Geico Insurance,Karen Simpson, Lisa Fishman, Deborah Schmidt, Jeremy Connor Do you want to know the truth about Geico? Woodbury New York

""The police report cited first driver for failing to yield right of way as a contributing cause of the accident. An outside witness stated that first driver was driving erratically and went through stop sign and hit other vehicle.""

Read the above carefully.  The police report mentions an OUTSIDE WITNESS who claims the driver was driving irratically and ran the stop sign.

THIS is why you have been denied your claim.

It doesn't matter whether you hit the other car or the other car hit you.

What matters is the CAUSE of the accident.  The reason you are being blamed for causing the accident is right in your report;

""The police report cited first driver for failing to yield right of way as a contributing cause of the accident. An outside witness stated that first driver was driving erratically and went through stop sign and hit other vehicle.""

The police report includes an OUTSIDE WITNESS who indicated that you were driving irratically and went through the stop sign-hence, you caused the accident.  It doesn't matter if the other car hit you or visa versa-you caused the accident.

It's time for you to move on.

Insurance companies love to deny claims,   they love to put the blame on the innocent person.   This Is why bad drivers get away with causing accidents.  I don't believe none of their commericals.

All state says you are In good hands yeah rights.   Don't bother listening to the nuts on this website they are pro business.  I see geico Is becoming more like progressive insurance.

Well just keep reporting your experince with these insurance companies,  to help warn people.

Of course the other driver who hit you will not admit to It,  they seem to be more mentally crazy people on the roads.  And they are the ones who seem to get believed more.

....abused, don't come here and tell us what isn't in the report.  What isn't in the report is irrelevant.  You could also claim a large pink elephant crossed the road and that little thing was missing from the report...too.  It only matters what is in the report; anything else...nobody cares about.

Unfortunately, your opinion is also not relevant to the case as well.  We all have opinions...but the only opinion that matters belongs to the insurance company.  What you think is physical evidence is not fact - it's also subject to interpretation and when taken into consideration with the eyewitness account, it clearly didn't add up with the insurance company.  This isn't a case of you deciding to be 'Perry Mason' and finding the person thought to be 100% guilty was really innocent.  You were determined to be 100% at fault.  The fact they changed it to 66% probably will lower your insurance rates...slightly.  On top of it, both parties are Geico customers, so it isn't like they were really ripping off anyone.  They paid on the claim.  You may not like that...but it is what it is.

Finally, you should know something about the BBB.  The companies you claim have 'A' ratings...are members of BBB. They pay dues.  When you pay dues and people turn around and complain, it doesn't affect their rating.  There was a company in South Florida (I won't say the name or industry, but they're a pretty prominent rip off artist on this site) that had well over 630 complaints in a 36 month reporting period.  They're members of the BBB.  Their rating you ask?  An 'A'.  Only in the world of the BBB can a company have over 600 complaints in a 36 month period and still have an A.  If a company has a grade of anything other than an A on the BBB, they generally aren't members of the BBB.  That's the only thing one can take from a BBB rating.  If you don't believe me - read THIS website....

Robert gave you great advice...it's time to move on.

....abused, don't come here and tell us what isn't in the report.  What isn't in the report is irrelevant.  You could also claim a large pink elephant crossed the road and that little thing was missing from the report...too.  It only matters what is in the report; anything else...nobody cares about.

Unfortunately, your opinion is also not relevant to the case as well.  We all have opinions...but the only opinion that matters belongs to the insurance company.  What you think is physical evidence is not fact - it's also subject to interpretation and when taken into consideration with the eyewitness account, it clearly didn't add up with the insurance company.  This isn't a case of you deciding to be 'Perry Mason' and finding the person thought to be 100% guilty was really innocent.  You were determined to be 100% at fault.  The fact they changed it to 66% probably will lower your insurance rates...slightly, but it doesn't affect the payment because they're obligated to pay the repair shop the entire amount of the repair because it was your fault.  On top of it, both parties are Geico customers, so it isn't like they were really ripping off anyone.  They paid on the claim.  You may not like that...but it is what it is.

You then question how it could cost that much to repair the car when you were traveling at a slow speed.  First, it's irrelvant what it costs the insurance company if (1) you were at fault and (2) the other party has a legit estimate from a repair shop.  I can tell you from my own experience, most car frames bend pretty easy, even at slow speeds.  Most cars that visit a body shop will need to visit a frame straightener.  A visit to a shop that straightens the frame alone would cost about $1200-$1500.  The rest, when you add parts and labor, could easily add up to the $3,700 figure without a problem.  I had a car back into my rear fender at about 7 MPH.  The cost easily went over $4,000.  The other party picked up the deductible....a nice guy.

Finally, you should know something about the BBB.  The companies you claim have 'A' ratings...are members of BBB. They pay dues.  When you pay dues and people turn around and complain, it doesn't affect their rating.  There was a company in South Florida (I won't say the name or industry, but they're a pretty prominent rip off artist on this site) that had well over 630 complaints in a 36 month reporting period.  They're members of the BBB.  Their rating you ask?  An 'A'.  Only in the world of the BBB can a company have over 600 complaints in a 36 month period and still have an A.  If a company has a grade of anything other than an A on the BBB, they generally aren't members of the BBB.  That's the only thing one can take from a BBB rating.  If you don't believe me - read THIS website....

Robert gave you great advice...it's time to move on.

Insurance companies don't like to pay anything.  They rather blame you the innocent driver.  Its diffuclt to put the blame on someone,  If the other driver has geico to.  So to make It easy they put the blame on you besides the other geico insured.

Bottome line the insurance companies love to blame the innocent person,   progressive insurance Is horrible.    Put I just saw on t.v. this law fire for injured people said.

Insurance companies have been sued for wrongfully denying claims,  & wrongfully blaming people for causing accidents.

With the experience I've had with Geico, they should all loose their jobs.

Anything they say is a lie. I think you have to go through a training school of lying before you get hired there. So if you are a Geico employee, nothing and I mean nothing you say is the truth. Did you see the movie The Rainmaker with Matt Damon? The insurance company that they sued, come to find out had a manuel on how to deny claims.  WHERE DOES GEICO KEEP IT'S MANUAL?  Is the training very long? Is it on the job lying training? If you work for Geico you ought to keep off this site because you are going to get slammed everytime you get on by the ones you stole from.

With the experience I've had with Geico, they should all loose their jobs.

Anything they say is a lie. I think you have to go through a training school of lying before you get hired there. So if you are a Geico employee, nothing and I mean nothing you say is the truth. Did you see the movie The Rainmaker with Matt Damon? The insurance company that they sued, come to find out had a manuel on how to deny claims.  WHERE DOES GEICO KEEP IT'S MANUAL?  Is the training very long? Is it on the job lying training? If you work for Geico you ought to keep off this site because you are going to get slammed everytime you get on by the ones you stole from.

 Do they pay their employees extra to reply to these complaints?

Do you have to work an exta hour or two and get part of the "bonus" money for taking care of their sleezy affairs.

Look at the web-site How Geico waste 9 million a year on search engines.

If you work for Geico, your mouth or fingers are moving.... translates into

YOU'RE LYING  It's so simple even a caveman can get it

I have 60 pages of documentation on my accident and it's like these people at Geico are robots. They are retarded. When I have showed people these documents they are dumbfounded. I mean I have it in writing from them, lie after lie.  As I told all the adjusters on my claim (plural) since I kept going higher, I think they have to go through lying training to be hired.

I'm in the process of putting up a web-site so people can see what they are getting into to. I have fliers that I have handed out, posted and sent e-mail.

I really wish there was some way to get in contact with you as I truly believe the only way to stop these crooks is word of mouth.

"Just like Geico you and Robert ignore the listed physical evidence."

Wrong.  I haven't ignored anything-especially the statement of an independent witness who claimed you ran the Stop sign.

"Do either of you have ties to Geico or the insurance industry?"

NOT that I'm aware of.

"For starters just explain how the damage runs from an inch behind his driver door past his tire and how is my bumper covered with his tire rubber when I just
hit him once going forward with the corner of my bumper at 4 mph."

Here's where you're done!  Now you admit that you were moving "I just hit him once going forward with the corner of my bumper at 4 mph."  It doesn't matter if you really were moving at about 4 mph or if you had slammed on your brakes and was STOPPED and the other car rubbed against your bumper.  It DOES NOT MATTER-YOU caused the accident.

"How does someone run a stop sign at 4 mph when you cannot even go forward
at this stop sign?"

It's easy as you know.  Instead of stopping BEFORE the stop sign as you should, you simply "creep" along at about 4 mpg.

"It is not just my opinion but the Insurance Dept. put it in writing that it was not my fault and so did the Geico estimator on my estimate."

THAT IS NOT WHAT IS ON THE REPORT you posted here.  NO WHERE on the report you posted does it state you were not at fault.  Adjusters do NOT DETERMINE FAULT-they assess damage.

"Both said my car was stopped at the point of impact and another car rubbed against it."

THAT IS NOT WHAT IS ON THE REPORT.  They stated that it "appears" that your were stopped-not the same thing.  In low impact accidents, the adjuster does NOT KNOW if you were stopped or not.  As I stated earlier, even if you were stopped when the impact occured, YOU were the cause of the accident.  In a rebuttal, you admit you were moving forward at 4 mph!  You're done-time to move on.

"I do not think many people are going to be fooled in  this situation."

You are correct-no one is fooled by your assertions.  You caused the accident.  It's over and done.  An independent witness claims you were driving irratically and ran the stop sign.  Unless you can get this witness to recant his/her statements to the police the case is OVER.  Nothing you post is going to change the outcome.

 1. There was no ticket. It would not hold up in court.  I would have had to have been driving up on the grass to hit him and this would have been stated in the report. There was nothing about being impaired. As far as the State taking my part, as previously stated the Insurance Department did.

 2. I undestamd Geico employees like to say they were just doing their job but unfortunately I think most people would agree that the physical evidence is more than conclusive. Why did they not respond to it?  Why dont you respond to it?

 3. I think that if they admitted they were wrong (looked in the mirror and say I messed up) and corrected the situation people would have more respect for them but of course this is out of the question.                                                                Of course I was upset with the officer. I was speaking to the Internal Affairs Bureau for months.  Also when I spoke to the officer afterwards he did not give reasons.  However even the police acknowledged that insurance companies regularly ignore the police report (and other false statemnts) when they want to. Insuraince companies are used to regularly dealing with all these things and I fully believe Geico knew the truth and should have set things right when it was settled if they were acting in good faith.

If you are so adament in your position, you have recourse.  SUE the person who was driving the car the "hit you" or sue the owner of the car that "hit you."

You are entitled to your day in court-go file a lawsuit now.  It doesn't matter what GEICO says, you can still SUE the other party for your damages.

Keep this in mind; in most jurisdictions at an intersection with a stop sign you are required to stop before the sign.  More importantly, you are not to proceed and enter the intersection UNLESS you can safely clear the intersection.  In other words, even if you were stopped (not creeping at 4 mph as you wrote) you still are the cause of the accident because you had pulled out in front of on-coming traffic that had the right-of-way.  Don't take my word for it, go file your lawsuit Monday.

I don't work for any insurance company-I'm self-employed; computer services and property management.

I had a funny incident back in the 70's in Plattsburgh, NY.  A guy who was stopped in the left lane suddenly made a right turn in front of me.  I was in the right line (2 lanes same direction) and couldn't avoid clipping him.  We both had the same insurance company and Farmer's said that I was 25% responsible (he made an illegal turn) and was only willing to cover 75% of the cost to repair my car. 

I SUED the kid, who was driving, in small claims court!  2 days before the scheduled court date, Farmer's PAID me the remainder of my repair costs.