This is a long letter I am submitting to all the higher-ups of AAA that I can locate an address for. It is long but details an awful experience in attempting to get the fair value for my vehicle from my insurance company. Big +1 to Geico for making things right.
August 4, 2011
Robert L Darbelnet
President and CEO
AAA Insurance
Dear Mr Darbelnet,
My wife, Jennifer, and I have been held vehicle and homeowner’s insurance with AAA for approximately 3-4 years. I am writing to you based on our first and only claim that I will ever file with your company due to the lack of quality service that I received from your employees located in Colorado. This claim stems from an accident that Jennifer was involved in and was deemed to be not at fault. This accident occurred on June 1, 2011 at approximately 5:00 pm.
The service that was provided by AAA was slow and the settlement offer was unbelievably low. I had numerous phone conversations with Pamela Foisy, the total loss specialist assigned to this claim, and never received any indication that AAA would be willing to listen to the complaints that I had about the lack of a reasonable offer for our vehicle. Before speaking with Ms. Foisy the first time, on June 24th, 2011, I had done a reasonable amount of research to make sure I knew what our vehicle was worth. My conclusion was that it would cost in the vicinity of $11,500 to replace our vehicle with one of similar mileage, options, engine, condition, etc. I was informed by Ms. Foisy on our initial conversation that we were being offered a settlement in the amount of $9,600 (minus our deductible and salvage value until the entire claim was settled between AAA and Geico). I informed Ms. Foisy in that initial conversation that I would not be sending information she requested (copy of vehicle title) due to the lack of an acceptable offer. Ms. Foisy told me at that time that I could collect comparable vehicles and forward those numbers to her for a comparison. Ms. Foisy also faxed the three vehicles that our vehicle was compared to so I could examine them. During the course of our conversation, Ms. Foisy told me to be honest about the options my vehicle had and to not try to inflate the value by comparing it to vehicles that had additional options.
After I received the fax from Ms. Foisy, I examined the comparison vehicles closely. Of the three comparison vehicles, only one had similar mileage. Our vehicle had approximately 70,200 miles on it at the time of the accident. The comparison vehicles had 68,000, 111,000, and 127,000 miles. These last two vehicles would not have been considered while I was replacing my vehicle due to the high mileage. Due to my work schedule, I was not able to devote a lot of time to searching for vehicles over that weekend but did call Ms. Foisy back on Monday, June 27. I informed Ms. Foisy about the Kelley Blue Book value of my vehicle and, although I was aware that insurance does not utilize KBB, stated to her that the difference in her offer and the vehicle’s true worth were obviously very different. I informed Ms. Foisy during the course of our conversation that the KBB retail value of a Mazda3 i was approximately $12,700. I also informed Ms. Foisy that I did not consider my vehicle to be in the “excellent” condition that KBB factors into the price of retail vehicles but that the difference should not have been nearly $4,000. I informed Ms. Foisy that the difference in an “excellent” vehicle with a “good” vehicle in a private sale was approximately $700. At no time in our conversation did Ms. Foisy indicate that she was considering the points I brought up. Ms. Foisy stated towards the end of our conversation that only 3 percent of vehicles fall under the “excellent” condition as advertised by KBB despite me already stating that I did not expect an excellent rating on our vehicle. This was the first instance that Ms. Foisy accused me of being dishonest with her. I also informed Ms. Foisy that comparing my vehicle to two vehicles that each have 40,000 more miles on them than mine was not acceptable. Ms. Foisy stated that the mileage difference is compensated for in the final value of the vehicles. I informed Ms. Foisy at that time that providing a change in value of between $.03 and $.04 per mile was too low and does not account for the additional wear a tear a vehicle takes. Ms. Foisy claimed that she had no idea where those numbers came from until I told her how I figured the amount.
Approximately 15 minutes after our conversation ended, I received a call from Diamond Collision stating that Ms. Foisy had just called them and stated that June 27 (that day) was the last day that AAA would be paying for storage fees for the vehicle. Ms. Foisy did not inform me of this when I spoke with her and, upon calling her a second time, I was informed that she had stated this in our first conversation that occurred on the 24th. I took this move to be a bullying tactic employed by Ms. Foisy in order to get us to settle the claim quickly. I spoke with Ms. Foisy’s supervisor who stated that she was not sensitive to the time difference of Indiana and Colorado (calling 30 minutes prior to the collision repair company closing) and that he would take care of the storage fees for an additional day until the vehicle could be moved to a “free” lot. While I do not remember his name, the supervisor was polite and non-confrontational the entire time that I spoke with him.
Due to the lack of response from Ms. Foisy about the vehicle’s KBB value, I collected information on 31 2006 Mazda3 i’s via AutoTrader.com. I searched within 500 miles of my residence due to the lack of these vehicles being for sale. I collected information including distance from my residence, mileage of the vehicle, listed options, the dealer name and phone number, and price. I included all this information in an email I sent to Ms. Foisy on June 28th. Ms. Foisy responded at that time that she only needed 3-4 ads and what the ads need to include. I took the three vehicles in my list that were closest in mileage to my vehicle to provide the dealer ads. While searching for the ads, I found an additional vehicle that had mileage that was closer than the other three so I included it as well. I attempted to fax this information on June 29th but had the wrong number. Upon asking for a better fax number, Ms. Foisy replied with only the fax number and a signature line of, “Total Loss Specialists.” I was able to have the ads faxed to the number in the evening of June 30th.
On July 1st, Ms. Foisy sent an email stating that the comps that I sent were not usable due to not being from the state of Indiana, per Department of Insurance requirements. In my reply email, I explained that I had chosen the vehicles with the mileage that most closely matched my vehicle’s and used no other criteria. Despite this information, Ms. Foisy replied and stated in a section of her email that, “It appears you picked the highest no matter where they were located.” In my reply, I asked Ms. Foisy to review the spreadsheet that I had sent originally. The vehicles range in prices from $8,500 to $15,000. The vehicles that I sent were all in the $11,000 to $12,000 range. This was the second instance of Ms. Foisy accusing me of being dishonest. I informed Ms. Foisy in a reply email that I was going to write a letter to the Insurance Commission of Indiana as well as speak with a lawyer about the situation. Ms. Foisy, in an attempt to provide legal advice that she is not authorized or trained to provide, stated that an attorney would only state that I was not able to file a lawsuit against AAA Insurance because, “we are one and the same.”
I received a letter dated July 7th, 2011. The letter appears to have come from the office of Ms. Foisy and declares a final settlement value of $9,754.02, minus the deductible. Despite Ms. Foisy’s final email stating that she could send a check and settle any further differences later, she included a Proof of Loss Receipt and Release. I feel this was another attempt by Ms. Foisy to get this situation settled despite me not having agreed to a final dollar amount for our vehicle. I chose not to respond to the letter or to acknowledge the check that arrived in the mail that was approximately $6,200 to $6,300 (I have destroyed the check since that time). I received a second letter from Regina Hooper dated July 16th. In this letter, the dispute is acknowledged and it is stated that accepting the check does not imply that the settlement is final. Also included was a second Proof of Loss Receipt and Release. I contacted Ms. Hooper via the telephone number that was included with her letter. I advised Ms. Hooper at that time that I was going to go through Geico, the responsible party’s Insurer and did not intend to sign anything with AAA. Ms. Hooper was very polite and informed me that due to Ms. Foisy being on vacation, she was advised to send this letter on her behalf. She also stated that Ms. Foisy may not have been aware that I was not pleased with the settlement as offered, reasoning behind sending the first letter.
I made contact with Geico and had difficulties locating my vehicle so it could be inspected. I was able to have the vehicle located and provided that information to Geico. Geico had some difficulty getting the vehicle out of the lot where it was being stored but was finally able to get access to the vehicle on August 3rd. The primary agent for Geico was Jennifer Thomason. I only had the opportunity to speak with Ms. Thomason one time but she seemed very pleasant and acknowledged that the amount of time that had elapsed between the accident and the claim moving forward was too long. Ms. Thomason seemed eager to help the process move along quickly. I then spoke with John (unknown last name) who works locally with Geico. John was very helpful both to me and Jennifer in explaining the situation and how the process would be handled by Geico. John realized that we had already gone through the vehicle inspection with AAA Insurance and that the vehicle was declared a total loss and decided to move the vehicle to their total loss department immediately. John always returned calls exceptionally quickly and his voicemail even instructs callers that don’t hear from him within an hour of their call to contact his supervisor, the number which he provides in the message. I never had to attempt to contact John’s supervisor. Matt (last name unknown) was the total loss specialist/vehicle inspector assigned to our case. Matt received the vehicle on August 4th and was able to get his inspection and valuation report done the same day. Matt apologized for taking so long to get to our vehicle, despite not having received any complaints from Jennifer or myself, and then offered us $11,750 as the base price of our vehicle. Including taxes and title fees, the total came to $12,540.57. Matt also stated that Geico will send an additional $100 as rental car coverage, even though we did not request this coverage or use a rental car during the two plus months that we have been without a vehicle.
Geico Insurance will be our next insurance agency. For someone to be offering a settlement for a vehicle they’ve never seen, based on comparison vehicles they’ve never seen is ridiculous. Geico has local agents who do the work and can provide answers when they are asked. The employees know why a settlement is reached and how the dollar amount is arrived at.
We never claimed any injuries in association with this accident. I was up-front with Geico with what AAA Insurance offered as a settlement for our vehicle. While I would not have been surprised if an insurance company only attempted to beat the low-ball offer by $1,000, Geico did not. Geico examined our vehicle and valued it based on our vehicle, not based on vehicles located elsewhere that they have never seen. I only wanted fair-market value from the beginning of this ordeal. I only wanted to be able to replace my vehicle with a similar vehicle without taking out a loan for $4,000.
I truly believe that AAA was attempting to make a profit from the accident my wife was in. It is my belief that AAA intended to file for fair market value of my vehicle with Geico and justify the difference by the amount of time invested by their agents. I expect an insurance company that I hire to be there for me when I need them. I was told that as a paying member of AAA Insurance, AAA wanted to handle the claim. I was under the impression that this was to make sure that AAA members were taken care of, possibly at the expense of the company. I was wrong. I spent many hours either on the phone with AAA employees arguing my point or researching vehicles. If I am to argue with an insurance company, shouldn’t it be the other party’s insurance?
While I will not hold AAA Insurance again, and I’ve already spoken with a family member who is also moving their insurance away from AAA, my real goal is to make sure I am never in an accident with someone who holds your insurance. I will reach as many people as I can to make this happen. I will be posting this letter on a website blog of 16,000 Indiana residents called, IndianaGunOwners.com. I will be distributing this letter to my friends and acquaintances in Law Enforcement, another close-knit group of people. As an officer, I happen to be asked often what kind of auto insurance is good. I will not mention AAA as a company that I recommend any longer.
Ms. Foisy needs remedial training immediately. She never acted like she cared or that she was on our side of this situation. I understand that her job is usually thankless and can be very difficult to do, but that’s no excuse for not knowing why vehicles are valued the way that they are (mileage adjustment) or for not listening to your customers during situations such as this. Accusing your customers of being dishonest will not make these types of situations go smoothly, it will only strengthen our resolve to get what is fair. Based on Geico’s assessment of my vehicle, I did not pick the highest-priced vehicles in my research of comps, I picked value-priced vehicles that happen to have similar mileage to the one that was totaled in the accident.
AAA needs to hire local adjusters who work in the area and can physically inspect the vehicles they are offering settlements for. It is impossible to defend a low-ball offer on a vehicle that you have never seen with your own eyes. This is likely what lead Ms. Foisy to accuse me of dishonesty. When my dishonesty was the focus, her lack of knowledge about my vehicle became less of an issue.
I would like the Insurance Commission of Indiana to investigate past claims that AAA has made to other insurance companies to determine if AAA has made a profit in situations like this one. While my mind has been made up in regards to future insurance situations, I would at least like to know that the management of AAA considers this situation as unacceptable as I do. A response letter will also be posted on IndianaGunOwners.com if it is received.
I have included copies of the original comp vehicles that Ms. Foisy sent to me, copies of all emails that were exchanged between myself and Ms. Foisy, and both letters and included paperwork that I received while a settlement was attempted by AAA staff that was not authorized by me or my wife.
I hope that AAA Insurance takes this seriously. I anxiously await your reply.
Sincerely,
Grant
Cc: Mark H Brown-Executive VP, Richard D Rinner-Executive VP, Satish D Mahajan-VP and CIO, Marshall L Doney-VP, Sandra S Hughes-VP, Susan G Pikraliidas-VP, John Schaffer-CFO, Better Business Bureau, Indiana Department of Insurance
August 4, 2011
Robert L Darbelnet
President and CEO
AAA Insurance
Dear Mr Darbelnet,
My wife, Jennifer, and I have been held vehicle and homeowner’s insurance with AAA for approximately 3-4 years. I am writing to you based on our first and only claim that I will ever file with your company due to the lack of quality service that I received from your employees located in Colorado. This claim stems from an accident that Jennifer was involved in and was deemed to be not at fault. This accident occurred on June 1, 2011 at approximately 5:00 pm.
The service that was provided by AAA was slow and the settlement offer was unbelievably low. I had numerous phone conversations with Pamela Foisy, the total loss specialist assigned to this claim, and never received any indication that AAA would be willing to listen to the complaints that I had about the lack of a reasonable offer for our vehicle. Before speaking with Ms. Foisy the first time, on June 24th, 2011, I had done a reasonable amount of research to make sure I knew what our vehicle was worth. My conclusion was that it would cost in the vicinity of $11,500 to replace our vehicle with one of similar mileage, options, engine, condition, etc. I was informed by Ms. Foisy on our initial conversation that we were being offered a settlement in the amount of $9,600 (minus our deductible and salvage value until the entire claim was settled between AAA and Geico). I informed Ms. Foisy in that initial conversation that I would not be sending information she requested (copy of vehicle title) due to the lack of an acceptable offer. Ms. Foisy told me at that time that I could collect comparable vehicles and forward those numbers to her for a comparison. Ms. Foisy also faxed the three vehicles that our vehicle was compared to so I could examine them. During the course of our conversation, Ms. Foisy told me to be honest about the options my vehicle had and to not try to inflate the value by comparing it to vehicles that had additional options.
After I received the fax from Ms. Foisy, I examined the comparison vehicles closely. Of the three comparison vehicles, only one had similar mileage. Our vehicle had approximately 70,200 miles on it at the time of the accident. The comparison vehicles had 68,000, 111,000, and 127,000 miles. These last two vehicles would not have been considered while I was replacing my vehicle due to the high mileage. Due to my work schedule, I was not able to devote a lot of time to searching for vehicles over that weekend but did call Ms. Foisy back on Monday, June 27. I informed Ms. Foisy about the Kelley Blue Book value of my vehicle and, although I was aware that insurance does not utilize KBB, stated to her that the difference in her offer and the vehicle’s true worth were obviously very different. I informed Ms. Foisy during the course of our conversation that the KBB retail value of a Mazda3 i was approximately $12,700. I also informed Ms. Foisy that I did not consider my vehicle to be in the “excellent” condition that KBB factors into the price of retail vehicles but that the difference should not have been nearly $4,000. I informed Ms. Foisy that the difference in an “excellent” vehicle with a “good” vehicle in a private sale was approximately $700. At no time in our conversation did Ms. Foisy indicate that she was considering the points I brought up. Ms. Foisy stated towards the end of our conversation that only 3 percent of vehicles fall under the “excellent” condition as advertised by KBB despite me already stating that I did not expect an excellent rating on our vehicle. This was the first instance that Ms. Foisy accused me of being dishonest with her. I also informed Ms. Foisy that comparing my vehicle to two vehicles that each have 40,000 more miles on them than mine was not acceptable. Ms. Foisy stated that the mileage difference is compensated for in the final value of the vehicles. I informed Ms. Foisy at that time that providing a change in value of between $.03 and $.04 per mile was too low and does not account for the additional wear a tear a vehicle takes. Ms. Foisy claimed that she had no idea where those numbers came from until I told her how I figured the amount.
Approximately 15 minutes after our conversation ended, I received a call from Diamond Collision stating that Ms. Foisy had just called them and stated that June 27 (that day) was the last day that AAA would be paying for storage fees for the vehicle. Ms. Foisy did not inform me of this when I spoke with her and, upon calling her a second time, I was informed that she had stated this in our first conversation that occurred on the 24th. I took this move to be a bullying tactic employed by Ms. Foisy in order to get us to settle the claim quickly. I spoke with Ms. Foisy’s supervisor who stated that she was not sensitive to the time difference of Indiana and Colorado (calling 30 minutes prior to the collision repair company closing) and that he would take care of the storage fees for an additional day until the vehicle could be moved to a “free” lot. While I do not remember his name, the supervisor was polite and non-confrontational the entire time that I spoke with him.
Due to the lack of response from Ms. Foisy about the vehicle’s KBB value, I collected information on 31 2006 Mazda3 i’s via AutoTrader.com. I searched within 500 miles of my residence due to the lack of these vehicles being for sale. I collected information including distance from my residence, mileage of the vehicle, listed options, the dealer name and phone number, and price. I included all this information in an email I sent to Ms. Foisy on June 28th. Ms. Foisy responded at that time that she only needed 3-4 ads and what the ads need to include. I took the three vehicles in my list that were closest in mileage to my vehicle to provide the dealer ads. While searching for the ads, I found an additional vehicle that had mileage that was closer than the other three so I included it as well. I attempted to fax this information on June 29th but had the wrong number. Upon asking for a better fax number, Ms. Foisy replied with only the fax number and a signature line of, “Total Loss Specialists.” I was able to have the ads faxed to the number in the evening of June 30th.
On July 1st, Ms. Foisy sent an email stating that the comps that I sent were not usable due to not being from the state of Indiana, per Department of Insurance requirements. In my reply email, I explained that I had chosen the vehicles with the mileage that most closely matched my vehicle’s and used no other criteria. Despite this information, Ms. Foisy replied and stated in a section of her email that, “It appears you picked the highest no matter where they were located.” In my reply, I asked Ms. Foisy to review the spreadsheet that I had sent originally. The vehicles range in prices from $8,500 to $15,000. The vehicles that I sent were all in the $11,000 to $12,000 range. This was the second instance of Ms. Foisy accusing me of being dishonest. I informed Ms. Foisy in a reply email that I was going to write a letter to the Insurance Commission of Indiana as well as speak with a lawyer about the situation. Ms. Foisy, in an attempt to provide legal advice that she is not authorized or trained to provide, stated that an attorney would only state that I was not able to file a lawsuit against AAA Insurance because, “we are one and the same.”
I received a letter dated July 7th, 2011. The letter appears to have come from the office of Ms. Foisy and declares a final settlement value of $9,754.02, minus the deductible. Despite Ms. Foisy’s final email stating that she could send a check and settle any further differences later, she included a Proof of Loss Receipt and Release. I feel this was another attempt by Ms. Foisy to get this situation settled despite me not having agreed to a final dollar amount for our vehicle. I chose not to respond to the letter or to acknowledge the check that arrived in the mail that was approximately $6,200 to $6,300 (I have destroyed the check since that time). I received a second letter from Regina Hooper dated July 16th. In this letter, the dispute is acknowledged and it is stated that accepting the check does not imply that the settlement is final. Also included was a second Proof of Loss Receipt and Release. I contacted Ms. Hooper via the telephone number that was included with her letter. I advised Ms. Hooper at that time that I was going to go through Geico, the responsible party’s Insurer and did not intend to sign anything with AAA. Ms. Hooper was very polite and informed me that due to Ms. Foisy being on vacation, she was advised to send this letter on her behalf. She also stated that Ms. Foisy may not have been aware that I was not pleased with the settlement as offered, reasoning behind sending the first letter.
I made contact with Geico and had difficulties locating my vehicle so it could be inspected. I was able to have the vehicle located and provided that information to Geico. Geico had some difficulty getting the vehicle out of the lot where it was being stored but was finally able to get access to the vehicle on August 3rd. The primary agent for Geico was Jennifer Thomason. I only had the opportunity to speak with Ms. Thomason one time but she seemed very pleasant and acknowledged that the amount of time that had elapsed between the accident and the claim moving forward was too long. Ms. Thomason seemed eager to help the process move along quickly. I then spoke with John (unknown last name) who works locally with Geico. John was very helpful both to me and Jennifer in explaining the situation and how the process would be handled by Geico. John realized that we had already gone through the vehicle inspection with AAA Insurance and that the vehicle was declared a total loss and decided to move the vehicle to their total loss department immediately. John always returned calls exceptionally quickly and his voicemail even instructs callers that don’t hear from him within an hour of their call to contact his supervisor, the number which he provides in the message. I never had to attempt to contact John’s supervisor. Matt (last name unknown) was the total loss specialist/vehicle inspector assigned to our case. Matt received the vehicle on August 4th and was able to get his inspection and valuation report done the same day. Matt apologized for taking so long to get to our vehicle, despite not having received any complaints from Jennifer or myself, and then offered us $11,750 as the base price of our vehicle. Including taxes and title fees, the total came to $12,540.57. Matt also stated that Geico will send an additional $100 as rental car coverage, even though we did not request this coverage or use a rental car during the two plus months that we have been without a vehicle.
Geico Insurance will be our next insurance agency. For someone to be offering a settlement for a vehicle they’ve never seen, based on comparison vehicles they’ve never seen is ridiculous. Geico has local agents who do the work and can provide answers when they are asked. The employees know why a settlement is reached and how the dollar amount is arrived at.
We never claimed any injuries in association with this accident. I was up-front with Geico with what AAA Insurance offered as a settlement for our vehicle. While I would not have been surprised if an insurance company only attempted to beat the low-ball offer by $1,000, Geico did not. Geico examined our vehicle and valued it based on our vehicle, not based on vehicles located elsewhere that they have never seen. I only wanted fair-market value from the beginning of this ordeal. I only wanted to be able to replace my vehicle with a similar vehicle without taking out a loan for $4,000.
I truly believe that AAA was attempting to make a profit from the accident my wife was in. It is my belief that AAA intended to file for fair market value of my vehicle with Geico and justify the difference by the amount of time invested by their agents. I expect an insurance company that I hire to be there for me when I need them. I was told that as a paying member of AAA Insurance, AAA wanted to handle the claim. I was under the impression that this was to make sure that AAA members were taken care of, possibly at the expense of the company. I was wrong. I spent many hours either on the phone with AAA employees arguing my point or researching vehicles. If I am to argue with an insurance company, shouldn’t it be the other party’s insurance?
While I will not hold AAA Insurance again, and I’ve already spoken with a family member who is also moving their insurance away from AAA, my real goal is to make sure I am never in an accident with someone who holds your insurance. I will reach as many people as I can to make this happen. I will be posting this letter on a website blog of 16,000 Indiana residents called, IndianaGunOwners.com. I will be distributing this letter to my friends and acquaintances in Law Enforcement, another close-knit group of people. As an officer, I happen to be asked often what kind of auto insurance is good. I will not mention AAA as a company that I recommend any longer.
Ms. Foisy needs remedial training immediately. She never acted like she cared or that she was on our side of this situation. I understand that her job is usually thankless and can be very difficult to do, but that’s no excuse for not knowing why vehicles are valued the way that they are (mileage adjustment) or for not listening to your customers during situations such as this. Accusing your customers of being dishonest will not make these types of situations go smoothly, it will only strengthen our resolve to get what is fair. Based on Geico’s assessment of my vehicle, I did not pick the highest-priced vehicles in my research of comps, I picked value-priced vehicles that happen to have similar mileage to the one that was totaled in the accident.
AAA needs to hire local adjusters who work in the area and can physically inspect the vehicles they are offering settlements for. It is impossible to defend a low-ball offer on a vehicle that you have never seen with your own eyes. This is likely what lead Ms. Foisy to accuse me of dishonesty. When my dishonesty was the focus, her lack of knowledge about my vehicle became less of an issue.
I would like the Insurance Commission of Indiana to investigate past claims that AAA has made to other insurance companies to determine if AAA has made a profit in situations like this one. While my mind has been made up in regards to future insurance situations, I would at least like to know that the management of AAA considers this situation as unacceptable as I do. A response letter will also be posted on IndianaGunOwners.com if it is received.
I have included copies of the original comp vehicles that Ms. Foisy sent to me, copies of all emails that were exchanged between myself and Ms. Foisy, and both letters and included paperwork that I received while a settlement was attempted by AAA staff that was not authorized by me or my wife.
I hope that AAA Insurance takes this seriously. I anxiously await your reply.
Sincerely,
Grant
Cc: Mark H Brown-Executive VP, Richard D Rinner-Executive VP, Satish D Mahajan-VP and CIO, Marshall L Doney-VP, Sandra S Hughes-VP, Susan G Pikraliidas-VP, John Schaffer-CFO, Better Business Bureau, Indiana Department of Insurance
