QuestionQUESTION: Rob, you seem very knowledgeable in these sort of cases and wondering if you can help us out. My girlfriends SUV was stolen from a wedding on Oct 2011. It has not been recovered by the police. She has followed all the insurance company's protocol (cellphone records, bank records and any other info they want) All along the adjuster has told her they have 60 days to either pay the claim or deny once they get the proof of loss form. They received the proof of loss on December 21. They still have not told her what is going on. She has already completed the examination under oath and told her she would get an answer. She has been keeping in contact with them but I noticed you said not to do that in previous responses. Is there anything she can do ? And why would they keep saying 60 days and now are not following through with what they said. Any help would be appreciated.
ANSWER: Hello,
Like many of these situations RBC and other carriers have a tendency of being truth-challenged in my opinion. She is not the first and will not be the last that this has happened to.
The problem is that the insured is their own worst enemy when going through this process without a consultant such as myself.
There is simply no way the insured can take control of the situation during the investigation stage without our intervention.
At this point having been through the investigation, the EUO she is what I refer to as being in the "dead" zone.
She cannot go on a counter attack (oh yes, they are considering this claim fraud-as all theft claims are considered these days), she cannot sue because she hasn't been denied and now, she is totally at the insurance company's mercy. Retention of a lawyer is a waste of money.
What might and I say might get them moving is for us to know the make model and year of the vehicle, to rite a report as to the multitude of ways the car can be stolen with the so-called anti theft system, submit it to the insurance company as new evidence and see if they speed up the process.
Insurance SIUs are too reliant on the information obtained by locksmiths that tell them these systems are impossible to defeat. They may be great locksmiths, but their approach is not to determine the possibilities if the car was stolen, but to come up with all the reasons it can't be stolen.
Since these locksmiths are paid by the insurance company, they will say anything that get them assignments. The locksmith might even write a short report stating how impossible the car is to steal. I am looking at one of those reports right now where the claim was denied because the locksmith said the vehicle was last driven with a programmed key. How would he know? The truck hasn't been recovered for 2 years.
I have another denial on a Chrysler. The locksmith said it would take him 20 minutes to make a key. That just says he is a crappy locksmith, and the car has not been recovered for 2 years.
Locksmiths are not thieves (generally)and because of their lack of knowledge about theft, creates a real problem for insureds. I am not bashing locksmiths. Most are very good at their trade, but they should stay with their profession of making keys and servicing locks and not get involved in anything they have no clue on such as theft.
I do not know if this is your girlfriend's situation, but couldd be.
http://www.autotheftexpert.com
---------- FOLLOW-UP ----------
QUESTION: Thanks for your quick reply. Do they not have a timeline they have to meet? Why did they keep telling her 60 days ? They were supposed to get back to her on friday (March 2nd,2012) and never heard from them. Should she contact them again this week ?
AnswerHello,
As I stated, from my experience RBC is truth-challenged and whatever you hear from them must be taken with a grain of salt. Calling them and bugging them does no good. You won't make the process go any quicker. They control all the shots. 60 days can mean 6 months.
See, what no one understands is that the carriers don't care how much they inconvenience their policy holders once SIU is involved and an EUO is given.
If you don't interject with something new, it is on their timeline. There is nothing other than that you can do. It's on the insurance company time line.
Generally, once under investigation, no matter what you have been told by RBC about the 60 ays which you have and will find is not accurate, all time lines are off when the claim is under investigation.
Just remember who underwrote the contract (policy) and who it will favor. All you are left with as the insure is the waiting game.
http://www.autotheftexpert.com
