• filter:

Auto Insurance Claim

  • Text Only
  • Search this Topic »
Voting History
rated:
I was with Progressive. Recently my daughter had an accident, total loss. I purchased the insurance under my name and based on the city where I live. She lives about 70 miles away from me, in a different city. The car was about 30K new. Just because the car was garaged in a different city they accused me of "Misrepresentation", denied my claim and rescinded my policy. I am wondering what to do.

Member Summary
Most Recent Posts
UGGH.. Justice boner. This thread delivered.

Ma171aC (Sep. 05, 2017 @ 9:21a) |

LOL. You are serious? You screw up and you are mad at the company? Look in the mirror, dude.

rascott (Sep. 06, 2017 @ 3:59p) |

I highly recommend Progressive because they keep rates down by cracking down on insurance fraud.

kamalktk (Sep. 06, 2017 @ 5:48p) |

Staff Summary
Thanks for visiting FatWallet.com. Join for free to remove this ad.

rated:
JKdeals said:   I was with Progressive. Recently my daughter recently had an accident, total loss. I purchased the insurance under my name and based on the city where I live. She lives about 70 miles away from me, in a different city. The car was about 30K new. Just because the car was garaged in a different city they accused me of "Misrepresentation", denied my claim and rescinded my policy. I am wondering what to do.

  
My best understanding has always been that with auto insurance everything depends on where the vehicle is garaged.

rated:
I think this is a 100% legit denial.  

You might want to specifically ask Progressive for the policy language that indicates they can do this.  If she was injured at all most attorneys will at least take a look at it and let you know if you have any shot of getting this overturned.

rated:
What are we dealing with? Did she injure somebody, or is it "just" the damage to her vehicle?

If she injured someone, the injured party's attorney might take this fight on your behalf. They want a pocket.

rated:
Was daughter insured under same policy? If not this is more egregious than just misrepresentation on your part.

rated:
#1 Ask for (they should have already sent them to you) their policy / your rights to appeal.
#2 Get your options from your State Board of Insurance (they should have some complaint / assistance group).
#3 Find a good/recommended attorney and ask for a 30 min meeting to discuss your options and if they think they can help - that should be a free meeting.

I'd be willing to bet that you end up getting your money, unless they can show gross or willful intent to defraud them.

rated:
slappycakes said:   #1 Ask for (they should have already sent them to you) their policy / your rights to appeal.
#2 Get your options from your State Board of Insurance (they should have some complaint / assistance group).
#3 Find a good/recommended attorney and ask for a 30 min meeting to discuss your options and if they think they can help - that should be a free meeting.

I'd be willing to bet that you end up getting your money, unless they can show gross or willful intent to defraud them.

  Pricing is based on Zip code for most Auto Insurance.  That might count as willful.

rated:
JKdeals said:   I was with Progressive. Recently my daughter recently had an accident, total loss. I purchased the insurance under my name and based on the city where I live. She lives about 70 miles away from me, in a different city. The car was about 30K new. Just because the car was garaged in a different city they accused me of "Misrepresentation", denied my claim and rescinded my policy. I am wondering what to do.

 I read your OP a few times just to be make sure. You just admitted you represented the car to be garaged somewhere else that you don't live at and you aren't even the primary driver.

Dude!

rated:
JKdeals said:   I was with Progressive. Recently my daughter recently had an accident, total loss. I purchased the insurance under my name and based on the city where I live. She lives about 70 miles away from me, in a different city. The car was about 30K new. Just because the car was garaged in a different city they accused me of "Misrepresentation", denied my claim and rescinded my policy. I am wondering what to do.


You say "Just because the car was garaged in a different city ...". Was the car actually garaged in a different city or are they just accusing you of that? Is it the case that your daughter was just driving your car (with your permission) in a neighboring town when the accident happened?
  
Sorry to say, this doesnt look good for you. Chances are, you already made some (presumably recorded or written) statements to the insurer, which they will use against you.

If you have access to a lawyer, it might be worth a consultation to see if there is a legal angle to salvage this.

rated:
Check out page 22: "Rescission’s Impact on Innocent Third Parties"

"Ingram (2005) notes that courts sometimes consider the effect on an innocent third party when deciding if policy rescission is an appropriate remedy.

One instance we discover in our sample is Blundy v. Secura, where a father insured a vehicle that was owned by his son. The son was involved in an accident, and
would have been entitled to personal injury protection (PIP) no-fault benefits. The insurer claimed that had it known the son owned the vehicle, it would have impacted the rate at which coverage was provided, in the form of a lower multi-vehicle discount extended to the father on his premium.

Michigan law requires an intent to deceive for an insurer to invoke the rescission remedy. Further, because the son was injured and not a party to the contract, the insurer was prevented from voiding the policy. The district court’s granting of the insured’s summary judgment motion was upheld by the appeals court."

http://www.naic.org/prod_serv/JIR-ZA-34-03-EL.pdf

rated:
rihex said:   Check out page 22: "Rescission’s Impact on Innocent Third Parties"

"Ingram (2005) notes that courts sometimes consider the effect on an innocent third party when deciding if policy rescission is an appropriate remedy.

One instance we discover in our sample is Blundy v. Secura, where a father insured a vehicle that was owned by his son. The son was involved in an accident, and
would have been entitled to personal injury protection (PIP) no-fault benefits. The insurer claimed that had it known the son owned the vehicle, it would have impacted the rate at which coverage was provided, in the form of a lower multi-vehicle discount extended to the father on his premium.

Michigan law requires an intent to deceive for an insurer to invoke the rescission remedy. Further, because the son was injured and not a party to the contract, the insurer was prevented from voiding the policy. The district court’s granting of the insured’s summary judgment motion was upheld by the appeals court."

http://www.naic.org/prod_serv/JIR-ZA-34-03-EL.pdf

  
Based on this the tipping point could be if he was the owner of the vehicle or not as the daughter wasn't injured.

rated:
David2k8 said:   
rihex said:   Check out page 22: "Rescission’s Impact on Innocent Third Parties"

"Ingram (2005) notes that courts sometimes consider the effect on an innocent third party when deciding if policy rescission is an appropriate remedy.

One instance we discover in our sample is Blundy v. Secura, where a father insured a vehicle that was owned by his son. The son was involved in an accident, and
would have been entitled to personal injury protection (PIP) no-fault benefits. The insurer claimed that had it known the son owned the vehicle, it would have impacted the rate at which coverage was provided, in the form of a lower multi-vehicle discount extended to the father on his premium.

Michigan law requires an intent to deceive for an insurer to invoke the rescission remedy. Further, because the son was injured and not a party to the contract, the insurer was prevented from voiding the policy. The district court’s granting of the insured’s summary judgment motion was upheld by the appeals court."

http://www.naic.org/prod_serv/JIR-ZA-34-03-EL.pdf

  
Based on this the tipping point could be if he was the owner of the vehicle or not as the daughter wasn't injured.

  depends on what OP means by "recent accident." if that means "a couple weeks ago," there's still time for "injuries."

if no injuries, vehicle ownership might not even matter, if a third party suffered a substantial loss and was NOT party to the insurance contract.  a court might not want OP's daughter to be without a vehicle because of her dad's misrepresentation.  this assumes she did NOT know that her dad had told the insurance company her vehicle would be garaged at his place.

EDIT: OP should also investigate what his premium would've been had he told his insurance company that the vehicle would be used 70 miles away.  What if risk profiles were similar and would've resulted in identical premiums?  or what if the other city's risk profile were better than his city's and would've resulted in a lower premium?  In either case, OP's "misrepresentation" would be meaningless and NOT justify a policy rescission.  (OP would do well if either the two cities look obviously similar or if his daughter's city looks obviously better).

rated:
Thank you everyone. The vehicle was originally purchased and intended to be used at the zip code where the insurance was purchased. I even have some service records from the local dealership. Oil change, tire rotation.. My daughter was not hurt, but couple of her friends had minor injuries and they are all fine now, I might add by the grace of God!

rated:
It comes down to what story can you come up with that's plausible that won't conflict with what you've already told the insurance provider on the record.

Pay attention to what rihex said about risk profiles in each geographic area. It might be important and work in your favor.

rated:
So OP, let me get some cash so I don't send this thread to Progressive... k, thanks?


On a serious note: don't go around making written records of things that will give them 100% proof that what they think is true, is actually true. Not saying to lie, but if it was a temporary use of the vehicle, in another town, there is zero reason they should be citing anything about being garaged elsewhere, etc. The only reason they would have denied based on that is if you told them. So, you're already screwed.

rated:
jaytrader said:   So OP, let me get some cash so I don't send this thread to Progressive... k, thanks?


On a serious note: don't go around making written records of things that will give them 100% proof that what they think is true, is actually true. Not saying to lie, but if it was a temporary use of the vehicle, in another town, there is zero reason they should be citing anything about being garaged elsewhere, etc. The only reason they would have denied based on that is if you told them. So, you're already screwed.

Send me your account number and routing number. I will wire some cash to your account.

Who cares! You can send it to them. I thought about it even before posting it. I bought almost the best policy, and paid in full, so I thought I was all set if something were to happen to the car, myself or any of my family. I even talked to some of the other insurance company (independent agent and Allstate) representatives and they all were shocked that Progressive rescinded the claim.

The ridiculous thing was they rescinded only my auto policy. They still wanted to make money of me by keeping my other policies. I cancelled all of them and took it with another insurer.

rated:
If the daughter has a different official address, then you are screwed. Your daughter can't be on your policy if she doesn't live with you. I mentioned this in another FW thread about college students doing the same thing but no one believed me. 

rated:
avalon6 said:   If the daughter has a different official address, then you are screwed. Your daughter can't be on your policy if she doesn't live with you. I mentioned this in another FW thread about college students doing the same thing but no one believed me. 
Depends on the state.  In NY, insurance follows the vehicle, not the driver.  She wouldn't have to be on the policy necessarily as long as she had permission to drive it.

OP hasn't mentioned what state the vehicle is registered in, or even if his daughter lives in the same state.

rated:
DTASFAB said:   
avalon6 said:   If the daughter has a different official address, then you are screwed. Your daughter can't be on your policy if she doesn't live with you. I mentioned this in another FW thread about college students doing the same thing but no one believed me. 
Depends on the state.  In NY, insurance follows the vehicle, not the driver.  She wouldn't have to be on the policy necessarily as long as she had permission to drive it.

OP hasn't mentioned what state the vehicle is registered in, or even if his daughter lives in the same state.

Sorry - This is my first post. I knew there will be more questions from those who read and try to answer. 

This happened in Michigan. And my daughter lives in Michigan too, but neither in the same official address nor was in my policy.

rated:
Is daughter away at school? Or she finished/dropped out and living on her own? If she's at school, then she is still your dependent and should be covered. (My insurance only gives discounts if you are away at college over 100 miles).

But if it's the latter and she's living on her own, then good luck.. you're gonna need it...

rated:
DTASFAB said:   
avalon6 said:   If the daughter has a different official address, then you are screwed. Your daughter can't be on your policy if she doesn't live with you. I mentioned this in another FW thread about college students doing the same thing but no one believed me. 
Depends on the state.  In NY, insurance follows the vehicle, not the driver.  She wouldn't have to be on the policy necessarily as long as she had permission to drive it.

 

  True, but then again we'd be back to the "where was it garaged" question, and it sounds like the answer to that was, "not in the location where the insurance company had been told it was garaged."

rated:
cestmoi123 said:   True, but then again we'd be back to the "where was it garaged" question, and it sounds like the answer to that was, "not in the location where the insurance company had been told it was garaged."
 

  Exactly. Where (address/zip code) is the car garaged is a typical insurance-speak.
OP said: "Just because the car was garaged in a different city they accused me of "Misrepresentation", denied my claim and rescinded my policy."

Presumably, the insurance company/agent has asked this question and based on that answer, denied the claim.

rated:
Was your daughter listed as a driver on your policy? Is she a teenager? Progressive is correct if you didn't disclose them that your daughter will be driving this car. If you were saving money of getting low rate for not disclosing all the drivers, then Progressive should deny it.

rated:
JKdeals said:   Thank you everyone. The vehicle was originally purchased and intended to be used at the zip code where the insurance was purchased. I even have some service records from the local dealership. Oil change, tire rotation.. My daughter was not hurt, but couple of her friends had minor injuries and they are all fine now, I might add by the grace of God!
 

   Michigan law requires an intent to deceive for an insurer to invoke the rescission remedy.  Your service records show that you originally intended to use the vehicle where you said it was garaged.  Unfortunately, you "innocently forgot" to update the garaged location when your daughter moved.  A court is likely to buy that story if auto premiums are similar in the two cities. If there's a huge difference, go with the "innocent third party" argument I mentioned earlier.

rated:
Is the vehicle registered to you? Was your daughter "borrowing" the vehicle? Is your daughter a college student? What is indicated on the police report and any other records? These questions and more will determine what recourse, if any, you have? 

rated:
JKdeals said:   jaytrader said:   So OP, let me get some cash so I don't send this thread to Progressive... k, thanks?


On a serious note: don't go around making written records of things that will give them 100% proof that what they think is true, is actually true. Not saying to lie, but if it was a temporary use of the vehicle, in another town, there is zero reason they should be citing anything about being garaged elsewhere, etc. The only reason they would have denied based on that is if you told them. So, you're already screwed.

Send me your account number and routing number. I will wire some cash to your account.

Who cares! You can send it to them. I thought about it even before posting it. I bought almost the best policy, and paid in full, so I thought I was all set if something were to happen to the car, myself or any of my family. I even talked to some of the other insurance company (independent agent and Allstate) representatives and they all were shocked that Progressive rescinded the claim.

The ridiculous thing was they rescinded only my auto policy. They still wanted to make money of me by keeping my other policies. I cancelled all of them and took it with another insurer.
Who cares? You should. Hopefully you didn't lie to them and tell them the vehicle was garaged where it wasn't, because insurance fraud is a very real thing. You're lucky they just decided to deny the claim and stopped there.

rated:
Garaged? When I'm home, my car is in my garage. When I'm at work, it's in the work garage. When I'm visiting my daughter, I sometimes put it in her garage, or may just leave it in the street. I just tell the insurance company where I live (they know it anyway since they insure my house), and don't bother with where the car is garaged at any particular moment of the day.

Garaged is a weird term for the insurance industry to use when what they really mean is where you and your car are based.  But if I have three residences and divide my time between all three, I'm not sure I would continuously update my insurance account with where I am each week, and shouldn't have my policy/claim denied either.

rated:
Rather than replying to each post, I will add more details here.

The vehicle was registered to me and outright owned. I did all the servicing (meaning took it to the dealer and my signature is on all the service records) whether it was done where I live majority of the time or where my daughter lives. My daughter lives with her Mom and I go there every weekend to help the family with all their needs. We are also planning to put the family back together soon. So, Basically I live 3-4 days in a week at the place where I bought the insurance and 3-4 days with my daughter.

Yes, my daughter is a teenage college student. She was wearing seatbelt and no alcohol involved in the accident. They took deposition with my daughter, asked her questions like whether she had a key of her own - she answered yes, If someone asked her friends would they say it is her car - she answered yes. So basically they were intentionally trying to pin her to admit that it is her own car.

Thank you all for the feedback and spreading the wealth of knowledge.

Take care and God bless you!

rated:
Was your daughter listed on the policy? or Did you tell your insurance company that your daughter was going to be the main driver of the car?

If the answers to those questions are "no," then I am not surprised they are denying your claim and it does sound like you were trying to get one over on the insurance company. Oh well, expensive lesson learned. Thank you for sharing your experience on FWF so others can learn from your mistake.

If the answers are "yes" and they are basing the denial solely on the living with mom thing, you should have some wiggle room here. The daughter should be able to explain that the answers she gave about where she lives are a little more nuanced considering she is in college and she has parents in two difference residences. She should say she "lives" with you, but "stays" at mom's house while she's in college (if that is truthful), and apologize for the confusion and not understanding the question.

rated:
Who takes a car to the dealer for "service" is completely irrelevant to insurance claims, vehicle garaging, drivers on policy, etc. No need to post or share such details with the insurer. The insurance company/underwriter cares about who owns the car, where the car is parked most of the time when not in use, who the primary/secondary drivers are listed on the policy (and their driving history), and where those drivers live/sleep primarily.

If there are discrepancies in any of those answers, there is going to be a big issue with a claim.  And if the state regulators get involved for suspected insurance fraud/misrepresentation, the claim will be the minor issue. 

rated:
JKdeals said:   Yes, my daughter is a teenage college student. She was wearing seatbelt and no alcohol involved in the accident. They took deposition with my daughter, asked her questions like whether she had a key of her own - she answered yes, If someone asked her friends would they say it is her car - she answered yes. So basically they were intentionally trying to pin her to admit that it is her own car.
 


Sounds like they were intentionally trying to get the facts. Were the daughter's answers accurate or not accurate?

rated:
There has to be more to the story here. There must have been some pretty clear evidence/something said to the insurance company that drove it toward such a decision. We're not getting all of the details, I believe. And, as some of you know, I try to give the benefit of the doubt in these situations when others jump on OP for not giving pertinent information. But this time, something seems strange with this story--if it is in fact the full story.

rated:
OP has been asked multiple times if the daughter was listed on the policy, and does not answer. I think we know what is going on here.

rated:
SummerSoFar said:   OP has been asked multiple times if the daughter was listed on the policy, and does not answer. I think we know what is going on here.
  OP kind of implies that they were the only one on the policy in the first post, saying "I purchased the insurance under my name." However, I agree, straightforward questions are being asked but not answered. OP knows they screwed up and are looking for a way to dig themselves out of a $30k mistake. Like I said, I really try to give the benefit of the doubt rather than jumping down OP throats, but this OP seems to be very picky and choosy with what information they provide.

rated:
JKdeals said:   They took deposition with my daughter, asked her questions like whether she had a key of her own - she answered yes, If someone asked her friends would they say it is her car - she answered yes. So basically they were intentionally trying to pin her to admit that it is her own car.
I understand what they were trying to do here, but this is a glowing example of what's wrong with the insurance industry and on a wider scale, what's wrong with the law and society in general.

When the motto of, "Don't talk to the police" has to be extended to your own insurance provider because talking can only hurt and never help you, there's a problem.  I've made official recorded statements to my own insurance providers in the past without legal representation, but I'm done doing that.  From now on, it's always going to be, "I'm sorry, but you'll have to discuss that with my attorney."

What OP's daughter's friends think is so far from having relevance that it's almost comical.  Whether OP's daughter had her own key is also irrelevant.  These bits of information are nothing more than circumstantial technicalities that will only be used to exploit loopholes in the law that favor insurance companies and screw typical citizens.  OP would have been much better off not allowing his daughter to speak to the insurance company at all.  Considering the amount of money at stake (total loss of a late model vehicle with an MSRP in the ballpark of $30K) I would have definitely hired a lawyer to file the claim with my own insurer.

The whole world sucks and the insurance providers are the lowest scum of all. /RANT

rated:
DTASFAB said:   
JKdeals said:   They took deposition with my daughter, asked her questions like whether she had a key of her own - she answered yes, If someone asked her friends would they say it is her car - she answered yes. So basically they were intentionally trying to pin her to admit that it is her own car.
I understand what they were trying to do here, but this is a glowing example of what's wrong with the insurance industry and on a wider scale, what's wrong with the law and society in general.

When the motto of, "Don't talk to the police" has to be extended to your own insurance provider because talking can only hurt and never help you, there's a problem.  I've made official recorded statements to my own insurance providers in the past without legal representation, but I'm done doing that.  From now on, it's always going to be, "I'm sorry, but you'll have to discuss that with my attorney."

What OP's daughter's friends think is so far from having relevance that it's almost comical.  Whether OP's daughter had her own key is also irrelevant.  These bits of information are nothing more than circumstantial technicalities that will only be used to exploit loopholes in the law that favor insurance companies and screw typical citizens.  OP would have been much better off not allowing his daughter to speak to the insurance company at all.  Considering the amount of money at stake (total loss of a late model vehicle with an MSRP in the ballpark of $30K) I would have definitely hired a lawyer to file the claim with my own insurer.

The whole world sucks and the insurance providers are the lowest scum of all. /RANT

To be fair, if OP's daughter was not on the policy and she was the primary driver, the insurance company may have been fully within their rights to do what they did. We don't know if this is the case since OP has not been direct about it.  

rated:
BostonOne said:   
 
To be fair, if OP's daughter was not on the policy and she was the primary driver, the insurance company was fully within their rights to do what they did. We don't know if this is the case since OP has not been direct about it.  

  I agree, but only up to a point.

If this should ever end up in a courtroom, Progressive is going to attempt to introduce into evidence the idea that OP's daugher's friends think a certain thing.  It's almost like a form of thought-policing.  At this point in time, Progressive presumably doesn't know who these friends are or whether OP's daughter's description of their thoughts is accurate.  She may have told them it was her car to gain social status when it actually wasn't.  She may have wanted the Progressive agent who conducted the phone interview to think the same thing for the same reason.  And yet, Progressive is going to use this statement as one factor (hopefully of many) to deny OP's claim.  It's the worst kind of legal hearsay I can contemplate off the top of my head right now.  It SHOULD get thrown out of a courtroom by any competent judge.  If it's not admissible in court, it shouldn't be part of Progressive's decision on whether to deny the claim before the case ever gets litigated.  Asking these types of questions is a scummy tactic at best.

rated:
At the core, auto insurance risk is a function of three factors:

1. The value of the car
2. Who's driving the car
3. Where and how much the car's being driven

There's no issue with #1.
With #2, unless the OP's got a terrible driving record, his teenage daughter is a higher risk than he is, so, if he didn't disclose to the insurance company that she would be the primary driver of the vehicle, that means the policy was underpriced for the risk.
With #3, some areas present a greater risk, due to some combination of traffic/accident rates, theft/vandalism rates, medical costs and injury laws, and cost of other vehicles on the road. If the OP claimed a primary garaged location that was (a) not where the car was actually spending the bulk of its time, and (b) lower risk than the location where the car was spending the bulk of its time, then the policy was underpriced for the risk.

rated:
But regardless. If the policy states (if, yes) that the primary driver of the vehicle must be on the policy, and listed as that vehicle's primary driver, and the garaged location must be updated if a material change occurs (I think 70 miles is certainly material with regard to rates), then OP is shit out of luck. OP agreed to the terms of the policy just as Progressive did. Granted, they may favor Progressive in some aspects, but OP was not forced to agree to the terms and could have gotten insurance elsewhere. Point is: if OP violated the terms of the agreement, OP loses. Simple as that. Doesn't matter what OP's daughter's friends said.

Skipping 71 Messages...
rated:
I highly recommend Progressive because they keep rates down by cracking down on insurance fraud.

  • Quick Reply:  Have something quick to contribute? Just reply below and you're done! hide Quick Reply
     
    Click here for full-featured reply.


Disclaimer: By providing links to other sites, FatWallet.com does not guarantee, approve or endorse the information or products available at these sites, nor does a link indicate any association with or endorsement by the linked site to FatWallet.com.

Thanks for visiting FatWallet.com. Join for free to remove this ad.

While FatWallet makes every effort to post correct information, offers are subject to change without notice.
Some exclusions may apply based upon merchant policies.
© 1999-2017