X  |  CLOSE
Report: #1491918

Complaint Review: Homesite Insurance Company of the Midwest - Binghamton New York

  • Submitted:
  • Updated:
  • Reported By: Nicholas Pavlik — Bluffton S.C. United States
  • Homesite Insurance Company of the Midwest P.O.Box 5300 Binghamton, New York United States

Homesite Insurance Company of the Midwest Geico Insurance Co. They cheated me out of my homeowner's claim for roof damage. Binghamton New York

*Consumer Comment: The State Won't Do Anything Because....

*Author of original report: Not Really

*Consumer Comment: Not Really

Show customers why they should trust your business over your competitors...

Is this
Report about YOU
listed on other sites?
Those sites steal
Ripoff Report's
content.
We can get those
removed for you!
Find out more here.
How to fix
Ripoff Report
If your business is
willing to make a
commitment to
customer satisfaction
Click here now..

On 7/5/19, my roof sustained damage from a wind/hail storm. On Nov. 2019, I noticed the damage and reported it to Samantha Anderson of Homesite Ins./Geico. She sent 2 adjusters out and on Nov.15,one adjuster advised her of the loss value at $12,569.27.

Ms. Anderson sent me a loss payment of $1326.31 on Nov.23,2019. She said in her letter along with the check that they subtracted $6460 for my deductible,which is correct. However,she also deducted another $4782.96 which her letter stated that this amount is NRD or non-recoverable depreciation. This policy language or letters NRD in not shown anywhere in my H.O. policy or in the Wind/hail rider. It is a deceptive entry and fraudulent. My policy endorsement states "if the age of the roof at time of loss is 10 yrs. old it will paid at replacement cost WITHOUT deduction for depreciation"

My roof is 14 yrs. old and has Architectural shingles with a 30 yr. rating. My neighbors all received payment for their similar roof damage claims with the normal deductibles but witout deduction for the deceptive NRD deduction. This is policy language fraud ,confusing and hidden to the consumer.

I've paid over $1000 per year for this H.O. policy and was fooled into thinking my roof would be covered with the usual deductible only. I am also filing complaints with the State of S.C.,Better Business Bureau and other Social medias.This has been my only claim with Geico in 15 yrs. and my only clain with Homesite since Geico assigned this company to me 7 yrs. ago. What a deceptive way to avoid paying a small clain such as this. A RIPoff!

This report was posted on Ripoff Report on 02/19/2020 09:27 AM and is a permanent record located here: https://www.ripoffreport.com/report/homesite-insurance-company/binghamton-new-york-geico-y-1491918. The posting time indicated is Arizona local time. Arizona does not observe daylight savings so the post time may be Mountain or Pacific depending on the time of year. Ripoff Report has an exclusive license to this report. It may not be copied without the written permission of Ripoff Report. READ: Foreign websites steal our content

Search for additional reports

If you would like to see more Rip-off Reports on this company/individual, search here:

Report & Rebuttal
Respond to this report!
What's this?
Also a victim?
What's this?
Repair Your Reputation!
What's this?

Updates & Rebuttals

REBUTTALS & REPLIES:
1Author
2Consumer
0Employee/Owner

#3 Consumer Comment

The State Won't Do Anything Because....

AUTHOR: Jim - (United States)

POSTED: Thursday, February 20, 2020

it isn't deceptive.  The policy is not a full replacement value policy - accordingly, it doesn't need to contain the wording you think needs to be there.  It isn't fraudulent in the least for all of the reasons I already told you, but to remind you...since it isn't a Full Replacement Policy subject to a deductible, there is no reason for the clause about unrecoverable depreciation - since that is implied in the policy.

In addition, the number of years you happen to be a customer is irrelevant and earns you nothing.  Nobody really cares how long anyone is a customer, especially with an insurance policy.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#2 Author of original report

Not Really

AUTHOR: Nicholas - (United States)

POSTED: Thursday, February 20, 2020

My primary gripe is that the endorsement is deceptive and confusing,misleading to an average consumer,who would not suspect that NRD clause,which is nowhere to be found in the policy or endorsement itself.

Based on my good history with both Geico and Homesite, they should pay me based on good faith.  Let's see what the State of S.C. feels about this deceptive policy writing.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#1 Consumer Comment

Not Really

AUTHOR: Jim - (United States)

POSTED: Wednesday, February 19, 2020

It's pretty standard to have the adjuster base payment back to you for the undepreciated cost of the roof, especially for a composite roof.  In such a situation, the adjuster evaluates the information, some of which you provided, and some of which is assessed by the adjuster.  The undepreciated cost of the roof isn't as simple as taking the age of the roof at 14 years and dividing it by the 30 year rating because the assessor may determine the roof may have a remaining life of more than the remaining 16 years, or less.

My policy endorsement states "if the age of the roof at time of loss is 10 yrs. old it will paid at replacement cost WITHOUT deduction for depreciation"  So it sounds like the insurance policy for your home is full replacement value (subject to a deductible) for the 1st 10 years of the life of the roof.  After the 10 year period, the FRV portion goes away, and replaced by what is called ACV, or actual cash value, which would be subject to unrecoverable depreciation.

The insurance policy would have to have been a full replacement value policy WITHOUT the clause for the 1st 10 years.  In fact, you probably needed to reevaluate your insurance policy AFTER the 1st 10 years and evaluate whether you needed to update your insurance.

My neighbors all received payment for their similar roof damage claims with the normal deductibles but witout deduction for the deceptive NRD deduction.  You assume the home insurance they had was the same as yours and did not update their insurance somewhere along the line.  I would not make such an assumption.  Not all policies are the same.

A policy does not have to specifically state that there will be non-recoverable depreciation - it is actuallyinferred in your policy with the 10 year FRV clause.  It's unfortunate for you, BUT it sounds like they're paying in accordance with your policy....

Respond to this report!
What's this?

Advertisers above have met our
strict standards for business conduct.

X
What do hackers,
questionable attorneys and
fake court orders have in common?
...Dishonest Reputation Management Investigates Reputation Repair
Free speech rights compromised

WATCH News
Segment Now