Progressive claim

[VolAgent]

I need to clarify about their declarations pages. if do not pay attention to other things, declarations pages clearly stated effective date of coverage, what kind of coverage has insured. This is also stated in their contract. There are not any word about who and when make changes to policy. Can that declarations pages confirms our coverage?

It sounds like the change was made retroactively. Generally that is going to include an attestment that there have been no losses. Obviously that is not the case if the change was done retroactively. And if so, you can expect coverage to be denied as there was a material misrepresentation. Thus the question becomes, when did you ask the agent to add the vehicle and when did the agent actually do it.

Finally, you can argue this with us until the end of time, it doesn't change your actual situation. If you feel your claim has been unfairly denied, we are not the party to seek help from. That would be the Department of Insurance and an attorney.

 

[djs]

Here is the rub.... I went and looked up the California for Western Truck Insurance (Progressive) and found this statement in the definitions. Generally, you have 30 days to add a vehicle as long as they insure the rest of the vehicles, but they slide an exception into this section:

For coverage to apply to the additional auto under PART III - DAMAGE TO YOUR AUTO, you must have notified us of the auto prior to any accident or loss

This is why they are sticklers in the timing of things. If you look at the transaction that caused the dec page to be printed, there is a time stamp associated with it. That time stamp must be after the accident, which they are using to decline coverage.

Is it legit to do this? Not sure, time to talk to an attorney.

Dan

 

[Alex -]

Here is the rub.... I went and looked up the California for Western Truck Insurance (Progressive) and found this statement in the definitions. Generally, you have 30 days to add a vehicle as long as they insure the rest of the vehicles, but they slide an exception into this section:



This is why they are sticklers in the timing of things. If you look at the transaction that caused the dec page to be printed, there is a time stamp associated with it. That time stamp must be after the accident, which they are using to decline coverage.

Is it legit to do this? Not sure, time to talk to an attorney.

Dan

We have proof that coverage effective before accident happened.
We have proof that agent told to insurance she received our request to add vehicle before accident. But now she changed her mind. But we have proof - letters from Progressive with her explanation that she received our request for changes before accident.

 

[VolAgent]

We have proof that coverage effective before accident happened.
We have proof that agent told to insurance she received our request to add vehicle before accident. But now she changed her mind. But we have proof - letters from Progressive with her explanation that she received our request for changes before accident.

Stop telling us this and start telling your attorney. If you do have this proof, and I will take you at your word, this will be a slam dunk against the agent and Progressive. Unfortunately there is not much more we can do for you at this point unless you want to start posting copies of everything, which I would recommend against.

 

[djs]

If you have all of this proof, send it in to Progressive with a dispute to the claim adjustment. They will look at it and decide if they can change their decision. Of course, they probably have all of this already so it isn't a good opportunity to change their mind.

Alternatively, post the claim denial letter and your proof and we'll see if we can understand why the claim is in limbo. Keep in mind though, nobody here can 'fix' this issue for you. The only thing we can do is help you understand the logic that Progressive used to deny (or continue to investigate) the claim.

Only other option, and it is your best option at this point, is to get the services of an attorney.

Dan

 

[BADTROUT]

Alex, It's time to follow the advice you have been given... We are fairly unified by the look of the comments... Each of the following is referenced 7 or 8 times....

1. Seek legal counsel.
2. If you have verifiable proof of what you say, you should have a decent argument.
3. If you do NOT have verifiable proof of what you say, your likely screwed.
4. There is nothing more any of us can interject without more facts, and even if we had more to say or advise, none of us have the power or control to do what you would need to do to resolve your situation.
5. We ALL wish you the best, and would appreciate any updates, new information, and outcome when and if it does get resolved.