Source Adult Video

August 25, 2016 Ms. [redacted]Complaint ID #: [redacted] Dear Ms [redacted]: I am responding to your submission regarding July 14, 2016, rental policy claim. Our records confirm that you filed an inquiry with the South Carolina Department of Insurance (DOI).  We provided...

a substantive response to the DOI on July 29, 2016.   We appreciate you allowing us to reply to you.   Sincerely, [redacted]

Complaint: [redacted]
I am rejecting this response because:
I WAS NOT AT FAULT YOUR INSURED WAS, I AM NOT ACCEPTING ANY RESPONSIBLITY FOR SOMEONE PASSING ME IN A RESIDENTIAL NEIGHBORHOOD!
Regards,
[redacted]

May 3, 2017 Mrs. [redacted]Complaint ID #: [redacted] Dear Mrs. [redacted]: I am responding to your submission regarding a March 28, 2017, automobile claim. Our records confirm that you filed an inquiry with the Mississippi (MS) Department of Insurance (DOI). We responded to the...

MS DOI on May 1, 2017. Thank you for the opportunity to reply. Sincerely, [redacted]

February 24, 2017
Mrs. [redacted] Complaint ID #: [redacted]
Dear Mrs. [redacted]
I am responding to your second submission regarding auto insurance coverage for your 1996 Honda Civic.
We responded to your complaint on February 21, 2017. While we recognize that you disagree, we feel confident that the correct decision has been made. No new information has been presented that would warrant a change in our position.
We appreciate the opportunity to review your concerns again; however, we consider this matter closed.
Sincerely,
[redacted]

February 22, 2018   Mr. [redacted] Complaint ID #: [redacted]   Dear Mr. [redacted]:   I am responding to your submission regarding your homeowners claim.   Thank you for speaking with [redacted], of our staff, who completed a thorough review of the claim and confirmed the...

appropriate payment was issued, based on the policy contract.  Should you have any further questions, Mr. [redacted] remains available to assist you.   We appreciate you allowing us to reply to you.    Sincerely,  
[redacted]

Revdex.com:
I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID [redacted], and find that this resolution is satisfactory to me.
Regards,
[redacted]

October 3, 2016
Mr. [redacted]
Complaint ID #: [redacted]
Dear Mr. [redacted]:
I am responding to your submission regarding your request for a quote for an automobile insurance policy. Our employees are expected to be courteous and informative and to handle matters in a timely manner; I...

regret that was not your experience.
I hope you found your conversation with [redacted], of our staff, responsive to your concerns. As a courtesy, she agreed to accept a 50 percent down-payment and set up an automatic payment plan; however, you did not accept the accommodation. As she advised, the policy premium is subject to change which may change the down-payment requirement. If you have additional questions, Ms. [redacted] remains available to assist you.
Thank you for allowing us to reply to you.
Sincerely,
[redacted]

Revdex.com:
I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID [redacted], and find that this resolution is satisfactory to me.
Good Evening,I received my check in the mail today.  Thanks for your the excellent service your company provides as always! I...

consider this issue closed. I couldn't figure out how to send this message through the complain ID system, so that's why I'm using an email.Have a Nice Day,[redacted]

Complaint: [redacted]
I am rejecting this response because:  because you are lying.  One of your representative called me the same day and fixed the situation. As I had control over my account and my money not my 21 year old child. Your original representatives were Completely Wrong in their information and the way that they handled things. Just because you strongly disagree does not mean it did not happen. I am going to keep the information out there because I am sure I am not the only one persons who lost control over there own account. You know better and should do better. PERIOD
Regards,
[redacted]

February 9, 2018   Sergeant [redacted] USA (Ret.) Complaint ID #: [redacted]   Dear Sergeant [redacted]:   I am responding to your submission regarding a refund from your external bank.  We regret any frustration you may have experienced.   Thank you for speaking with [redacted]...

[redacted], of our staff, who confirmed your external bank sent the funds and advised that once they are received, we can send you the funds directly or credit your account.  If you have additional questions, Mr. [redacted] remains available to assist you.   We appreciate you allowing us to reply to you.    Sincerely,   [redacted]

Revdex.com:
I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID [redacted], and find that this resolution is satisfactory to me.
Thank you all for correcting the matter and your apologies.  It is very frustrating when you don't have access to any of your money for a full week.  May none of you have to go through that ever.Best Regards, [redacted]

Complaint: [redacted]
I am rejecting this response because:My name is [redacted]. I had been a student/employee at Harvard University for nearly two decades when my mother, [redacted], was diagnosed with Ovarian Cancer and given little time to live. I left Harvard (where I had worked in the Athletic Department—tennis mostly—to care for her). To facilitate my staying home 24/7, my parents built me a tennis court in their backyard. Because their backyard was sloped, a structure was built to level out the land, with the tennis court built atop the structure. The court/structure was insured by Farm Bureau of NC. After my parents died, I remained in their home, having moved back into the bedroom of my youth, in the town of my youth, eventually becoming the girl’s tennis coach at the local high school I had once attended—the boys had a coach. My brother, a career enlisted man in the Marines, serving overseas since the 9/11 Call to Arms, returned home after three tours, back into the home we had shared as children. Having been exposed to years of USAA Insurance propaganda, he switched our insurance policy from Farm Bureau to USAA upon his return, including the tennis court, which had been standing nearly ten years. Before insuring our home, USAA sent inspectors, who walked the property discussing our needs. At USAA’s request, USAA was given a copy of the Farm Bureau policy, which had insured the tennis court separately from the home. On advice from USAA, which said the tennis court did not warrant a separate policy, the coverage was combined, meaning the court would be covered by ten percent of the home coverage under the new USAA policy. (When I argued ten percent wasn’t enough, USAA raised the value of the home.) Then, having finished their inspection, they took my money. And contracts were signed. Nearly fourteen months later, calamity struck (in my opinion, tennis court windscreens pulling like sails during a windstorm, taking the court down). Despite the fact that USAA had sent an inspector, taken my money, and signed a contract, they refused to repair the court after it fell. Instead, USAA spent money creating a deceptive, misleading engineering report that talked about everything from poor soil, to poor construction, to lack of wind. (Notably, the wind screens on the court had been ripped partially down in every direction around the court, which would have taken an enormous swirling force, but the USAA engineer diligently removed every ripped windscreen before taking any pictures, eliminated a glaring piece of evidence that the calamity had been caused by high winds.) Nonetheless, neither the soil, nor the court’s construction, nor the high winds are particularly relevant, because the Supreme Court of North Carolina had already ruled that if an insured structure falls all of a sudden, the insurance company holding the policy is both required to cover the loss and barred from claiming poor construction to avoid payment of the claim. Of course, the point of the deceptive engineering report was less about any particular reason, than creating a plethora of red herrings to distracts the courts. I.e., the purpose of the engineering report was to create so much confusion that the policyholder, me, would not be able to afford to take USAA to court, which is the policyholders only option if an insurance company decides to renege on their own policy, even by breaking the law. Of course, they say you can go to court, but how many policyholders out there can afford to confront a multibillion dollar insurance company to court—certainly not me. But back to the purposeful deceptions in USAA’s purposely misleading engineering report. Let’s consider three items: One, soil samples: It was the same soil beneath the court when USAA inspected the property in 2012 as when the court fell in 2014. (It had probably been the same soil since the last ice age ended nearly ten thousand years before the court fell.) But USAA did not mention soil when its inspector first inspected the court. USAA did not mention soil when they took my money. USAA did not mention soil when the policy was signed. Soil quality was not relevant. If soil had been relevant, USAA should not have insured the court, giving me the opportunity to keep my old policy with Farm Bureau instead of being caught up in a fraud. Two: Court construction: It was the same court when USAA inspected the court in 2012 (having already stood for many years) as when it fell in 2014. But USAA did not mention court construction when its inspector inspected the court. USAA did not mention court construction when USAA took my money. USAA did not mention court construction when the policy was signed. Court construction was not relevant. If court construction had been relevant, USAA should not have insured the court, giving me the opportunity to keep my old policy with Farm Bureau instead of being caught up in a fraud. Three: wind: The deception here is different. Besides removing ripped windscreens before pictures were taken, the USAA engineer claimed in his report, using data from NOAA (the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration), there were no high winds in the area during the period when the calamity occurred (e.g. January 2014). The USAA report did not mention the NOAA website the engineer cited in his report had a disclaimer, e.g.:             The absence of SWDI [Severe Weather Data Inventory] data for a             particular location and time should not be interpreted as an indication that             no severe weather occurred at that time and location. Furthermore, much             of the data in SWDI is automatically derived from radar data and             represents probable conditions for an event, rather than a confirmed             occurrence. Clearly, information from NOAA cannot be used for anything other than insurance fraud. (I also contacted NOAA headquarters and was told. not only that NOAA information could not be used to determine severe weather at a particular time and place, but also, that the closest site to my tennis court with accurate, vetted, minute-by-minute weather information was over fifteen miles away.) Of course, accuracy wasn’t USAA’s point. USAA’s point citing NOAA was to give the illusion of authority, and as a hedge against being taken to court, by driving up court costs beyond my capacity to pay, like with the soil quality samples and court construction quality, each argument being intended to insure court costs would exceed what their own duped clients could afford, which is one way USAA games the system of law to avoid being held accountable to the laws it manipulates to increase its profits.To iterate, even though the NC Supreme Court has already ruled that if an insured structure falls all at once an insurance company cannot deny a claim, even based on an argument of poor construction, USAA did exactly that, adding misleading information about soil and wind conditions to drive up the costs of being challenged in court. In this way USAA games the legal system into becoming a quasi-co-conspirator in insurance fraud, because it is the very expense of the legal system keeping my case (and cases semblant my case) out of court, and this despite the VII Amendment to the Constitution of the United States, which supposedly guarantees me (and policyholders like me) the right of trial by jury. PS            An expose on 60-Minutes, broadcast on 1 March 2015, explicated how             engineering reports are used by insurance companies to defraud customers out             of claims, just in case the Revdex.com is interested in being more than part of the             gamed system of law.
Regards,
[redacted]

Complaint: [redacted]
I am rejecting this response because: your representative should have added the coverage correctly. Maybe you should talk with the actual representative that issued my policy. Maybe they will admit to there mistake.
Regards,
[redacted]

October 20, 2016   [redacted] Complaint ID #: [redacted]   Dear Mrs. [redacted]:   I am responding to your submission regarding the cancellation of your automobile and homeowners policies.  We regret any frustration you have experienced.     Thank you for speaking...

with [redacted], of our staff, who explained the reason why the settlement offer was not accepted to resolve a balance on your credit card with the USAA Savings Bank (USB).   I understand that you also spoke with [redacted], of our staff, regarding the cancellation of your automobile and homeowners policies.  Ms. [redacted] confirmed that a Notice of Cancellation for Nonpayment of Premium was sent to the mailing address on file, advising that a payment of $680.55 was due before August 11, 2016, to avoid cancellation.  On August 23, 2016, a letter was sent acknowledging that a payment for $680.55 was received after the date specified on the Notice of Cancellation for Nonpayment of Premium; therefore, the policies were canceled on August 11, 2016.  The letter advised issuance of the new policies depended on a full review and approval.    Although the automobile policy was reissued effective August 21, 2016, it was determined that due to the outstanding balance that is owed to the USB, neither policy was eligible for reissue.  Ms. [redacted] confirmed that your automobile policy will remain in effect. However, the homeowners policy is not eligible for reissue until the outstanding balance owed to the USB is satisfied.  If you have additional questions, Ms. [redacted] remains available to assist you.   We appreciate you allowing us to reply to you.    Sincerely,   [redacted]

September 19, 2016   [redacted] Complaint ID #: [redacted]   Dear Petty Officer [redacted]:   I am responding to your submission regarding your recent automobile claim, your automobile policy, and renter’s policy.  I regret any frustration this matter may have caused. ...

  Thank you for speaking with [redacted], of our staff, who discussed your service experience, and confirmed that the claim dated September 01, 2016, was not coded as an at-fault claim.  The loss was handled as an Uninsured Motorist Property Damage claim.     I understand that you also spoke with [redacted], of our staff, regarding your premium concerns for your automobile and renters policies.  Ms. [redacted] explained the reasons for the premium increases and decreases.  She confirmed that your renter’s policy was canceled and rewritten in 2014, per your request, so that it would renew on the same month as your automobile policy.  If you have additional questions, Ms. [redacted] remains available to assist you, and can be reached at [redacted], or [redacted], extension [redacted].   We appreciate you allowing us to reply to you.    Sincerely,   [redacted]

Complaint: [redacted]
I am rejecting this response because:You people are a bunch of crooks and criminals. Grow up and quit playing games. If you would do your jobs properly and not screw around you wouldn't have lost thousands of $'s in business. Obviously your lack of intelligence shows as your inability to do simple tasks is too complicated. You can't handle being called names so you act like babies and children and play ridiculous games. Your incompetence lost you a lot of money and you screwed yourselves. Pretty stupid, but your loss is our gain. Time to rethink how you operate and make smarter decisions. 
Regards,
[redacted]

Complaint: [redacted]
I am rejecting this response because:1. I am currently working out of town and the time constraint of three days is not reasonable to turn over possession of my car, locate a replacement car, purchase, title, and transport the replacement vehicle from Virginia to [redacted] without leaving my daughter with transportation to from from work and school. I strongly disagree with the finding that three days is even close to reasonable.2. The response totally ignores the most significant part of the disagreement, which is the valuation of the car.The call I received on May 9 did not even allow for three days.  When I was contacted by [redacted]e on Monday, May 9, the offer required me to return the vehicle by close of business on May 11.  At that time I did not have a rental was not in a position with my schedule to pick one up before May 10 at earliest.  [redacted]e was not even familiar with the three requests I had made for resolution. According to her she is not allowed access to that information.
Regards,
[redacted]

December 30, 2015
Mr. [redacted]
Complaint ID #: [redacted]
Dear Mr. [redacted]:
I am responding to your submission regarding the October 27, 2015, automobile claim.  I regret any frustration or inconvenience that you or [redacted] experienced.
I understand that...

[redacted], of our staff, spoke with [redacted] who advised that his driver’s license was reinstated and there were no fees incurred.  Ms. [redacted] remains available should you or [redacted] have any additional questions.
[redacted] you for allowing us to reply to you. 
Sincerely,
[redacted]

April 25, 2017   Mr. [redacted] Complaint ID #: [redacted]   Dear Mr. [redacted]:   I am responding to your submission regarding your experience using the USAA Car Buying Service (CBS).  I regret any inconvenience this situation may have caused you.   Thank you for speaking...

with [redacted], of our staff, who confirmed that USAA does not certify the dealerships or own the vehicles sold through the CBS.  I understand that he reviewed the CBS and explained that the dealership provided the details regarding the vehicle history and any misrepresentation of that would be addressed by the dealership as USAA does not engage in the sales transaction.  If you have any additional questions,        Mr. [redacted] remains available to assist you.    We appreciate you allowing us to reply to you.    Sincerely,  
[redacted]

[redacted]
*
[redacted]
*
[redacted]
I am responding to your submission regarding the automobile claim.  We apologize for any frustration you may have experienced.
[redacted], of our staff, accommodated your request to have your claim...

transferred to another adjuster for handling.  Ms. [redacted] later confirmed that your vehicle was found to be a total loss.  Once valuation is calculated, you will be contacted to discuss settlement.  If you have additional questions, Ms. [redacted] remains available to assist you, and can be reached at [redacted]
We appreciate you allowing us to reply to you. 
Sincerely,
[redacted]