

Attention: [redacted]

RE: CASE NUMBER: 9435205

COMPLAINANT: [redacted]

INSURED: [redacted]

CLAIM NUMBER: [redacted]

POLICY NUMBER: [redacted]

DATE OF LOSS: September 17, 2012

COMPANY: Government Employees Insurance Company

NAIC #: [redacted]

Dear [redacted],

Thank you for your recent correspondence.

The loss was reported to us on September 18, 2012. When the loss was reported it was identified as a liability dispute and was transferred for a liability investigation. We spoke to [redacted] on September 19, 2012, and obtained his recorded statement regarding the details of the loss. He advised that he had photos, a diagram of the accident scene and a video of the loss that was recorded using the video camera mounted in his vehicle. We requested [redacted] submit that information to us for review.

We spoke to the other party involved in the loss on September 19, 2012, and obtained their recorded statement and requested photos of their vehicle. Photos of both vehicles, a diagram of the accident scene and the video of the loss were obtained on September 19, 2012.

All of the evidence was reviewed and in the video submitted by [redacted] he appears to pull to the left from behind a line of cars and struck the other parties vehicle that was traveling in the left lane of the parking lot. The loss did not occur in an intersection. It occurred in a school parking lot; therefore, [redacted] law regarding not passing in an intersection would not apply.

[redacted] was contacted on September 19, 2012, and advised he would be responsible for the loss. [redacted] called in on September 21, 2012, to question the liability decision. He was advised of how the decision was made and what information was reviewed. [redacted] called again on September 24, 2012, and spoke to a supervisor in the claims department to discuss the liability decision. The supervisor advised [redacted] the reason for the decision and advised him at that time, if he had any additional information he wanted to submit for us to review he could certainly do that. No additional information was received from [redacted].

[redacted] called and spoke to the handling adjuster on February 22, 2013 to question the liability decision that was made. The handling adjuster reviewed all the evidence with him, as well as the video that shows [redacted] pulling from a parked position and striking the other parties’ vehicle that was traveling in the left lane of the parking lot. He was advised again he would be responsible for the loss. [redacted] sent a request to have the information regarding the liability decision sent to him in writing on February 24, 2013. This information was provided to [redacted] as requested.

If there are any additional questions, please feel free to contact Claims Manager, [redacted] at [redacted].

Sincerely,

Regional Vice President

Consumer

Response:

[To assist us in bringing this matter to a close, you must give us a reason why you are rejecting the response. If no reason is received your complaint will be closed Administratively Resolved]

Review: [redacted]

I am rejecting this response because:

Unfortunately, GEICO's response had serious misrepresentation of the facts. Following are the misrepresentation I found in GEICO's response:

The accident happened within 100 feet of the intersection at [redacted] drop-off and pickup way. [redacted] Traffic Law prohibits passing within 100 feet of an intersection. The other driver violated this law. The other driver also made a wide right turn at the intersection, which was another violation of [redacted] Traffic Law requiring right turn into the closest right lane.

This accident didn't happen in a parking lot. GEICO didn't even understand where the accident happened, therefore, how could they make an appropriate liability judgement?

I didn't strike the other car. On the contrary, I found there was a car trying to pass me from my left and I stepped the brake and stopped. However, the other car was still moving fast and cut into my front. When the other car was cutting into my front, it struck my car at the front left bumper. At the time of collision, my car was standing still.

I never parked my car in the whole process. So GEICO's statement of my pulling from a parked position was completely wrong.

I submitted detailed traffic report outlining all the relevant facts in an email to their adjuster ([redacted] for GEICO to consider on Sept 24, 2012 and they never responded with regard to the relevant facts I outlined.

So overall, GEICO misrepresented all the important facts and made a strongly biased judgement without understanding the full picture. Their adjusters and supervisors are very unprofessional and inexperienced in determining the true cause of an accident. Their decision was a hasty and careless one, which can be seen from the fact that they made the judgement within only one day on Sept 19, 2012 from collecting both parties' statements to the final judgement. I hadn't seen that any insurance company could make a liability decision within one day's time from collecting data to final decision. I would hope GEICO had paid more attention to their work quality rather than speed when it comes to a serious judgement like this.

Regards,

Business

Response:

March 26, 2013

Revdex.com of Metropolitan Washington DC and Eastern Pennsylvania

1411 K St. NW, 10th floor

P.O. Box 149104

Attn: [redacted]

RE: CASE NUMBER: [redacted]

COMPLAINANT: [redacted]

INSURED: [redacted]

CLAIM NUMBER: [redacted]

POLICY NUMBER: [redacted]

DATE OF LOSS: September 17, 2012

COMPANY: Government Employees Insurance Company

NAIC #: [redacted]

Dear [redacted]:

We were loyal customers for years. My daughter wanted to buy a car and was on a tight budget. She saw cars she liked, but knew that she had to be able to afford full coverage insurance. So, my husband called and got a quote for each car we looked at. Finally, we were given a quote that she could afford. So, based on that quote she purchased the car. When my husband called back the quote was $60 higher than it was before! We understand that a quote is just a quote, but that's a big difference! My husband asked why it was such a big difference. He was told that when the original person gave him the quote it was for 6 months, as it always is. We know this. My husband had asked him how much it would be per month because my daughter needed to know how much it would be each month. Now, this person said that that original quote for each month was a mistake. They calculate the payment each month on a calculator and that guy made a mistake. My husband put the car on our policy because my daughter had to have insurance. However, I called back and spoke with a man and stated that they gave us that original quote, based on that my daughter bought this car, that isn't fair, Geico should do something about it. Who is going to pay that extra $60?! He said they couldn't do anything, they can't adjust claims. I told him I wasn't asking him to adjust a claim. I wanted Geico to take care of that $60 because my daughter can't take the car back. She's stuck with it now because of that original quote. He gave me some other explanation for why the quote was now different from that original quote. I told him that we were told that it was because of a calculator mistake, and now he's changing it! I asked to speak to a manager. A man named Donovan called me back, saying he was the manager. He gave me a completely different excuse for why the wrong quote was given. I told him that it really doesn't even matter how the mistake was made. What matters is that their mistake was now costing us $60 extra a month and it's not fair that we have to pay it because of their mistake. He didn't really believe that the original guy made that mistake. I asked him if they record calls. If do, then listen to the recording. He acted as if he hadn't thought of that and like it was a good idea. He said they do random recordings, so he would see if that conversation was recorded. Then, after a minute of silence, he sai, "I'm still here, I'm just reading through this transcript." I thought great, he found the recording! After a few minutes he said, "O, sorry. That call wasn't recorded." I believe he lied. If it wasn't recorded, what transcript was he reading?!
After more talking back and forth, I told him I just want to speak to his manager. He said that he was the highest person I could talk to. I asked him, "In all of Geico, you are the only person I can talk to?!" He said yes. I told him that it's really sad to be a loyal customer to a company for so long, then for the company to show you that they are not an honorable company. I told him that we will be taking our business elsewhere. He talked about their competitive pricing and asked me why we don't just adjust the coverage on our other vehicles to make up for that $60! I told him, "Why should we make adjustments for your mistake?! We shouldn't have to adjust anything!"
When we finally found another insurance company, I called Geico to cancel our policy. The representative said that someone would call me back. A lady called me back and tried to convince me to stay on with Geico. I briefly explained what happened and told her we were just done. She said, "I wish you had spoken to me when all this happened. I'm the one with the authority to adjust how much you pay." I told het, "Umm, Donovan said that he was the only one in allllllllllll of Geico I could talk to!" She said, "Yeah, I'm reading that here. I'm sorry about that."
This just confirmed to me that we got screwed over. We were given a quote, it wasn't honored, we were told over and over again that because of laws they could not adjust quotes and Geico wasn't going to cover it.
That is absolutely disgusting!
Then, she told me several times that she could cut my rates in half if I stayed with Geico, maybe even more! I told her no.
This was a horrible experience! I'm now convinced that Geico is a dishonorable company and do not deserve loyal customers like us.

Despite the fact that I have a good driving record and have been with Geico for over 5 years, they keep raising my rate every 6 months. Each time my policy renews, despite my good record and taking advantage of every discount I can get, my rates increase. I can't afford $115/month. This company does not reward customer loyalty.

I'm being with GEICO for a very very long time never had an accident before I read my policy doesn't say anything about deductible when I call to find out what was my deductible they told me was $1,000 but the cost to fix my car its a $900 now they want me to pay $1,000 my advice to everybody before buying insurance make sure how much is your deductible them to you so you can get you later on in the road I don't recommend this insurance or anybody good luck

Review: I had an at-fault accident in a parking lot. I was going no more than 2 mph and barely hit a bumper of a Toyota. The cost of repairs was $1076 ($76 over the threshold) and now my insurance is going up by $175 per 6 months. I tried to speak with a service representative and they were unable to make an exception, even though it is barely over the threshold. The case manager, prior to being connected to the service rep, explained that many times the service rep can make exceptions, especially because it is only 7.5% above the threshold. The policy seems like it should have some flexibility, as I hit a parked car in a very tight parking lot, but am otherwise a safe driver. This is a very isolated incident and should not effect my insurance rate in perpetuity and I am disappointed in the lack of customer-focus that this policy has.Desired Settlement: I would like an exception to be made to the policy so that my insurance rate does not go up. It seems very unfair to have such a strict policy, given the nature of the incident. It was not a moving violation and it is barely over the threshold.

Business

Response:

Please find out response attached. Hardcopy will be mailed to [redacted] tomorrow; therefore, the letters are dated 03/27/13.

Review: A few months ago while I was in military training for three months with no phone access, Geico incorrectly reported to the VA DMV that I was uninsured (even though they were still taking my money) My license was suspended and I had to pay a bunch of fines to get my license back. I filed a compliant against Geico and they made it right and reimbursed me but I was left with a SR 22 note attached to my license. Not to big of a deal just more of a pain for me.

I was not happy with Geico so I decided to switch my insurance over to [redacted], I switched my insurance over to [redacted], waited two days and then called Geico to end my insurance policy with them. After about 20 minutes on the phone I was able to cancel my insurance and I asked if all my info was transferred to [redacted] and I was told yes. A week later I am trying to renew my registration and AGAIN MY LICENSE IS SUSPENDED. After I investigated the problem I found out Geico did not transfer my SR22 along with my information over to [redacted]. So Geico was able to cause me grief and cost me money one last time. This is all happening the day before I am scheduled to get hired onto the police department. So now I am unable to drive myself to my final interview and I look irresponsible to my future employer.Desired Settlement: I would like Geico to pay all of my reinstatement fees and any fines I might have to pay due to their negligence.

Business

Response:

March 11, 2014

Revdex.com

1411 K ST NW 10TH FLOOR

WASHINGTON DC 20005-3404

Regarding: [redacted]

Policy No: [redacted]

ID No: [redacted]

Dear **. [redacted]:

We received your letter regarding **. [redacted]’s concerns.

On July 7, 2013 we addressed **. [redacted]’s concerns with your office in regard to his suspended driver’s license. **. [redacted] ultimately provided proof of his paid license reinstatement fees, and by July 10, 2013 we refunded him a total of $645.00.

**. [redacted] contacted us on February 27, 2014 and requested to cancel his policy. His request was processed and the policy was cancelled effective February 28, 2014. **. [redacted] is required to file a Certificate of Financial Responsibility (SR22) with the DMV until March 21, 2014. Since GEICO had previously provided this information we are obligated to alert the DMV as to the cancellation of the policy. This information is solely reported to the DMV by GEICO not to [redacted]. It is the responsibility of the policyholder to alert their current carrier to the fact that an SR22 is required. We are unable to transfer SR22’s or any other information to another insurance company. If **. [redacted]’s driver’s license is suspended because a current SR22 was not on file, we suggest he notify [redacted] to provide that information as of the effective date of his policy with them.

If you need additional information regarding this matter, please contact [redacted], at ###-###-####, extension [redacted].

Sincerely,

Virginia Beach Regional Office

Government Employees Insurance Company

Consumer

Response:

[To assist us in bringing this matter to a close, you must give us a reason why you are rejecting the response. If no reason is received your complaint will be closed Administratively Resolved]

Review: [redacted]

I am rejecting this response because:

I was only forced to have a SR 22 on my driving records due to Geico's negligence. They did admit fault and reimbursed me for initially getting my license suspended. I'm not complain about that. It only when Geico failed to handle my claim when y truck was damaged that I decided to cancel my membership. When I canceled my policy I was not informed that my SR22 Would not be transferred to my new insurance company. How was I supposed to know that it was my responsibility to provide my new insurance company with my current SR22? I would think that since GEICO was technically still my insurance provider that they might mention that the SR22 that I have because of their Negligence would have to be manually transferred by me to my new companies policy.

Regards,

Review: On Jan 4,2013 I was involved in an accident due to no fault of my own. I have witnesses that have attested to this to police. My car was towed to [redacted] on [redacted] in [redacted] to be fixed. I have Geico Insurance as well as the person who hit me. Geico paid [redacted] $4,493.89 to fix my car. I got a call on Feb 12, 2013 from [redacted] at Geico informing me that [redacted] had taken the check that they gave them and all the rest of the money from the business and split. Now Geico tells us that they will not repair my car because they can't pay the money twice for the same work and we have to pay to have it fixed, and, if they get the money back from [redacted], they will give us a check for $4,493.89 back. My husband and I went to [redacted] Automotive on [redacted] to pick up my car and we had to pay the $4,493.89 plus an additional $16.79 for a new tire that was damaged in the accident. They however did pro-rate this but I feel that since it was a perfectly good tire before the accident, the insurance should cover this. I only have a little over 18,000 miles on my car and it is a 2009 Dodge Caliber.Desired Settlement: We would like to have Geico pay $4510.68 back to us because that is what we had to pay to get my car fixed.

Business

Response:

Your file no. [redacted]

Review: My 1999 Ford F150 was totalled in an accident caused by another driver running a red light. I called my insurnace Company "GEICO" to let them know what happened and to get advice on what to do s[redacted]e this was my first accident. A representative at Geico informed me that I could either claim through them (GEICO) or I could wait until I received the other drivers insurance info and claim through the other company. I asked the GEICO what the difference was between claiming through GEICO or the other comany and the responce I received was "None" which turned out not to be true s[redacted]e filing with GEICO they are making me pay a $500 dollar deductable where the other company would not have.

GEICO then determined that my vehicle was totalled and that I would get a payout of whatever the market rate is for a "like vehicle" (even though when I log into GEICO online it states cash value of my vehicle but GEICO refuses to do that even though I have all of my receipts of purchas on the vehicle s[redacted]e the purchase was recent). GEICO came back to me with a few quotes of vehicles in my area but they used vehicles in poor condition to try and state that the market value of vehicles in my area is around $7,000-$8,000 when that is not the case . My vehicle was in amazing condition with a brand new motor installed. I had also just bought that vehicle 9 months prior for 10,880 and put a new motor in it of which $1120 was out of my pocket and I am able to find actual like vehicles in my area for the same price where as all of the lower priced vehicles are in poor condion and one Dealer that they had used for a quote wasn't even in business. That dealership actually had closed due to all of the allegied illegal car sales taking place there.

I then notified GEICO of the improper quotes and the deceitful practices of the company [redacted] they were using and they then stated that they would get different quotes and that they would also use the "like vehicle" quotes I found in my area. A few days later I did notice the updated quotes came through and they were again using [redacted] only this time they were using vehicles up to and over 200 miles away as their quotes making it imposible for me to check them and they did not use the quotes I supplied of "like vehiclesa' in my area. A large number of the quotes were also in other states but none of them were in my area or market area. And if I can search surrounding state for like vehicles (which I did) I find like vehicles for $15,000 but they wouldnt accept that.Desired Settlement: I would like to have the EXACT Vehicle I had prior to the accident, or get the EXACT amount I paid for my vehicle (with the new motor) as that is what I have been paying GEICO for with my full coverage. I would also like to not have to pay the $500 deductable s[redacted]e I was told at the start before filling my claim that I wouldnt have to. (I was told no difference in price if I claimed through GEICO or the other company and the other company wouldnt have made me pay a deductable s[redacted]e the other driver was the at fault driver)

Business

Response:

November 25, 2013

To Whom It May Concern:

On October 17, 2013, our policyholder, **. [redacted], reported that his 1999 Ford F150 had been damaged by collision. Our Auto Damage Adjuster, [redacted], inspected **. [redacted]'s vehicle and deemed it a total loss. In order to ascertain the actual cash value of **. [redacted]’s truck, **. [redacted] obtained a market valuation report from [redacted]. The market valuation report, which is based on locally available similar vehicle adjusted for mileage, options and condition, provided actual cash value of $8,108.50 less **. [redacted]s $500.00 collision deductible for a net settlement of $7,608.50. **. [redacted] relayed the settlement amount to **. [redacted] who objected to the value provided.

**. [redacted]'s supervisor, [redacted], reviewed **. [redacted]’s claim and agreed to increase the amount of consideration for recent work he had performed increasing the net settlement amount to $8,908.50 less the collision deductible for a net payment of $8,408.50.

**, [redacted] accepted this settlement and we issued payment on November 7,2013, one day after **. [redacted]s contact with your organization.

We sincerely regret any inconvenience [redacted] experienced during our handling of his claim. We believe this matter has now been resolved. Should you have any additional questions, please contact our Auto Damage Manager, [redacted], at ###-###-####.

Sincerely,

Review: My insurance company GEICO, made repairs on my vehicle from an accident on 6/27/13. The collision shop that repaired my vehicle is refusing to return my vehicle stating that they have possession of my vehicle until my deductible is paid. I initially spoke with a [redacted] WHO WAS VERY RUDE who works for GEICO and has been assigned as my adjuster, when I spoke with [redacted] ON 6/27/13 SHE NEVER DISCUSSED THE DEDUCTIBLE WITH me and she really didn't discuss to much of anything with me. I THOUGHT I Was doing thing by contacting my insurance COMPANY WHOM IS SUPPOSE TO BE INSURING ME....THAT IS WHAT I PAY INSURANCE FOR. THIS [redacted] SHE NEVER ONCE DEXPLAINED ANYTHING INFACT SHE BASICALLY TOLD ME HOW MY CLAIM WOULD BE HANDLED WHICH WAS DNOT IN MY BEST INTERST AT ALL. NOT DISCUSSING MY COVERAGES OR EVEN KNOWING FOR SURE IF I UNDERSTOOD. NOW THAT MY CAR HAS BEEN REPAIRED THE COLLSION SHOP [redacted] WILL NOT RELEASE MY VEHICLE, had I known this I WOULD HAVE NOT AGREED UNTIL I SPOKEN TO THE OTHER PARTY INSURANCEW CARRIER. I CAN NOT BE WITHOUT MY VEHICLE I HAVE A SON WITH DIABETES THAT NEED CARE AND MEDICAL CARE AND MEDICINE WITHOUT MY VEHICLE I CAN NOT ATTEND TO MY SON NEEDS. I SPOKEN WITH THE SUPEVISOR OF THE PROPERTY DAMAGE ADJUSTOR NAME DAVID WHO ADVISED ME TO SPEAK WITH [redacted] SUPERVISOR ABOUT THIS WHOM HAVE NOT RETURNED MY CALLS. THE COLLISION SHOP ADVISE DME THAT I HAVE UNTIL FRIDAY 7/19/13 TO PAY BECAUSE THEIR SHOP WOULD BE MOVING TO ANOTHER LOCATION AND I NEED TO GET MY VEHICLE BEFORE I ACCRUE NORE COST WHICH I WOULD NOT BE ABLE TO PAY BECAUSE I AM UNEMPLOYED DUE TO CARING FOR MY SON. THEY DID NOT TRY TO MAKE ANY KIND OF ARRANGEMENTS WITH ME TO PAY THE DEDUCTIBLE THEY JUST ADVISED ME THAT THEY WILL KEEP MY VEHICLE UNTIL I PAY THE DEDUCTIBLE WHICH I SHOULD NOT BE LIABLE FOR BECAUSE I WAS NOT LIABLE FOR THE ACCIDENT.Desired Settlement: I WOULD LIKE MY VEHICLE RELEASED TO ME.

Business

Response:

Attached is our response to Complaint ID [redacted].

Review: Claim#[redacted] I have repeatedy contacted Geico regarding a recent claim and they do not respond at all. It is my hope that they will respond so that we can reach a mutual agreement before the next level of action is required. It is disrespectful and poor customer service to at least acknowledge they have been contacted and respond.Thank you[redacted]Desired Settlement: I would appreciate Geico reviewing the information I sent them via e mail and fax so that an agreeement can be reachhed.Claim Number: [redacted]

Business

Response:

June 3, 2014Dear [redacted]:Thank you for your May 24, 2014 inquiry,We researched [redacted]s concerns and regret he had difficulty settling his claim. Our records indicate we handled a claim on his 2011 [redacted] for a loss Suffered on April 22, 2014.Our [redacted] supervisor, [redacted], spoke with [redacted] on May 26, 2014 and addressed each concern [redacted] presented on the aforementioned email in his complaint. Our position was clearly stated on each item and it is our understanding [redacted] understands and accepts our position.If further information is needed, please contact [redacted], Auto Damage Manager, at ###-###-####.Sincerely,

Review: My car was stolen on 4/12/14. Geico picked up my car on 4/16/14 and said it was being taken to a storage facitlity for damage estimate. Between the time Geico picked up my car until 6/2/14 we were told because the car was found in a pond and the age of the car it would be totaled. (also, I have been paying my car note and have had no lates through this whole process). On 6/2/14 I called Geico and asked for status on the claim, as it has been two months and I have been told it was most likely being totaled. I was then informed that they were going to fix my truck by the agent and asked the adjustor to please call me back. At this point, again two months later, I was told by the adjustor that is would be repaired and that they had already pulled the motor and were in the process of repairing the vehicle. I did not realize at the time that it was illegal for them no to give me an option of who I wanted to repair my vehicle. I do not think I should have to have this car in the condition it is in with MAJOR work that was completed by a company I did not choose. I did not know at the time that I had a choice. I also printed off the estimate of record dated 4/28/14 and it states that the repair facilty was owners choice which is not true as of 4/28/14 I was still under the impression that the vehicle would be totaled. In the mean time, geico had already cancelled my car insurance so they apparently also had it listed as totaled. I am very unhappy that I did not get a choice of who repaired my vehicle, especially since it was major rapairs like an ENTIRE motor being replaced. I do nothave the money to go to an attorney or I would have but being a soldier I do not have that option or available money. So I feel like I am being taken advantage of. Also, It seems the company doing the work on my car, [redacted] Collision [redacted] is affilliated with GEICO. AND I cannnot find where my adjustor Lisa A[redacted] is a licensed adjustor. please help.Desired Settlement: I really at this point am not comfortable with getting the vehicle back with repairs done by a company I do not know as well as I thik the time was excessive in getting an actual update on my car, almost two months. I think my rights were taken away anf GEICO knew they were breaking the law otherwise they would not have shown repair facilty as owners choice on 4/28/14 when at this time it was being totaled per my agent. I am not comfortable with getting the car back with the extensive work that was done but also feel like me having to pay three months car payments with no used of my car and having to pay 1000.00 deductable in additon to it when I had no use of my car is not right. I sdtill have not picked up my truck becuase it is not yet finished. The repairs seem excessive for the age of the vehicle.

Business

Response:

July 18, 2014Dear [redacted]:We have received your letter requesting assistance on behalf of [redacted]. I welcome the opportunity to respond to his concerns.Local area supervisor Randy H[redacted] met with [redacted] at [redacted] Collision on July 8, 2014 and re-inspected [redacted]’s vehicle and address his repair concerns:1. Engine Sputtering upon acceleration 2. Fuel filler excepting fuel slowly3. Accelerator broken bracket4. Rusty components under dash areaUpon inspection it was agreed to have Dealership [redacted] inspect and repair the first 3agreed to have [redacted] test drive vehicle to insure all repairs are in line. Mr. H[redacted] spoke with [redacted] about repair authorization and addressed dates and times and they agreed it was miscommunication due to having 3 GEICO representatives from different departments involved.We initially inspect the vehicle at [redacted] Collision Center on April 18, 2014. On April 24 the claim was assigned to our Special Investigation unit, their investigation was completed on May 23. It was at this time liability was accepted and the vehicle was deemed repairable. We would like to apologize to **. & [redacted] for the length of time it took to investigate this loss and process their claim.-The value of the vehicle at the time of the foss including taxes and fees were $10,133.79. The totalcost of repairs thus far is $ 3648.09 making the vehicle clearly repairable.I hope this information is helpful in resolving [redacted]’s concerns. If you have any additional questions, please contact my associate, Kyle H[redacted], at [redacted].Sincerely,Joe N[redacted]Assistant Vice President Government Employees Insurance Company

Consumer

Response:

[To assist us in bringing this matter to a close, you must give us a reason why you are rejecting the response. If no reason is received your complaint will be closed Administratively Resolved]

Review: [redacted]Dear [redacted],

Regarding: Geico

Claim Number: [redacted]

Revdex.com file number : [redacted]

This is in response to [redacted]’s letter to your office

regarding my claim and complaint with his company, Geico. It is true that Randy

Hominda and I met on July 8th 2014 to talk about the concerns I had

with my 2004 [redacted]. Randy and I talked about the issues that I was

having with the way Geico has handled my claim. Randy did agree that Geico had

a communication issue because of the amount of agents involved in my case. By

the end of this conversation he did apologize for the confusion. The fact is

that I was never offered the chance to send my vehicle to the shop of my choice

and Randy said the reason for this was because of the amount of time and people

it took to come up with a plan of action for my claim. I did not even realize that my SUV was going

to be repaired until Lisa A[redacted] , My Geico damage adjuster, told me that the motor was out of the truck

and that the repair process had already started.

As far as the value of my vehicle is concerned, Geico did

value my 2004 [redacted] at $10133.79 but, as far as the amount Mr.

N[redacted] says was spent to repair my vehicle, $3648.09, is wrong. The total amount

of my last invoice was $8042.49. This figure does not include the repairs that

are currently being performed at [redacted]. Is it an ethical practice to

spend almost as much as the vehicle’s worth to repair it? I’m a person that

purchases a new vehicle every two years. Thanks to [redacted] and Geico I will not

be able to do this with my [redacted] since its value has been severely diminished.

I also have an issue with the reliability of this [redacted]. Since so many major

components have been replaced I’m not confident in the ability the SUV will

have to last as long as I need it to without running into another issue caused

by this nightmare. I firmly believe that if I would have been given the opportunity

to have this repair done by a shop of my choice we would have known the extent

of the damage prior to spending almost 80% of the total value to complete the

repair, which by the way was not complete. These figures do not include the

repairs currently being done. I would

like to reiterate that I am not confident in the reliability of this vehicle.

I filed this compliant because of the way I was treated by

Geico representatives. Since I voiced my concerns to Geico Customer Support,

Lisa A[redacted] and Kyle H[redacted] have treated me and my wife with an obvious

negative tone in their voice and I don’t feel that a company that sells itself

as being among the best in customer service should allow employees to treat

loyal policy holders as I was treated. If Geico made the error then Geico needs

to stand behind its own claims and make this customer satisfied. I also feel that if Geico stands behind the repairs and appraised value they should buy it from me for the appraised value.

If you have any questions or concerns to my response, please

feel free to contact me at ###-###-####.

I will attach supporting documentation to my response for your

review.

Very Respectfully,

Business

Response:

August 6, 2014Dear [redacted]:We have received [redacted]’s request for additional assistance regarding the damage to his 2004 [redacted].Per our previous letter to the Bureau, [redacted] did have some concerns regarding the repairs to his vehicle and it was agreed that the vehicle would be taken to [redacted] to inspect and repair any additional loss related items. It was determined the fuel tank, as well as Sender and pump needed replaced. Subsequently, the windshield was also replaced due to the numerous rock chips which [redacted] explained were not there prior to the loss. These additional repairs totaled $4023.76, bringing the total cost of repairs to $ 7671.85 and GEICO will stand behind these repairs and guarantee them for as long as [redacted] own this vehicle.We would like to apologize for the confusion in regards to having the vehicle repaired at [redacted] Collision Center. The vehicle was moved to that facility after it was recovered and our adjuster, Lisa A[redacted], was under the impression [redacted] gave verbal authorization to have the vehicle repaired at [redacted] should it be determined to be repairable, which it was. At no time were we made aware that **. or [redacted] may have wanted to have their vehicle repaired at a repair facility other than [redacted].With regards to [redacted]’s question “is it ethical an ethical practice to spend almost as much as the vehicles worth to repair it”, our policy to either pay the actual cash value of the vehicle at the time of the loss or repair the vehicle should it be determined to be repairable, which it was in this case. With no obvious damage to the vehicle other than the discolored engine oil, it did make it difficult to determine the full extent of the damage. The vehicle was extremely clean and showed no signs of any other apparent damage.Auto Damage supervisor Randy Hominda received an email from [redacted] over the weekend and in his email [redacted] stated when starting his vehicle the engine makes a noise that his old engine did not make. [redacted] was told by [redacted] that this is a known issue for these [redacted] engines and [redacted] has a repair kit for this particular problem. Mr. H[redacted] spoke with [redacted] on August 4, 2014 and agreed to have [redacted] complete this repair and we would pay for this repair.Lastly, we wish to assure [redacted] it is our goal to provide exceptional service to all of our customers. We recognize we did not fulfill this goal and would like to apologize for his experience during his conversations with [redacted] and Ms. A[redacted].I hope this information addresses the additional concern raised by [redacted]. Should either you or [redacted] have any further questions or concerns please contact my associate, Troy P[redacted] at ###-###-####, extension [redacted].Sincerely,Joe N[redacted] Assistant Vice President Government Employees insurance Company

Review: Geico has participated in unfair practices, negiglance, failure to fully disclose important consumer/contractual related information to me.

I have been with Geico for a many years. However their practices have eroded.

I paid my insurance premium the end of last month. I received a cancellation letter in the mail (regular US mail) after the policy was cancelled. The company did not send me a certified mailing of cancellation to ensure its timely delivery where I would sign for it. Per the associate, they send it "certified on their end." The company states it has a two day grace period after cancellation to pay the premium, (however, I have also been told three and four days. Their policy regarding the "grace" period is not written in my Geico agreement. Per the reps. it is only in their policies. The consumer does not have the information. Geico now is refusing to renew my policy without an extensive down payment after being with them for nearly 12 years and having a top rated driving record which placed me on their highest pretier (per Geico previously). The proposed monthly premium has nearly doubled my previous policy premium. There is no sense of urgency to resolved this matter. I reached out to manager Andrea K[redacted] on yesterday. To date this matter has not been resolved and am without insurance.

Previously, (a few months ago), Geico modified my policy without my knowledge or permission regarding the deletion of a vehicle from my policy. I had requested a follow-up call after the investigation was conducted regarding a credit on my account for a vehicle which was removed. This never occured and months went by. I requested removal from paperless billing, yet the company continues to send my billing in this fashion and previously send it to an old outdated email address. I spoke to Andrea K[redacted] regarding these concerns previously. As a result of Geico's insurance negliance I am left without insurance. I find that they are in violation of Florida 690-175 (Vehicle Ins.), 690-176 (Requirement of Insurance), Chapter 627 pt. XVII Insurance company reporting requirement and Chapter 627 part XVI (Finance Insurance Premium, I have spoken with Brent and Nick (supervisor) regarding my recent concerns and received horrid service with no resolution. Please assist me with this matter. Regards, [redacted]Desired Settlement: Reinstatement of my auto insurance policy at the same high tier rating. I have been with Geico for a many years. No downpayment or a need to write a brand new policy. Return to the same policy that I had last week prior to cancellation.

Business

Response:

August 4, 2014Dear [redacted],We received your correspondence dated July 28, 2014, regarding the above-noted Consumer. We have not included any personal identifying information in our response as you requested.On June 23, 2014, we sent our Insured a bill for $142.37 due on July 6, 2014. We did not receive payment, and on July 7, 2014, we sent our Insured a notice via Post Office Receipt Secured mail that her policy would cancel if we did not receive payment by July 18, 2014. Please note that the certificate of mailing is provided to GEICO by the United States Post Office, to confirm our mailing of cancellation notices. As a courtesy, we generally provide a 3-day grace period, which would have allowed our Insured until 11:59 pm on July 20, 2014, to make her payment. We did not receive payment, and our Insured’s policy cancelled for non-payment of premium effective July 18, 2014.In regards to our Insured’s statement that we removed a vehicle from her policy without her permission, our records reflect that on March 15, 2014, our Insured requested we remove her 2005 Audi from her policy. We removed her vehicle effective March 16, 2014. On April 26, 2014, our Insured requested we backdate the removal of her 2005 Audi to February 28, 2014, since she no longer had possession of the vehicle as of that date. As an exception, we agreed to remove the vehicle effective February 28, 2014.On May 30, 2014, our Insured requested we mail her a statement confirming we credited her account for the removal of her vehicle. On May 31, 2014, we e-mailed her a statement which showed her policy was credited accordingly.On July 27, 2014, we reissued our Insured’s policy at a higher premium due to the lapse in coverage. Our Insured opted to lower her coverage limits to compensate for the higher premium. At that time, we removed our Insured from our paperless billing option and confirmed the e-mail address on file was correct.We spoke to our Insured on July 29, 2014, regarding her concerns. Although she claims we were in violation of Florida state statutes and laws, our records do not reflect any such violations. We mailed the required cancellation notice, and we did not make any unauthorized changes that were in violation of her contract. We trust this information is sufficient to allow you to close your file. Please call Jaime B[redacted], Customer Service Director, at [redacted], if you have any further questions.Sincerely,George *. R[redacted] Regional Vice President

Review: I purchased car insurance online paid for it with the website and it said making changes and changed the name on the policy without allowing me to review it. They will not change the name or refund my money.Desired Settlement: Return money to my account.

Business

Response:

October 25, 2013

Review: My fiance [redacted] and I purchased car insurance from Geico a month ago. She was offered a rate of $316 for 6 months, and agreed to it, paying it in full at the time. She disclosed to the agent she spoke with that she had a fiance living with her, told her that I was going to be driving the car, and gave her my driver's license information. However, we had wanted to purchase the insurance for the car only under [redacted]'s name, and Geico happily did that for us. We were very pleased about the rate she was offered, and therefore accepted it without researching further options with other companies.

We then called today, wanting to get me added to the policy. [redacted] spoke with an agent, who had my driver's information in the computer, confirming that they knew I was a household member. He then said that they would add me to the policy but would need to change the rate to $868 for 6 months. We decided that that wasn't worth it, but Geico informed us that there was no way to remove me from the policy at this point, or to recover the money that we had paid for the next five months and to look for other insurance options.

We spoke at length with the Geico representative and eventually his supervisor. We said that this was essentially a bait and switch: we had decided to buy 6 months worth of insurance at a certain rate from them, and they were changing the rate early into the policy without the information that we had presented to them having changed. They insinuated that we either did not tell them that there was a fiance living in the household, or else that we told them that I already had insurance, which they had marked on their forms. They said that it was impossible and against company policy that we would have been offered this policy without having been asked basic questions, questions which we were in fact asked and which we answered truthfully: the only error in their records was that I had insurance, which we were never asked.

In short: the first Geico representative we spoke with apparently broke company policy and made an error in offering us our rate. We paid that rate for six months, and when another representative was made aware of the error, he said that we would have to pay the new rate and that we had no recourse, for example, to get back the money we had already paid them under the offer they had given to us or to remove me from the insurance policy. Neither the representative with whom we spoke nor his supervisor were able to explain to us what sort of economic transaction we were undertaking, only that we would be billed for the $500 above what they had originally offered us.Desired Settlement: I believe a fair outcome would be for them to either reinstate our original policy or else to present us with the opportunity to discontinue our policy and therefore shop for rates with other companies.

Business

Response:

Please see attached PDF response.

Review: I had insurance through Geico for a few years at this time. (5/11/11). I called to make my payment. I also inquired about renters insurance. The agent in this call said the best way to handle this in make a partial payment of $50.00. in the mean time he will prepare a quote with both auto and renters. Which would save me money. I asked was he %100 sure it would not adversely affect my auto insurance by only paying half my payment. He said "not at all [redacted]". Two day latter I was hit by a hit and run driver and was rushed to [redacted], in [redacted], TN. In critical condition. I was knocked out for approx 3 days. My wife was in the room when I made to call to Gieco and heard everything. When I called to make a report I was called by shortly and told I was not covered because lack o full payment. I explained everything. But, no one was even slightly interested in helping, all were as rude as possible. And treated my like someone that was trying to run some scam. I asked, why would I make only a half payment. I said , if I was not going to pay, why would I pay any amount. They said none of their employees told me this (about renters and auto combination) and no record or recording existed either. So, I lost my car and was sued for medical bills.

Product_Or_Service: INSURANCE

Order_Number: 0

Account_Number: I will find it ,if nDesired Settlement: DesiredSettlementID: Replacement

Just give me the money for my 1980 [redacted] ( fully restored) I believe it was only covered by roughly $2500. But thats all they could insure it for. I understood. We have two children with Leukemia (ALL). which added insult to injury. I have no car to transfer them back and forth to. [redacted]. We had to call on friends and family at least 3 to 4 day a week for 7.5 years. I have never been so humiliated, hurt and felt so helpless in my life. I thought Geico was fir

Business

Response:

July 30, 2014

Review: On Monday July 21st I noticed my monthly payment for car insurance was returned for NSF which was presented to my bank on July 18th. This was an oversight for me and I immediately contacted Geico in effort to make payment arrangements. I was advised by a representative to "Not" make a payment because it was not showing in the company (Geico) system as returned. She claimed to be keeping me from being double billed and advised me to wait until Friday July 25th to make the payment. She also stated I would receive notification either by email or text if the payment is confirmed NSF. On Saturday July 26th after not receiving any correspondence from Geico I decided to just make my normal payment from another account just to be on the safe side. On Monday July 28th at 4:33 pm I received a text from Geico stating my payment was returned and to visit Geico.com or contact directly by phone. I contacted Geico by phone and spoke with supposedly a supervisor by the name of Adam who was of no help at all. His answer was its my banks fault I received two NSF charges ($70) and an additional return fee of $20 from Geico. I don't dispute the initial NSF for July 18th. However the debit on July 24th should have never taken place because I called in and was advised by there rep not to make the payment. This is a terrible billing practice and is unfair to the consumer. Now there is a $55 difference in what I should have paid this month for car insurance.Desired Settlement: Refund NSF fees and $20 Geico fee or deduction from next months bill for my insurance.

Business

Response:

August 1, 2014

Review: To Whom It May Concern:

On 9/9/13 I placed a call to GEICO regarding changes to my auto insurance policy as I was recently married on 9/6/13. I spoke at length with a gentleman there regarding keeping my current insurance and adding my spouse or transferring my business to the [redacted] where my husband has a policy. The gentleman at GEICO informed me that they would check to see if they could provide homeowners along with auto and get back to me. Upon the return call I was informed by this same individual that they do not offer homeowners on log homes so therefore I needed to make a decision no later than 12 o'clock midnight on 9/10/13 as my auto coverage would cease. I talked with my husband and found that both of our vehicles and home would be more cost effective to combine the three with the [redacted], my husband also stated to please call this gentleman back and make positively certain that my insurance would be in effect until 9/10/13 and not cancelled as renewal date was 9/7/13. I called GEICO back and spoke with an individual who confirmed that everything would be fine but that I would need to go online and submit the proper paperwork to cancel my policy effective 9/10/13 at midnight. I did as I was told and there is no way that I would allow a lapse in coverage. Since then I have received a letter from the DMV that I had no insurance from 9/7/13 to 9/10/13 which is not true according to what I was told. I immediately phoned GEICO on 10/19/13 for assistance concerning this matter and was informed that they would not accept any responsibility for this error on their part and they could not help me and suggested that I pay the fine of $50.00. As you can surmise from my letter I am a very conscientious person and would never operate my vehicle or any vehicle that was not fully insured. I have been with GEICO for many years and I am appalled that they have treated me in this fashion over merely three days of coverage of which the negligence is on their part not mine. I clearly was instructed by them to proceed in the manner of which I did and now I am to be penalized with a $50.00 fine from the DMV due to their error. Any assistance in this matter would be greatly appreciated as they haven given me a deadline at the DMV of 10/27/13. My new name is [redacted] but when the insurance was in effect with GEICO it was [redacted] so there would not be any confusion. Thank you for your time and I await your response, as my time is limited.

Sincerely,

###-###-#### (home)Desired Settlement: My desire would be for GEICO to admit their error and make the proper call to the North Carolina Division of Motor Vehicles so that the $50.00 penalty would be removed from my records.

Business

Response:

October 28, 2013

Review: Policy No.

[redacted] is a policy that was set up over the phone with Geico. Calling Geico they refused to cancel that policy. I escalated past the agent to the supervisor who acknowledged that the policy is binding over the phone. When asked why it isnt binding to drop coverage over the phone? The supervisor said it was just policy.Desired Settlement: The system is used to trap customers. It is not a good business practice. It cant be ok to set up a policy on the phone, but not to cancel it on the phone. This is a deceptive practice and should be stopped.

Business

Response:

April 22, 2014Dear [redacted]:We are in receipt of **. [redacted]’s complaint dated April 14, 2014.On April 14,2014, we received a call from **. [redacted]s requesting to cancel the Umbrella policy. We informed **. [redacted] a written request is required by his policy contract.11. Termination (a) CancellationYou may cancel this policy by returning it to us or by notifying us in writing of the cancellation. Any return premium will be calculated on a pro-rate basis.An Umbrella policy is unique in providing $1,000,000 liability coverage; therefore, it is imperative a written request to cancel is on file due to the possibility of pending claims and this procedure.Although we followed procedure, we should have made the exception to cancel the Umbrella policy knowing **. [redacted]s was upset. We attempted to reach **. [redacted]s via phone and left messages informing him we made the exception to cancel his Umbrella policy effective April 15, 2014, date after his initial call and mailed the enclosed letter confirming his cancellation request.Please let me know if you have any further questions or concerns.

Review: I was quoted a rate of $184 dollars a month. This rate was agreed upon and after 2 months of coverage the company raised my premium to $811 a month. I provided necessary documentation they requested to have my rate return to the original agreed upon premium and I was denied.Desired Settlement: I would like my insurance premium to be adjusted to the original quoted rate.

Business

Response:

October 1, 2013

Revdex.com of Metropolitan Washington DC and Eastern Pennsylvania

1411 K St NW, 1001 Floor Washington, DC 20005-3404

Attention: [redacted]

Re: [redacted] Case ID: [redacted] Policy#: [redacted]

Dear **. [redacted]:

This will acknowledge receipt of your September 27, 2013 inquiry regarding the above referenced private passenger automobile insurance policy.

On August 8, 2013 the above policy was established in the name of [redacted] to insure a 1994 Honda. The policy was rated for [redacted]. Enclosed is a copy of the policy declarations dated August 8, 2013.

On September 20, 2013, after a routine review was conducted by our Underwriting Department, the rated location for the above policy was adjusted to reflect a [redacted] address since our findings indicate that the said location is the primary place of residence for the insured, and is therefore the primary location of our risk exposure. A letter as well as revised policy paperwork was also sent to the mailing address on file notifying the insured of the reasons for the change. Enclosed are copies of the letter and the revised policy declarations dated September 21, 2013.

To date, GEICO has not received sufficient documentation from the insured to unequivocally prove that the [redacted] location is currently his primary place of residence. If our company’s findings are inaccurate, our underwriters will review any supporting documentation that the insured is willing to provide as proof (pay stub, bank/credit card statements etc.) that he is currently residing at the [redacted] location. The insured can contact the underwriter listed on the enclosed letter to discuss any additional documents that would be considered as acceptable proof of residence.

Since there appears to be no valid complaint against GEICO, we ask that this be removed from our record. If you require further assistance with this matter, please contact the undersigned at ###-###-####.

Consumer

Response:

[To assist us in bringing this matter to a close, you must give us a reason why you are rejecting the response. If no reason is received your complaint will be closed Administratively Resolved]

Review: [redacted]

I am rejecting this response because: The information supplied is false. my residence is [redacted]. I have sent documents proving my residence. we agreed upon a premium of $180. A premium for any more is excessive to the consumer and should be illegal. Geico should honor the agreed upon rate and stop ripping off the public.

Regards,

Business

Response:

October 4, 2013

Revdex.com of Metropolitan Washington DC and Eastern Pennsylvania

1411 K St. NW, 10th Floor Washington, DC 20005-3404

Attention: [redacted]

Re: [redacted] Case ID: [redacted] Policy#: [redacted]

Dear **. [redacted]:

This will acknowledge receipt of your October 3, 2013 follow up inquiry regarding the above referenced private passenger automobile insurance policy.

Please be advised that GEICO’s position on the matter remains unchanged. As stated previously, to date our company has not received sufficient documentation from the insured to unequivocally prove that the [redacted] location is currently his primary place of residence. If our company’s findings are inaccurate, our underwriters will review any supporting documentation that the insured is willing to provide as proof (pay stub, bank/credit card statements etc.) that he is currently residing at the [redacted] location. The insured can contact the underwriter listed on the previously enclosed letter to discuss any additional documents that would be considered as acceptable proof of residence.

Since there appears to be no valid complaint against GEICO, we ask that this be removed from our record.

If you require further assistance with this matter, please contact the undersigned at ###-###-####.

Consumer

Response:

[To assist us in bringing this matter to a close, you must give us a reason why you are rejecting the response. If no reason is received your complaint will be closed Administratively Resolved]

Review: [redacted]

I am rejecting this response because: I have sent pay stubbs and bank and tax statements with acceptable proof. I have the proof as well as Geico.

Regards,

Review: Company authorized a payment of $549.96 out of my checking account because a payment was made by another policy holder and the account number was entered incorrectly. I have never authorized this company to deduct any monies from my account and have not saved any account information online. The company is refusing to reimburse my funds because they advised they have no way. I previously contacted the company on the phone with my financial insituition and they advise the company that they can complete a stop authorization to satisfy my request. This company is refusing to return my money that I have never authorized them to take from my accountDesired Settlement: I am requesting that the company offer a full refund and delete all my saved profiled information, so that they can use again without my authorization

Business

Response:

Please find our response letter for complaint #[redacted].

September 20, 2013

Dear **. [redacted],

We received your correspondence dated September 8, 2013, regarding the above-noted Consumer.

On August 29, 2013, **. [redacted] entered checking account information to submit an online payment of $549.96 at geico.com. On September 4, 2013, that payment was returned due to an invalid account number. We recognized that the invalid account number **. [redacted] entered only differed by one digit from the valid account number **. [redacted] previously used on his policy. Assuming **. [redacted] made a keying error in his payment request, we submitted the payment with **. [redacted]’s correct account information on September 5, 2013.

On September 6, 2013, **. [redacted] disputed the payment, and advised us that his bank account we used on September 5, 2013, was not the account he intended to use for this payment. **. [redacted] advised us that the account number entered online on September 4, 2013, belonged to his sister, and requested that we refund the $549.96 taken from his bank account. At that time, we advised **. [redacted] that we could not refund his payment until the payment cleared his account.

On September 10, 2013, we spoke to **. [redacted] regarding this matter. At that time, we verified with **. [redacted]’s bank that the $549.96 payment would not clear due to insufficient funds, but that **. [redacted] incurred one $36.00 bank fee for the returned check.

We agreed to compensate **. [redacted] for the bank fee, and we mailed **. [redacted] a check for $36.00.

As a standard practice, we attempt to automatically resubmit all returned check payments.

On September 11, 2013, **. [redacted] advised us that our payment resubmission cleared his account, and that he would incur additional insufficient funds fees. **. [redacted] again asked us to refund him the $549.96 payment and advised that he had obtained other insurance on August 28, 2013. We subsequently confirmed the payment did not clear **. [redacted]’s account. We did agree to compensate **. [redacted] for the additional bank fees, and we mailed **. [redacted] an additional check for $72.00 on September 18, 2013.

We trust this information is sufficient to allow you to close your file. Please call [redacted], Customer Service Director, at ###-###-####, if you have any further questions.

Very truly yours,