The Hartford, thank you.
I’m shifting gears somewhat tonight. One of the things I enjoy doing is helping companies realize that they should follow a policy that is good for the consumer. Most companies desire to serve the consumer as long as their bottom line is intact. Large companies some times get enmeshed in bureaucratic regulations, which are often issued for sound reasons, and can lose sight of the consumer. Occasionally, they need to be reminded that common sense should take precedent over unbending rules. I again thank The Hartford for using common sense.
This is an actual incident with only the identities not being revealed. I wrote two letters on behalf of an individual I know. Here is the first one.
On 6/14/05 an 86 year old acquaintance of mine while driving her car was hit by an 89 year old woman driving a car insured by your company, I believe through AARP. (Copy of accident report although difficult to read is enclosed.) The car was totaled for insurance purposes. Until she purchased another car, she rented a car for transportation purposes. It is my understanding that your company has accepted 100% responsibility for the accident through your insured driver.
First, I personally did not approve of the agreement but I don’t have power of attorney. My acquaintance owned a 1998 Chevy which had 32,999 miles on it at the time of the accident. Needing another car, she settled on a newer Ford Taurus that had 34,000+ miles on it. The difference between the amount received for her old car and the new one was over $6,000. I personally was not happy with that because it is my belief that she should be made whole without cost to her—she was not responsible for the accident in any way. The most important aspects of a car in her situation are a car that runs well and the total mileage on it. She is not going to buy another car in her life time and she is not going to use all the bells and whistles on the newer car. I would not have accepted the deal. However, she is of the old school and doesn’t like to make waves. I don’t have a problem in that area. All this is leading up to what I see as the present problem.
She paid for the rental car with a credit card. (Copy of credit card bill is enclosed.) In July she paid her credit card bill including the $172.73 for the rental car. Today, we went to her insurance company to see why she has not yet received reimbursement. Her insurance company said paying the bill is your responsibility. An agent from her company called your company and was told that no reimbursement would occur until the total process was complete. My understanding is that that can not occur until after the car has been sold for salvage which has not yet occurred and in fact can not be predetermined. In the mean time, she has not been reimbursed for a cost she should never have had to incur. It occurred only because your insured driver hit her car. Are you going to pay her interest on the money during the time you have use of it and she does not? I didn’t think so!
After I returned home, I called your agent. She refused to budge from the position of no payment until the process is complete.
My question is: Is $172.73 worth antagonizing an individual who has only suffered loss because of the driving skills of one of you insured drivers? Do you want someone complaining to everyone she knows and meets about the policies The Hartford follows in dealing with an 86 year old woman who is completely innocent of any wrong doing? Is this practice good public relations? Plus, now with the hurricane situation will this meager amount be pushed in the background even farther than it is now? It is now almost two months since she paid for that which she should not have had to pay for. Will it be two years (which was one time frame we were told) before she receives her money? She may not be alive in two years. (Is that your plan; to drag it out until she has dies?) I hear people reacting negatively to the government’s response to the hurricane, how will they react to your response to an innocent 86 year old woman? You are supposed to be the company for the retired? Give me a break!
As it happens, I have power of attorney for one of my clients (I am a tax consultant and my clients listen when I tell them of incompetent companies.) who has both house and car insurance policies with your company through AARP. Her husband recently died and she is moving from Arizona to Texas. I will look long and hard for a replacement company if this is an example of how you handle policy claims! I also happen to write a Blog:
http://www.christiangunslinger.blogspot.com/ You can rest assured that this incident will make a good post for one of my almost daily blogs. If I am not satisfied by your response you can look for a blog on this issue on or about the first few days of October. (I do want to give you a chance to rectify the situation.) Oh yes, I also own a publishing company—Gunslinger Publications L.C. (an Arizona company)—and I plan on publishing as a book my blogs from July 13th through the end of this year. So you will not only make the blog but probably a book as well. That should be good for your company, as they say—even bad publicity is still publicity. I’m happy to do you the favor.
The above letter generated a check for $50.00 late in September. Since it was not the $172.73 owed; a second letter was sent.
Are you serious? This is not acceptable! I suggest you immediately rectify this situation!
On September 7, 2005; I sent you a letter in relation to an accident an acquaintance of mine had with one of your clients. (A copy of that letter is enclosed.) I requested that your company immediately pay her the $172.73 (copy of credit card statement enclosed) she had already paid to rent a car because of the damage caused to her car by your client. I suggested that you must respond before the end of September. You did. You sent a check for $50.00 instead of the $172.73 out of pocket expenses she incurred. That is not acceptable.
The day after she received the check, we went to her agent. While we were present, the agent called your adjustor for an explanation. Your adjustor claimed that she had only rented the car for 2 days and had selected the other costs that rental agencies charge on an optional basis and that The Hartford would not pay for those. I had a copy of the rental agreement with me (A copy is enclosed.) which proves that not to be true. We FAXed that copy to her and she claimed she could not read it. (That could well be true.) She claimed she would get a copy from the rental company. That was two weeks ago and she still has not been paid the money due her. That is not acceptable!!!
This is the situation. If she does not have a check for the remainder owed to her in her hand by October 24, 2005 (I don’t care if an agent has to personally bring it to her, you are costing me time and money!), I will begin advertising how The Hartford treats an 86 year old victim of one of your clients. Check my blog site on the night of October 24, 2005. There will be a post concerning The Hartford. It can either be positive or negative. The choice is your. Any publicity is good publicity—right?
She received the money this morning. She called me and said, “I got it!” She was happy, surprised, and is satisfied.
This post tonight is to fulfill my statement about a post on the 24th. Thank you again—The Hartford. The keys are to keep copies of everything, provide them as needed, be persistent, and follow through. Most companies want to do the right thing; some times they need some encouragement and direction.
I’m shifting gears somewhat tonight. One of the things I enjoy doing is helping companies realize that they should follow a policy that is good for the consumer. Most companies desire to serve the consumer as long as their bottom line is intact. Large companies some times get enmeshed in bureaucratic regulations, which are often issued for sound reasons, and can lose sight of the consumer. Occasionally, they need to be reminded that common sense should take precedent over unbending rules. I again thank The Hartford for using common sense.
This is an actual incident with only the identities not being revealed. I wrote two letters on behalf of an individual I know. Here is the first one.
On 6/14/05 an 86 year old acquaintance of mine while driving her car was hit by an 89 year old woman driving a car insured by your company, I believe through AARP. (Copy of accident report although difficult to read is enclosed.) The car was totaled for insurance purposes. Until she purchased another car, she rented a car for transportation purposes. It is my understanding that your company has accepted 100% responsibility for the accident through your insured driver.
First, I personally did not approve of the agreement but I don’t have power of attorney. My acquaintance owned a 1998 Chevy which had 32,999 miles on it at the time of the accident. Needing another car, she settled on a newer Ford Taurus that had 34,000+ miles on it. The difference between the amount received for her old car and the new one was over $6,000. I personally was not happy with that because it is my belief that she should be made whole without cost to her—she was not responsible for the accident in any way. The most important aspects of a car in her situation are a car that runs well and the total mileage on it. She is not going to buy another car in her life time and she is not going to use all the bells and whistles on the newer car. I would not have accepted the deal. However, she is of the old school and doesn’t like to make waves. I don’t have a problem in that area. All this is leading up to what I see as the present problem.
She paid for the rental car with a credit card. (Copy of credit card bill is enclosed.) In July she paid her credit card bill including the $172.73 for the rental car. Today, we went to her insurance company to see why she has not yet received reimbursement. Her insurance company said paying the bill is your responsibility. An agent from her company called your company and was told that no reimbursement would occur until the total process was complete. My understanding is that that can not occur until after the car has been sold for salvage which has not yet occurred and in fact can not be predetermined. In the mean time, she has not been reimbursed for a cost she should never have had to incur. It occurred only because your insured driver hit her car. Are you going to pay her interest on the money during the time you have use of it and she does not? I didn’t think so!
After I returned home, I called your agent. She refused to budge from the position of no payment until the process is complete.
My question is: Is $172.73 worth antagonizing an individual who has only suffered loss because of the driving skills of one of you insured drivers? Do you want someone complaining to everyone she knows and meets about the policies The Hartford follows in dealing with an 86 year old woman who is completely innocent of any wrong doing? Is this practice good public relations? Plus, now with the hurricane situation will this meager amount be pushed in the background even farther than it is now? It is now almost two months since she paid for that which she should not have had to pay for. Will it be two years (which was one time frame we were told) before she receives her money? She may not be alive in two years. (Is that your plan; to drag it out until she has dies?) I hear people reacting negatively to the government’s response to the hurricane, how will they react to your response to an innocent 86 year old woman? You are supposed to be the company for the retired? Give me a break!
As it happens, I have power of attorney for one of my clients (I am a tax consultant and my clients listen when I tell them of incompetent companies.) who has both house and car insurance policies with your company through AARP. Her husband recently died and she is moving from Arizona to Texas. I will look long and hard for a replacement company if this is an example of how you handle policy claims! I also happen to write a Blog:
http://www.christiangunslinger.blogspot.com/ You can rest assured that this incident will make a good post for one of my almost daily blogs. If I am not satisfied by your response you can look for a blog on this issue on or about the first few days of October. (I do want to give you a chance to rectify the situation.) Oh yes, I also own a publishing company—Gunslinger Publications L.C. (an Arizona company)—and I plan on publishing as a book my blogs from July 13th through the end of this year. So you will not only make the blog but probably a book as well. That should be good for your company, as they say—even bad publicity is still publicity. I’m happy to do you the favor.
The above letter generated a check for $50.00 late in September. Since it was not the $172.73 owed; a second letter was sent.
Are you serious? This is not acceptable! I suggest you immediately rectify this situation!
On September 7, 2005; I sent you a letter in relation to an accident an acquaintance of mine had with one of your clients. (A copy of that letter is enclosed.) I requested that your company immediately pay her the $172.73 (copy of credit card statement enclosed) she had already paid to rent a car because of the damage caused to her car by your client. I suggested that you must respond before the end of September. You did. You sent a check for $50.00 instead of the $172.73 out of pocket expenses she incurred. That is not acceptable.
The day after she received the check, we went to her agent. While we were present, the agent called your adjustor for an explanation. Your adjustor claimed that she had only rented the car for 2 days and had selected the other costs that rental agencies charge on an optional basis and that The Hartford would not pay for those. I had a copy of the rental agreement with me (A copy is enclosed.) which proves that not to be true. We FAXed that copy to her and she claimed she could not read it. (That could well be true.) She claimed she would get a copy from the rental company. That was two weeks ago and she still has not been paid the money due her. That is not acceptable!!!
This is the situation. If she does not have a check for the remainder owed to her in her hand by October 24, 2005 (I don’t care if an agent has to personally bring it to her, you are costing me time and money!), I will begin advertising how The Hartford treats an 86 year old victim of one of your clients. Check my blog site on the night of October 24, 2005. There will be a post concerning The Hartford. It can either be positive or negative. The choice is your. Any publicity is good publicity—right?
She received the money this morning. She called me and said, “I got it!” She was happy, surprised, and is satisfied.
This post tonight is to fulfill my statement about a post on the 24th. Thank you again—The Hartford. The keys are to keep copies of everything, provide them as needed, be persistent, and follow through. Most companies want to do the right thing; some times they need some encouragement and direction.
posted by Christian Gunslinger at 12:05 AM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home