Reply
Fri 10 Mar, 2006 06:11 pm
I was recently in an accident. There was an unexpected snow storm and the roads were not clear. I was going all of about 20 mph, hit a patch of ice under the snow, slid into a tree - fortunately no one was hurt.
I brought the car to the shop and the owner quoted about $2k in damages. He did suggest that I make a claim at my insurance agency as it was weather related and therefore I am not considered at fault.
Went through all the insurance crap and then I get a surcharge notice in the mail. Talk to the thoroughly knowledgeable service rep and basically her response was if there was another car involved then it would be considered a weather related incident, but since I cleverly avoided hitting another car I am considered per the insurance company at fault. I can of course appeal at a cost to the Commonwealth of $50 (no charge at all to the insurance company).
I send in my $50 and my appeal form - explaining why I am not at fault - took all of a day for my check to clear, then about a month later I get a letter from the court saying I don't even have to come in - it is obvious that it is weather related and I get no surcharge.
Insurance company just automatically sends this stuff out - hoping you won't fight it. No skin off their back even if they are wrong - however, the poor average Joe needs to spend $50 even in an obvious situation.
I'd send the insurance company a bill for the court costs.
Funny - when I called the service rep to complain about the letter - she said I should fight and nicely informed me that the insurance company would not reimburse me even if I was not at fault.
You could let them know that you will be looking for a new insurance company if they don't refund your court costs.
Of course they do that. They're in the business of collecting as much as they can, and paying out as little as possible.
It happened to me too. I was pretty much run off the road by an oncoming ambulance with no sirens, hit ice and slid into a parked car. Police report even noted black ice. Same thing happened as you, got it cleared after appealing.
This "surcharge notice" you're talking about is just plain bizarre. Nice way for the State to make a bit of extra change, I guess.
Ticomaya - it isn't the State that gets the money - the insurance companies do - basically you pay through the nose for insurance premiums then when you need the insurance money that you are entitled to - they tack on a surcharge if you are deemed more than 50% at fault. The insurance company keeps the money. In addition, they increase your points against you so your annual premium goes up. Basically whatever they end up paying out - they get back between surcharges and extra points because now you are a bad driver.
I do plan on complaining especially since this insurance is offered through my company - you get a slight group discount. The positive side is that my company gives you a couple of chooses of insurance companies so I can still get the group discount with another company.
Slappy did you actually have to go to court? I know some one else who almost had the exact same sort of accident I did and he had to go to court. There was recently some people who wrote into the Globe about this court appeals - seems like it takes about 18 months for get a court date. In the mean time you have to pay the surcharges - if the court deems you are less than 50% then the insurance company pays back the money to you. What a damn scam.
No, just sent the appeal back in, as far as I know. This was back in high school when I was under my dad's insurance. Pretty sure there was no court.
I found the letters about this whole appeal stuff. One poor sap wrote in that he received a notice to appeal in court, but it would be over 18 months due to high volume of appeals (wonder why so high). Then in another month he received a second letter stating he furnished enough evidence to find him less than 50% at fault.
It seems because of the high number of appeals, many they are determining right off the bat these drivers are not at fault. If they can determine this was quickly and easily - my turnover time for this was less than a month - why can't they put some basic guidelines - like snow storm - slippery - no fault.
Because they're banking on the people too lazy to appeal, and who will just pay it.
Linkat wrote:Ticomaya - it isn't the State that gets the money - the insurance companies do - basically you pay through the nose for insurance premiums then when you need the insurance money that you are entitled to - they tack on a surcharge if you are deemed more than 50% at fault. The insurance company keeps the money. In addition, they increase your points against you so your annual premium goes up. Basically whatever they end up paying out - they get back between surcharges and extra points because now you are a bad driver.
It sounds as if the insurance lobby was quite successful, but the non-refundable $50 appeal fee goes to the State, correct? That was the money I was referring to. The Insurance company declares you to be involved in an accident and more than 50% at fault, the State sends a "surcharge notice," and pockets $50 every time someone appeals. Pretty sweet little racket they've got going.
I remember being a young naive college grads and sending my resume to a couple of insurance companies - I am so glad I never got a job there. I can't imagine working some where that everyone instantly hates you. My job is much better - I make money for people.
And I help everyone's favorite people, car dealers, make more money.
Nice slappy - another hated group - it does sound like a nice racket, Ticomaya - what did the wonderful Commonwealth do for my $50. About 15 minutes of work and a form letter. They probably discovered that it is now cheaper for them to now just send a form letter stating you are not at fault rather than spend all that time in court. I still cannot believe how efficient they are at depositing checks. It was within 48 hours of me mailing the appeal that the check cleared - no joke. Just imagine if the government were so efficient with other things?
It sounds a bit like a Grishim novel - refuse every initial claim.
Slappy recently became my favorite ex car salesman.
Actually, the Acura salesman I was working with on my recent purchase was a nice guy. Sure, he was trying to sell me a car but compared to the a-holes I ran into at Honda and VW, he was a peach.
I drove a TL and then the RL. I was more interested in the RL but explained my problem with narrow garage doors. He shrugged and told me to take the car home to see if it fit. I don't live anywhere near the dealership. While here I posted a note to Slappy on my thread above, caught up on some messages and returned the car about 2 hours later.
I gave him a check to hold the car overnight so I could bring Mr B by the next day. That didn't work out but, as Mr B was working at home that day, I called and asked if I could swing by, pick up the car and bring it back here for him to check it out. I had the car about 3 hours that day.
During the whole process I never felt that he was trying to sell my husband a car. When I filled out the sales and finance agreements using only my name and income he never asked if or inferred it could/should be a joint purchase.
The fact that he was selling a great car and he knew that someone would buy it if I didn't might have helped but it was a pretty painless experience.
Stumble It!
Tweet This
Bookmark on Delicious
Share on Facebook
Share on MySpace