Nationwide

My car was not damaged until a nationwide policy holder hit my car. "Pre accident condition" is not a repaired door and quarter panel being that prior to the accident I had a BRAND NEW DOOR THAT HAD NOR NEEDED ANY REPAIRS!!!! I don't understand what's the issue with this nationwide is 100% liable in this accident. My car that I paid for that I OWN was not damaged until the accident and I understand that things happen, but the solution to this issue is to REPLACE THE PARTS OF MY CAR THAT YOUR POLICY HOLDER HIT! REPLACE NOT REPAIR! If you guys can provide me a LAW where it states that you DO NOT need to replace my parts in my vehicle then i'll gladly go get it repaired, but until then the "pre-accident condition" of my car was a BRAND NEW DOOR AND QUARTER PANEL STRAIGHT OUT OF THE DEALERSHIP. 
P.S There are no new damages on my car you guys are free to come inspect. 
Regards, [redacted]

[redacted]
 
[redacted]
 
[redacted]...

[redacted] 
Thank you for the opportunity to respond to the Revdex.com regarding policy
number ##### for [redacted] and to address her concerns about the policy.
On 7/28/2014, [redacted] purchased a six month insurance policy with a bill plan of 20%
down and 5 installments with an Electronic Funds Transfer (EFT) auto draft.
On 7/28/2014, [redacted] contacted our service center and advised that her son, [redacted], should not be excluded from her policy. [redacted] was advised that he would need to be rated or excluded on the policy per our underwriting guidelines. As [redacted]’s policy was purchased the same day and unable to be changed, per her request a pending endorsement was submitted to our underwriting department to change [redacted] to a rated driver effective 7/28/2014. On 8/5/2014, [redacted] was changed to a rated driver effective 7/28/2014 and a Motor Vehicle Report (MVR) was ordered. On 8/12/2014 a valid MVR for [redacted] was received and processed and the endorsement was completed showing an increase in premium in the amount of $648.20 for the term of the policy. On 8/13/2014 a declarations page and a revised EFT payment schedule were sent to [redacted] advising of the increase in premium. On 8/14/2014, [redacted]’s policy was canceled per her signed request effective 8/15/2014.
[redacted] was not advised of an increase in premium when she contacted our service center on 7/28/2014 for the change of [redacted] to rated as the change was not able to be processed at that time, but she was provided in writing a declarations page and payment schedule showing the increase.
As of this letter $35.23 remains due for coverage for which payment has not been received. 
I trust that I have addressed the issues within [redacted]’s complaint. If I can be of further assistance, please contact me at ###-###-####.
Sincerely,
[redacted]

Attached is a copy of my April 4, 2015 statement from Nationwide stating 1 mo payment April 4 - May 4 is $63.80 page 1 
It cleared my bank on 4-2-15 so it was not late Page 2 attached.
Page 3 is part of your letter stating they cancelled on April 28, 2015 Insurance was paid through May 4, 2015 so why do I woe according to Nationwide $32.50. There is no reason for fees.

Dear [redacted]           
 
Thank
you for the opportunity to respond to [redacted]’s concerns.  I have reviewed the concerns and the accident
involved in this complaint along with the Nationwide Claim. Please accept this
letter as a summary of our actions taken and resolution of the concern. 
This
concern stems from a personal auto accident on December 6, 2014, involving our
insured, [redacted]  The claim was
reported to us on December 19.  On
December 24, 2014, we completed our initial contact with our insured and [redacted] and obtain the facts of loss.  Both
parties were guided to park in a special parking lot for cruise
passengers.  Upon returning from cruise
[redacted] noticed damage to his vehicle which was allegedly cause by our
insured vehicle. 
We
have completed our investigation and determine that our insured did not cause
damage to [redacted]’s vehicle, and there was no damage to our insured
vehicle.  We completed an appraisal only
for [redacted] vehicle which verified that there was no paint transfer from our
insured vehicle, and only a dent was noticed. 
We
communicated verbally and in writing to [redacted], that we will not be
accepting liability for his damages as there was no damage to our insured
vehicle and no evidence to support we caused the damages to his vehicle. We
have also spoken with his daughter and explained our final liability decision
and that will not be taking care of his damages, advising of the option to file
a claim with their insurance carrier. 
On
January 23, 2014, we spoke with [redacted]’s insurance carrier [redacted] and
explained our liability decisions and claim status at that time. They also
agreed with our liability decision after reviewing the photos of [redacted]’s
vehicle. 
We
hope we have answered the consumer’s questions or concerns that were brought
forward with this concern and if there is any additional information needed or
clarification on any concerns, please let me know.
Sincerely,
 
 
[redacted]
Nationwide
Property & Casualty Insurance Company
###-###-####
[redacted]

I am writing in response to the complaint you filed with the Revdex.com, regarding payments made to
your late husband's Visa credit card with Nationwide Bank.
First, please allow me to once again offer my most sincere sympathy on the loss of your husband. I am...

terriblysorry for the complications and frustrations that arose as the result of two payments being made to Mr. [redacted]'sVisa account after his passing. Prior to his passing, payments to the account had been made via automaticpayments from your joint checking account, as requested by your husband. As the Visa credit card was held inyour husband's name, upon his passing, you were no longer responsible to make those payments. Once younotified Nationwide Bank of his death, and provided supporting documentation, the automatic payments shouldhave stopped immediately. You did contact Nationwide Bank, and provided the requested documentationpromptly.There were two payments made to the Visa account, one dated January 14, 2016 in the amount of $153.00, andone dated February 14, 2016 in the amount of $164.00. A check has been mailed to you, at the address shownabove, for a total of $317.00, representing a refund of those two payments.
I am enclosing in this letter. another check in the amount of $72.00. This check wilt refund the two non-sufficientfunds fees that were charged, to your checking as the result of the two payments being pulled from the account inerror.
Once again. Mrs. [redacted], I extend my sincere sympathy and apologies. Our Lack of prompt response to yoursituation was not at all acceptable. I appreciate the opportunity to speak with you and to take what steps I can tocorrect the situation.
Please feel free to reach out to me if I may be of further assistance.

[redacted]
[redacted]
[redacted]
[redacted]
[redacted] 
Our investigation has been concluded,...

statements
taken, photos and estimates completed and have concluded that [redacted]'s daughter is 50% responsible for this multiple car accident. [redacted] likely wants us to pay 100% because she does not have collision
coverage.  Our liability decision stands.

RE: Second response to
the Ms. [redacted] complaint to the Revdex.com on 2/15/2016
#[redacted]
Dear Ms. [redacted]:
My
response to your complaint is the truth and was nothing more than stating what
took place. Our associates were not falsely representing our services. This all
took several days and many conversations about this work, about our discounts,
and explanation after explanation from different conversation with different
associates saying the same thing to you. We even had a phone conversation with
someone representing themselves as your husband that was very hostile to
everyone here. That surely did not help matters. I will apologize to you for
what you felt we let you down in meeting your expectation of our services.
All
the different conversations everyone from here had with you were straightforward
and not trying to pressure you into a decision. We quoted several options trying
to tailor each to your needs. We responded to each of your questions in a
timely manner and gave you the multiple quotations from all the conversations.
Our
Service Maintenance Agreement is a significant cost saving when compared to our
regular service rates. In your case it saved you over three hundred dollars if
you were to be charged our regular service rates for the two service calls. Your
Maintenance Agreement saved you money. You also received priority service and we
worked with you to make these calls fit your schedule by arriving on our first
call in the morning.
I
was told you were selling this condo and you were expressing how upset you were
to have to invest in this repair before selling it. That is very understandable
and we were trying to lower that cost to you with every quote. We even talked
to our supplier and asked them for help to lower the cost on the equipment.
That effort was then passed on in one of our quotes to you. It was apparent
from all the conversation about this work it was about the price. The request
for transparency with our pricing was about you wanting a lower selling price.
You never agreed to our work nor signed anything to that affect.
My
offer for a concession in your situation is still on the table to resolve this.
You have already used over half of your Service Maintenance Agreement. You used
two of the two service calls under the Maintenance Agreement. The resolution offer
of $132.50 paid to you is half of what you paid us over eight months ago for
the one year Maintenance Agreement. We will issue a check to you for this
amount once this is settled.
Our
customer’s patronage is important to us, and again we sincerely apologize for not
meeting your expectation of quality service.
Thank
you again for bringing these matters to my attention.
Sincerely,
Mark Favret
President

We have been with Veterinary Pet Insurance through Nationwide for 5 years now. We recently needed to file a insurance claim for possible tumors and skin/hair loss. My pet had a previous allergy to chicken and required antibiotics for his new allergy discovered as a puppy years ago. Now, 4.5 years later, he developed a unknown skin rash and tumors and had to see a specialized pet dermatologist for assessment. After a Specialist Doctors Visit, Prescription Food, Skin Biopsy, and Overall Pet Assessment was completed, I submitted all receipts and discharge paper work to VPI (Veterinary Pet Insurance) for reimbursement. VPI sent us a letter for each charge saying that because he had a allergy as a puppy to a food, all skin rashes in the future are blanketed under a food allergy. Even though this has been proved to be far from a simple food allergy. VPI gave us only one option which was to resubmit all paper for any vet visit over the last 5 years, fill out claim forms for approximately 15 vet visits, and pay out of pocket for faxing the submissions just for the possibility of reimbursement. This is after the supervisor informed us we do not meet their criteria for reimbursement.

The photos provided by Oscar at Nationwide are not close ups, therefore does not show the condition of the bumper. I have attached current photo’s of the bumper that shows alignment issues (the bumper does not fit which is clear to see when you look at the vehicle in person) I’m not sure if Nationwide has actually looked at the vehicle or being honest in this report as you can clearly see the issue. I’ve also attached a  picture of the poor welding job done by [redacted] Auto Body during the first attempted repair in 2015 which [redacted] Auto Body finally corrected in 2016 after my complain to Revdex.com after exhausting efforts made with Nationwide to address.
The report provided by Oscar is not the inspection to the customer. We have not received the report or bill at this time and will make further contact once we have an update from Toyota Financial.

I am responding to a Better...

Business Bureau of Columbus Ohio complaint received on October 21, 2015.  The customer filed the following complaint: Re: Case # [redacted]
The date of loss for this claim was April 23, 2015.  The Customer is a third party to the claim reported.  Georgia statutes require all insurance companies to conduct reviews for the possibility of diminished value for all 1st party losses and provide notice of same. The Customer has a policy with another company therefore the statue would not apply on this policy. Third party reviews are conducted upon request.  The Customer requested a review for diminished value on June 12, 2015.  Nationwide contacted her immediately and advised her by phone and in writing that we would need proof of ownership and all information regarding any prior claims to her vehicle in order to proceed with the claim.  The Customer did not respond to our requests until September 9, 2015 when proof of ownership was received in our office.  Nationwide asked for the prior loss information regarding losses from 03/29/2015 and 03/30/2015 and made an offer of $555.63 based on the information provided and discovered.  The Customer advised that she would be hiring an attorney after the offer was provided to her.  Nationwide inquired about her representation so we could discuss this matter with her attorney and The Customer ended the call. 
At no time did Nationwide ask for any tax documents or anything other than proof of ownership and prior claims information.    
Nationwide will continue to attempt to reach an agreement for the diminished value and continue to work towards resolution. 
A new adjuster has been assigned to this customer and the claim has been resolved.
Sincerely Yours,
Angie T[redacted]
###-###-####

Arial, sans-serif; font-size: 10pt;">This letter is in response to your inquiry dated
October 27, 2015 regarding the above referenced Nationwide auto policy for
[redacted]. This policy is a semi-annual policy that incepted on June 30,
2015, insuring a 2013 Hyundai.
The following events transpired on the policy:
·        
The
Automobile policy was added to the billing account and $376.90 was charged for
premium.
·        
On
July 7, 2015, a bill was issued for $75.38 due July 30, 2015.
·        
On
July 31, 2015, Nationwide received a payment of $75.38. The new balance equaled
$301.52.
·        
On
August 6, 2015, a bill was issued for $75.38 due August 30, 2015.
·        
On
September 1, 2015, Nationwide received a payment of $75.38. The new balance
equaled $226.14. On the same day, the Home and Car Discount was removed from
the policy back to the inception date since a qualifying Homeowner policy was
not found. This change increased the premium by $55.70 making the new total
balance equal $281.84.
·        
On
September 4, 2015, a bill was issued for $93.95 due September 30, 2015.
·        
On
September 9, 2015, the Uninsured Motorists and Underinsured Motorists (UM/UIM) coverages
were defaulted to Stacked coverage, and theTort Coverage defaulted to Full Tort
because our records showed the mandatory UM/UIM and Tort Coverage Option Form(s)
that were sent to the insured at the inception of the policy were not signed
and returned to Nationwide. The change resulted in an increase in premium for
the amount of $108.20.
·        
On
September 25, 2015, the UM/UIM coverage was changed to Non-Stacked coverage
limits and the Tort option was changed to Limited Tort coverage effective
September 15, 2015, the date we received the signed coverage forms. The change
decreased the premium by $20.30.
·        
On
October 22, 2015, upon further review of the policy, we have found that the insured’s
 agent faxed the documents that Mr.
[redacted] signed on July 2, 2015, however, the transmission had failed. Nationwide
has corrected the policy to reflect Non-Stacked UM/UIM coverage and Limited
Tort coverage effective June 30, 2015, back to the original
inception date of the policy. This adjustment decreased the premium an
additional amount of $87.90.
·        
On November 4, 2015 the policy cancelled by request of the insured
effective October 28, 2015, and the amount of $149.70 was credited to the
billing account for unearned premium leaving a collection balance of
$44.95. 
Enclosed is a breakdown of the premium and
payment history for your review.
We apologize for any inconvenience
that Mr. [redacted] has experienced, and are sorry to have lost him as a
customer. We hope that he will reconsider Nationwide in the future.
If
you require further assistance, please contact our [redacted], Cathy D[redacted], at ###-###-#### or by email at [redacted]
Sincerely,
Renee C[redacted]
[redacted]
Member Solutions –
Shared Services
Customer Resolution and
Response
Nationwide
###-###-####

I am in receipt of your email letter to Nationwide dated January 20, 2016.
I am providing you with the following information:
• Revised Declarations
• Identification Card
I reviewed the call that transpired on November 28, 2015. The member called to remove the Comprehensive...

and Collision Coverages from her 2003 Chevy Impala and added a 2015 Nissan Altima to the policy effective November 28, 2015. Unfortunately, the changes did not process and the policy was not updated accordingly.
On January 27, 2016, the Comprehensive and Collision Coverages were removed from the 2003 Chevy Impala and the 2015 Nissan Altima was added to policy [redacted] effective November 28, 2015. The change increased the term premium by $299.50. An email has been sent to the member, at [redacted] indicating that policy documents are available online for viewing. The policy documents include a Revised Declarations and Identification Cards.
The next payment, of $209.54, is due on February 14, 2016.
Nationwide is required by the Department of Insurance to charge premium for coverage provided; therefore, we are unable to write off the premium increase caused by the addition of the 2015 Nissan Altima. If there had been an accident prior to the addition of the vehicle in question, Nationwide would have located the call, added the vehicle effective November 28, 2015, and handled the claim accordingly.
If you have any additional questions, please contact Susan H[redacted], .
Sincerely,

Christina L[redacted] ###########

0in 0pt 0.5in;">The
policy for [redacted] was renewed on February 12, 2016 for $1,174.62.  The previous premium on her policy was
$786.12.  There was a general rate
increase that was included in the renewal premium. The member increased the
dwelling coverage by about $10,000. Due to the recent claim, the “Claims Free
Discount” was also removed from the policy. All of these factors attributed to the
increased renewal premium.
Please
accept my apologies if you feel that any representative treated you in a manner
that was less then professional.
Please
do not hesitate to contact me, should you have any additional questions.
Sincerely,
Carol
G[redacted]
[redacted]

To Whom It May Concern:
Thank you for your recent inquiry regarding a Revdex.com complaint received from [redacted]. As Material Damage Claims Manager I have reviewed this claim file and would like to address the issues involving this Texas claim.
Initially it should be noted that as is...

our insured, Mr. [redacted] is a resident of Texas. Additionally, the motor vehicle accident that gave rise to the claim of Mr. [redacted] occurred in Grapevine, Texas. At the time of the accident, Mr. [redacted] was operating a motor vehicle he leased from [redacted] Leasing of Dallas, Texas. The Colonial County Mutual Insurance Company (Nationwide) paid for the repairs to the leased vehicle. The parties have not been able to resolve any diminished value claim for the leased vehicle.Nationwide acknowledges that the leased vehicle likely suffered diminished value as a result of the aforesaid accident. While Mr. [redacted] is not the owner of the leased vehicle, [redacted] Leasing granted him permission to resolve any diminished value claim. Based upon our investigation into the diminished value claim the leased vehicle suffered diminished value in the amount of $618.00. On August 3, 2015 Nationwide issued payment in the amount of $618.00 for undisputed diminished value to [redacted] Leasing which it accepted. Mr. [redacted] disputes this amount. Mr. [redacted] has since traded the vehicle and is seeking the variance from the paid trade in amount he negotiated. His settlement demand is an additional $2000.00.
Under Texas law the burden of proving any diminution of value to the leased value rests with its owner, [redacted] Leasing, or in this case, Mr. [redacted] because of the assignment [redacted] Leasing gave to him. It is the position of Nationwide that Mr. [redacted] has not satisfactorily supported his demand for additional compensation through proper documentation. Because he is not the owner of the vehicle and is attempting to negotiate on behalf of the owner of the vehicle, he is unable to provide us with the necessary documentation only an owner can provide. Unless and until Mr. [redacted] provides sufficient documentation to support his claim for additional compensation, it is Nationwide’s position that he has not sustained his burden of proof. Consequently, at this time Nationwide maintains that it has paid the proper compensation for the diminished value of the vehicle.
If you have any additional questions please do not hesitate to contact me.

We disagree with Nationwide’s assessment of liabilities, so is our insurance company ([redacted]). Our insurance company determined Nationwide’s client is 100% responsible. 
We are going to use our insurance to repair the car and [redacted] will try to recover payment from Nationwide.  Contacting Revdex.com is a step that we hope will make Nationwide be more objective in their assessment. Unfortunately Nationwide is intransigent.
 
This is not words against words. We have facts below:
 
1.      [redacted] admitted his fault by offering to pay me cash if the damage is not too great.
 
2.      Nationwide representative confirmed that [redacted] said he did not see my car and he backed into my car.
 
3.      I called the police (who did not show up) at the scene. The police suggested that the person who was responsible for the accident needs to give his insurance information, driver’s license, license plate and phone number to the other person who was not responsible for the accident. So I took a photo of [redacted]’s insurance card, while [redacted] did not ask for mine at all.  This provides further evidence of liability of Nationwide’s insured client.
 
4.      On March 18th at 11:48am Pacific Time, a Nationwide representative called me (the number he called from is ###-###-####). He said that he reviewed the case and felt assigning me 30% of liability is too high.
 
Based on the facts, Nationwide’s client is 100% responsible for this accident. I am contacting Revdex.com to dispute the liability, but also report the Nationwide’s dishonesty in this case.
 
We also filed the complaint against Nationwide to [redacted] State Office of the Insurance Commissioner (OIC) about their totally dishonest and unprofessional way of conducting business. To avoid compensating our damage in the accident, Nationwide changed their stories several times.
 
In our complaints to OIC, we urged OIC to protect the interest of [redacted] State residents, and put pressure on Nationwide to correct its dishonest behavior. We also urged OIC to examine if Nationawide complies with [redacted] State’s laws and regulations, and to examine if Nationwide and its employees have a pattern of dishonest and unethical behavior and prosecute them to the fullest extent of the laws of [redacted] State.
 
Regards,
 
[redacted]

Nationwide has falsified the claim that [redacted] even exists! I will be filing a suit for this liable! Under no circumstances does this person even exist!
I cannot believe the audacity of this company! If you search the entire world data base this person is non-existent. Most importantly they falsified my multi-line discount.
Seems to be a company of deceivers and money grubbers. Thank you Nationwide! Always at your Back!

This letter is in reply to a concern filed by [redacted] regarding the automobile policy of[redacted]. The policy last renewed effective June 24, 2016. The policy has been activewithout lapse from that date to present. Our records indicate that Nationwide is in receipt of...

thePower of Attorney documentation provided for [redacted], however, we have yet to receivedocumentation for the sale of the vehicle. This is why we have been unable to complete thecancellation of this policy.Nationwide will backdate the cancellation of the policy when the documentation showing the sale ofthe vehicle including the sale date is received. Please fax documentation to me directly at ###-###-####and please feel free to contact me if additional information is needed.
Sincerely,
Colleen F[redacted], Senior AnalystMember Solutions – Shared ServicesCustomer Resolution & ResponseNationwide###-###-####, Ext. [redacted][email protected]

Dear [redacted]
This letter is in response to our second follow up letter that was sent on March 6, 2015.
We are aware of [redacted]’s concerns and have completed a thorough investigation and are confident that our liability decision is accurate. We have taken the necessary steps to evaluate this claim and the damages to both parties’ vehicles. With regard to [redacted]’s concerns of physical damage to his auto, the picture reveals damage to his vehicle which appears to be from an impact of some kind but is not consistent with damage from a vehicle. Nor does the picture show any paint transfer that would be consistent with damage from a red car door.
Furthermore, we have determined, based on the evidence submitted, that our insured vehicle did not cause damage to [redacted] vehicle. There is no damage to our insured vehicle and no paint chips that would suggest impact with another object or vehicle.
[redacted] took his vehicle to one of our preferred shops for an estimate.  This was not an authorization for repairs. At no point in time did we advise [redacted] that we would extend coverage for his damages.  Our investigation was ongoing and no liability decision had been made on this file.
[redacted] does have the option to seek repairs through his insurance carrier Geico. We encourage [redacted] to contact claim adjuster, [redacted], with his insurance company [redacted], at ###-###-####. 
We hope we have answered the consumer’s questions or concerns that were brought forward with this concern and if there is any additional information needed or clarification on any concerns, please let me know.
[redacted]
Nationwide Property & Casualty
###-###-####
[redacted]

Nationwide insurance deliberately disregarded having my payment information on file, resulting in them attempting to charge me an additional fee per month for continuing to have insurance through their company.
I was a Nationwide Auto Insurance customer 2013 to 2016. On Jan 31 2016, I received a cancellation notice stating that my credit card had not been accepted and my policy will be cancelled by the end of Feb if I didn't take action. I had been paying them using this card for quite some time, the bank had cancelled the card due to suspicious activity and had sent me a new card. The letter told me to go online or call to update my credit card information to ensure my policy will not be cancelled. On Feb 10, I went online and updated my credit card information.
Later in Feb, I received a letter that my policy had been cancelled.
I called Nationwide to resolve the issue. They said "You entered your updated credit card information but you did not specifically tell the website to charge that credit card for the outstanding bill. Your policy has been cancelled. If you would like to reinstate your insurance, you will first have to pay the outstanding bill, would you like me to charge the credit card we have on file?" I could not believe the audacity of this statement. I said "Yes" and on Feb 28, without giving them any additional information, they charged my card (which they had on file) for $19.71.
I told them I would like to continue with the process to reinstate my insurance. They had me go through all the information needed for a completely new account and told me the price. This price was higher than my previous insurance but was the exact same coverage. I asked why this is. They told me that "rates are variable and change often. Additionally, since you had a lapse in your insurance, we have to charge you an additional fee every month for the first six months during the new policy period." Again, I could not believe that they could knowingly say this.
I asked the person I was talking if this fee could be waived considering the circumstances outlined above. She said she would talk with the underwriters and return a call on the following day. I was never contacted again.
They had my credit card information on file, they were able to charge that credit card without issue, they cancelled my insurance anyway, then asked me to pay more money than I had been paying to reinstate the insurance.
Additionally, I am having to pay this fee to another insurance company due to having a "lapse in insurance" and I have received a fine from the state of NC for having a "lapse in insurance". These are terribly business practices. They allow a customer's account to be terminated without having a competent human look over the situation and realize that all requests had been satisfied. They provided misleading information stating that the customer could "update their payment information online" to resolve the issue.

I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID #####, and have complied with the response for the coverage brochures from [redacted], however, with that being said, this complaint is about what Allied/Nationwide offered as coverage.
Sincerely,
[redacted]