by selfdefense03 » Tue Oct 02, 2012 06:55 pm
My home was burglarized in July, I filed my claim and out of spite, my ex-wife called and said its a fraudulent claim when she caught wind of what happened. This opened a door of nightmares with questions and a statement under oath which my insurance has the right to do. I spoke to my pastor and he said its not worth the stress alone to continue this and to withdraw my claim and leave it in Gods hands. I've already replaced most of the stuff that was stolen since so much time has passed. What are the steps to just withdraw the claim. I don't want to be someone who has a stroke over this or something. I already work and live in a stressful environment. Thanks in advance.
Posted: Wed Oct 03, 2012 02:03 am Post Subject:
If the insurance company has already done the EUO, it's probably near the end and the insurance company would need to make a decision. So I don't know that there would be much more stress involved. However, to withdraw the claim you only need to write them a letter to this effect.
Posted: Wed Oct 03, 2012 02:30 am Post Subject: how do I withdraw my claim
another reason I want to withdraw the claim that's because my business is primarily cash based and they are questioning I pay everything with cash. with my ex wife saying the things she said, I'm in fear that they try try and file a fraudulent claims against me. if they were going to file 1 when would they do it? thanks again
Posted: Wed Oct 03, 2012 11:42 am Post Subject:
I spoke to my pastor and he said its not worth the stress alone to continue this and to withdraw my claim and leave it in Gods hands.
First, let me say that I am a Christian. Then let me say that your pastor is not giving you good advice . . . because God doesn't pay insurance claims.
If you were to withdraw your claim, it would not prevent you from being prosecuted for insurance fraud -- in fact, it might raise more "red flags" than help. That will certainly not reduce your "stress."
How you pay for things is immaterial. Cash, check, credit card, it makes no difference. You simply have to prove that you owned whatever it is you claim was lost, stolen, or damaged. You either have receipts or other evidence of ownership or you don't. People have lost their entire inventory, and all their business property, in a flood or tornado event, including all of their receipts. Insurance companies still pay claims.
If you cannot prove ownership, the insurance company has the right to deny coverage. It does not mean you were attempting to commit insurance fraud.
In my business, I have many pieces of equipment and various supplies that I have purchased on eBay or from other retailers. I paid using my checking account or my debit/VISA checkcard. I don't necessarily have "receipts" like that from a cash register, but I can probably show a record of the transaction, which is sufficient. If not, I might have trouble getting a claim paid.
And I have purchased lots of things with cash from my pocket. If I fail to keep the receipt (a high likelihood of that, most of the time), it does not prove that I never bought the item. If it is reasonable to assert that I needed something in the course of operating my business, that might be good enough for the insurance company to pay a claim. Or not. Each company is different in how they investigate and pay claims.
If I'm going to be paid on a "replacement cost" basis, it is entirely reasonable for the insurance company to say, "Well, if you don't have a receipt for what you claim was lost, buy a replacement item and send us the receipt and we'll pay the claim." You will either do that or you won't. It's up to you. If you do, you get paid, if you don't, you won't get paid. Simple. Still doesn't mean you've committed (or attempted to commit) insurance fraud if you choose not to replace something.
If you are an honest, reputable, and (generally speaking) profitable business person, there is little to worry about.
Posted: Wed Oct 03, 2012 12:22 pm Post Subject: How do Ii withdraw my homeowners insurance claim
Well that makes alot of sense reading both of the posts. Let me explain a bit more. The insurance is questioning my purchasing alot of items within the last year. I paid cash for most of everything. I explained I went through a divorce and had left with pretty much nothing. I was now 3 yrs later getting more involved and serious in my current relationship and decided to start rebuilding my home and assets and such.
I use a bank account but only deposit whats needed for my overhead and majority I kept at home... its not the safest way or the most common way but its the way my father raised me on saving money and not trusting the banking system. (old fashioned hispanic). So with my ex making accusations of insurance fraud, me not being able to substantiate record of my income from my bank account raises red flags already.
So thats why I want to just take my loss and drop the claim. I certainly don't want to raise "more" red flags but I also don't really have the money to hire an attorney to represent me. Does this make sense? So thats why I'd rather close the claim with no payment than deal further with this. Im a very honest person but I just don't live the average banking life as some.. nothing wrong with that but the way i've been doing things has worked well for me until now that this has happened I'm in a bad position... thanks again.
Posted: Wed Oct 03, 2012 01:28 pm Post Subject:
I have claims all of the time where the person really cannot prove they owned something. They also right on a Proof of Loss form that they bought their 13" CRT TV 3 years ago for $1000.
For an insurance company to pursue fraud they pretty much need a slam dunk, smoking gun on video case. It almost never happens. Also, it needs to be financially worth it. It could easily cost them $30,000 to pursue a fraud claim in court. They would also be counter sued if they lost... costing them the $30,000... perhaps another $30,000 to defend and then might need to pay a judgement. If a claim is only $10,000 or $20,000 it's easier for them just to deny the claim and see what happens. There is no point in "sending a message" and pursuing fraud unless they stand to gain a lot.
I'll give you another example... I have a home owners claim where I can show the fire was set in 3 different locations with accelerant. They insured gave an EUO and stated he was at home at the time and saw the stove catch on fire. I simply denied the $100,000 claim. I doubt I could prove fraud and I'm not about to spend $50,000 trying... that would just be throwing money away. Yes... at some point it becomes worth it but not on your every day home owners $10,000 claim and certainly not because someone cannot support their stolen/destroyed items.
Posted: Wed Oct 03, 2012 01:29 pm Post Subject:
You don't need an attorney. Talk to the claims dept. and ask them if you can replace the lost items at your own expense and send in the receipts. They should have no problem with this.
I had a car trunk full of emergency supplies stolen. I had virtually no receipts for any of the stuff since I had purchased most of it several years earlier. I filed a police report (it is a crime to file a false report, so this adds to credibility of a claim), they paid me the ACV of what was reported as stolen, and upon presentation of receipts for all the replacement items, they paid those additional amounts. Over a couple of months, and two or three claim checks, I replaced everything that had been stolen.
Now, I had an ex-wife at the time, but she did not claim that I was committing insurance fraud. If you can even prove ownership of some of the lost items -- photos or receipts -- that should be sufficient for the insurance company to accept your offer to replace items and submit receipts or other proof of purchase that you actually bought it. You don't have to replace all at once -- you generally have 180 days to complete your claim. They would understand not being able to replace all at one time.
Posted: Wed Oct 03, 2012 08:17 pm Post Subject: How do Ii withdraw my homeowners insurance claim
I read over the entire SUO today and it actually doesn't sound as bad as I thought. I had taken some time to call some attorneys for free consultation and I received a call back this morning from one in Texas. He said if the insurance hasn't made a decision yet, I don't need representation for anything for now. He said if i'm denied then to call them and they will help me recover my claim but not to close it.
Then 30min later he called back and said he wants to send me some paperwork and represent me. I told him what was the change of heart.. he said he wanted to get a jump on this with me.. I got the info by email and he is asking for 40% of the pay out... does this seem odd? 1st he said he can't help nor can anyone until a decision is made and then he asked to represent me for %40 of the pay out....
Posted: Wed Oct 03, 2012 09:38 pm Post Subject:
Blow off the attorney at this point in time. As I said, right now you don't need one, and you should be able to equitably resolve this claim without hiring an attorney. I laid out the math for you above. Only if the insurance company completely denies your claim might you want to hire an attorney.
But even if someone denies your claim, you can ask for a higher level administrative review to make sure your claim denial is within company guidelines.
As tcope has also said, you shouldn't have to go to extraordinary measures to get your claim paid.
Posted: Thu Oct 04, 2012 12:56 pm Post Subject: How do Ii withdraw my homeowners insurance claim
So what your saying is that they may pay out the claim with limitations. Agree to pay for this but maybe not for that? Repay possible items if I purchase and send in receipts? That would work fine with me....
I received the hard copy of the SUO yesturday and I have a friend thats an attorney and is going to read over it for me. Based on all the great help I've received from this board, I may have been over thinking this and stressing myself out way more than I needed to be.
Posted: Thu Oct 04, 2012 01:26 pm Post Subject:
Attorneys love these cases where the insurance many just pay a claim as they do with any other claim and they still take 40% of the cut for doing nothing. I'd do nothing for 40% of someone's claim as well. That's a sweet deal. Truth is, there is really next to nothing that you could do at this point that would change anything. So there is really nothing an attorney could do right now. What you were told initially was 100% on. My guess is that he thought about how easy it would be to take 40% of your settlement for doing nothing so he called you back. I'd cases _exactly_ like this... but the insured also hired a public adjuster. I settle with them and then find out that they don't want to pay the 10% to the public adjuster and don't want to pay the 40% to their attorney because only then do they realize those people just took 50% of _their_ money.
An attorney should be charging 33% and only 40% plus expenses if suit is filed.
Hey, the insurance company may deny your claim (I doubt they would deny the whole thing) or they may deny part of it. You can always hire an attorney at that point. But at least you will be able to make an informed decision and not just throwing away 40% of your settlement. If the insurance company ends up deducting 10% or 20% of your claim because you cannot support it, would you then pay an attorney 40% of _everything_ to collect that extra 10% or 20%?
Just a note: There is no release signed. So you can always take what the insurance company offers and then pursue them just for the difference of what they did not pay.
Add your comment