QuestionHi Rob,
Hope you can help; my car was stolen from my driveway on a Saturday night. Late November In New Brunswick Canada It was a 2009 Mazda – I was home asleep and didn’t hear or see anything; I noticed my car missing in the morning when I let my dog out. I reported it to police and insurance (RBC insurance). I was told by both the police and adjuster that the odds are the car would be recovered within a week. I had coverage for a rental vehicle for up to 30 days, my insurance adjuster assured me that even if the car was unrecovered by that time, the claim would be finalized prior to the end of the 30 days.
After about 3 weeks the adjuster informed me my rental needed to be returned and that this would take longer to settle then he originally told me, due to; a) the vehicle still being unrecovered, b) not having received the police report that they had requested from police as of yet. C) it required further investigation. I was very upset and as originally he assured me of a 30 day time line. Now he said they had up to 60 days “ to respond” from the date of the claim. All relevant info was received by RBC except a copy of police report which was forthcoming – my 60 days ends Jan 25 2012. At that time RBC would either pay the claim or deny it.
He scheduled a follow-up call for a week later which he never honoured, I called and left several messages – over a week went buy and I started trying to get info from other adjusters. They finally reassigned the case to a different adjuster… my new adjuster informed me that the previous one had misinformed me and no such time line is in effect as they are missing a document called proof of loss – the 60 days doesn’t start until that document is received… she latter emailed it to me. I pretty much had a fit and demanded some answers regarding timelines and next steps. A manager contacted me and gave me some fluffy assurance’s and said sorry for the previous adjusters mistakes... but would contact me next week once she had familiarized herself fully with the file.
My car is still unrecovered, my old adjuster no longer works for RBC insurance… I was told by his supervisor that he made many mistakes on my claim – including giving me faults assurances on the time lines and informing me all documentation was received when it was not. I get the distinct impression they will not pay the claim… and are employing delay tactics with intent.
What can I do? What is likely to happen next? Must I wait for them to deny a claim prior to (legal action?) or is there something I can do to prior? How long can they drag this out?
I notice most of your expertise is related to forensic analysis of the recovered vehicles… what happens when the car is not recovered? How does it affect the % of denial rate or time line to resolve the claim?
thank you
AnswerHello,
Welcome to my world! I am not just a forensic expert witness on reported stolen cars to determine how the reported stolen vehicle was last operated (completely different that the forensic locksmith insurance hacks that are shills for the insurance companies and purportedly only determine how the ignition was last operated), but I am also an SIU Investigation consultant/expert when it comes to these claims.
I have over 20 years SIU claims handling and investigation experience, where I know what they are doing before they do it.
I represent people accordingly.
Unfortunately in your situation, and you obviously did not know about me until now, it sounds like the claim has gone to far for me to offer you assistance and you are now in a "dark" zone.
I am not an attorney, nor do I give legal advice anywhere in the world. On the other hand, attorneys know absolutely nothing about the auto theft claims investigation process.
Unlike other experts that only have to give sworn testimony only on the facts of the case, I have always been treated as the defendant. An example would be where in a 8 hour deposition, 7.5 hours will be to attack me and .5 on the facts to the case. I had one goof ball attorney in California that took 3 8 hour days deposing me and actually went back to the judge saying he din't have enough time with me.
I have ha situations in which they could not get me on my training, background, experience and methodology, that they went personal.
Attacks o my credibility were manufactured through the court system. All my writings have been subject for fodder for opposing insurance defense attorneys and prosecutors. Even when they tried to take quotes out of one of my books they never paid for and made their own copies.
Why is this important? Because I have hundreds and hundreds of hours of sworn testimony and with that, I can share my experiences with insureds that are being attacked by the insurance investigation units.
I am the only person in my field that dares oppose the insurance companies in these matters in the US and Canada. Otherwise the experts are at the pig trough giving opinions that they cannot factually support. To make matters worse when attacked, its hard to make me look biased against insurance companies, because services are also provided to them as well.
With all that said, insurance investigations are intrinsic, because it all is determined on the individual claims investigator as to if and when the claim will be honored. There are some so arrogant that will build a case out of thin air and will deny even if the vehicle is never recovered. For an example and there are many, car is never recovered and the insurance company will find some locksmith that will do anything for a buck. He may say it would take him 30 minutes to make a transponder anti theft ignition key, and that the car could not have been stolen. That only means he is a crappy locksmith.
The problem is that first of all,is insurance investigators commonly believe what they are told that these anti theft systems prevent theft. That is a lie from the manufacturer. Not just misrepresentation on blind faith, flat out lie!
These systems were never designed to prevent theft. They were designed totally from the idiocy of thinking that the driver inserts the key into the ignition. He/she turns that ignition to start the engine. Well, design an electronic method in which the key has to match the computer for the engine to start. Since they make such a design, the vehicle is claimed to be virtually unstealable. That is great in theory, but what these engineers did not take into consideration is professional car thieves such as myself that can circumvent all that in less than 60 seconds, and of course these anti-theft systems do not prevent towing. Not one of them, no matter who makes the vehicle!
This is the problem when the insurance company uses a locksmith to determine how an ignition lock was last operated in a reported stolen vehicle. First, its rare to see a true forensic lock examination to determine if there are any new unidentifiable tool marks. Its simply apparently too much work! Occasionally I will see where such an effort was performed, but rarer ad rarer. Its easier for the locksmith or forensic examiner if the car is recovered to just insert a key in the ignition, destroy evidence and author a report. 10 minutes work for $700!
When not recovered, it is my opinion the claim should be paid because there is no evidence to support what happened to the vehicle.
Most of the investigators I know will pay the claim if the car is not recovered. Its just the right thing to do. If the car shows up three months later, possibly a determination can be made to determine if its a bogus claim, but until then, there is nothing.
In your situation, you should not have been constantly interrogating them about the claim. Once is goof enough, because they will put comments in like NI (Named insured) wants quick resolution on IV (car) in their insurance claims notes, which can be construed as a fraud indicator. Every time you contact insurance company, everything said is recorded in these notes.
Yes, insurance companies use imagined contradictory fraud indicators that fit all of us, and although just assumed, fit each and everyone of us. One biggy, is gap insurance and you did not say if you had that. Gap is a ripoff in these situations because it pays the difference between the value of the car and what is owed. The insurance companies look at gap and theft, in which you can walk away without the liability of a car note if something happens to the car as it relates to theft or vandalism. This is a huge assumed red flag!
See, the claim morphs from the car to the insured as it relates to their financials, their character. Has the insured had a prior theft claim? Is the insured a felon? Has the insured have a seedy background? Or can we make it look seedy? The deck is really stacked against the insured when he/she had nothing to do with the theft, and no matter how you try to prove your innocence, it falls on deaf ears.
Part of the innocent insured's problem is that they think they are trying to help the insurance company find out who stole the car, when in fact, the insurance company is doing their best to link the insured to the theft.
In the insurance company's defense though, there are many crooks out there that are filing false theft claims. Some actually make a business of it. So where do they draw the line? Most investigators are ex cops for intimidation purposes. They are indoctrinated everyone is trying to rip the insurance company off ad it is there job to prevent this. Many get performance bonuses in this situation.
Do you get the impression I know the claims process very well?
You are in the dark zone. An attorney can't help you, I can't help you. They generally have an unlimited time to investigate. There is nothing now that can be done until they decide to take the next step. The Examination Under Oath (EOU), in which I can consult with you, or an outright denial in which then you need counsel to sue them with my assistance. This is a bad place to be. I have been in the similar situation with our worthless US federal Department of Justice investigating me and freezing my assets for 12 months. Their proof--(2) anonymous letters. 12 months of Hell and took 20 minutes of my deposition to see how stupid they were. 12 months-20 minutes!! Two more months to close the case based on what they called "anonymous allegations." All courtesy of the insurance expert hacks I opposed, an insurance company an one pos insurance defense attorney. He claims he had nothing to do with it, well then he is a blooming misguided idiot that was use as a pawn. So I know all too well what you are going through.
All you can do is like I did. Wait for the next step. Do not contact them again! You will not make the outcome any better.
Please do me a favor--keep me informed when the next step comes. My personal email is robo14@aol.com. By the way, my writings here will just give the opposition attorneys more fodder--Bring it on!It's billable hours for them!!! As you see, I am very high profile. My tattoos on my arm say it all. The wolf howling at the moon with the caption "Fear None", and the Phoenix with the caption "Out of the Ashes."
