by johnpaul.krcik » Sat Feb 20, 2010 05:47 pm
Hi, I live in New York State.
I re-initiated a full coverage auto policy with Geico after having kept my car in storage for 6 months, while being overseas. My Credit Union was listed on the policy as the lienholder; a 'Loss Payable Clause'was attached to my policy and Geico informed my CU of coverage being in place.
Approximately 10 days later, Geico contacted me and informed that an underwriting review had determined that I didn't qualify to be written under the preferred rating company (Geico General Insurance Company). The underwriter provided me with a quote for my same coverages in the standard rating company (Geico Indemnity Company). The 6 month premium went from $803 to $3,760. Bewildered, and completely unable to afford that cost, I went through several coverage options with the underwriter and finally determined that I could only afford the state required liability at $1,270/6 mos.
A liabilty policy was issued with Geico Indemnity, and the Geico General policy was canceled. Though the Indemnity policy has the same policy number as the original General policy, it has a different term date: effective 1/26, as opposed to 1/12. Further, when I look on the Geico website under policy documents, one folder representing each of the term dates mentioned above. Finally, the Indemnity policy effective on 1/26 is listed as 'New Business.'
A few days later, an insurance agent friend convinced me that I was putting myself at great financial risk considering my outstanding auto loan. Together we logged on to the Geico website and he was able to tweak coverages so that comprehensive coverage could be added for $180. Living in NYC and I don't drive very much anymore, we decided my risk of an accident was lower and left off the collision coverage. We submitted the changes online, and Geico sent me a confirmation email of the coverage being added.
My car was stolen about 10 days later. NO, I am not joking.
I filed a claim and Geico is currently denying it. Their denial of the claim is based on a complicated issue that actually doesnt relate to my question. So, I won't get into now, but can explain later.
My question actually goes back to the original full coverage policy initiated on 1/12, and the attached 'loss payable clause.'
New York State has no statutes or regulations reagarding the obligations of an Insurer to notify a lienholder or loss payee of coverage changes. The Insurance Department does have a published opinion on their website stating that while there are no state regulations, any policy provisions regarding notification must be abided by.
In regards to notification of coverage changes, the loss payable clause states:
"We will mail notice to the Lienholder at least 10 days before we cancel his interest in the policy."
Here is my question:
In the above cirumstance, did Geico have a responsibility to send notification to the lienholder of the cancellation of the 1/12 Geico General Policy, according to this statement in the 'Loss Payable Clause.'
Its unclear to me due to the following:
Q1) What does 'cancel' mean?
-- Does 'cancel' simply mean any elimination/removal of coverage impacting the lienholder?
-- Would 'we cancel' specifically indicate removals/revocations of coverages initiated by Geico, or would 'we cancel' also indicate a request from me the Insured to remove coverages impacting the lienholder?
I, the insured, did not request that Geico remove coverages from or cancel the 1/12 General policy. In actuality, all I did was purchase a new policy from Geico Indemnity that provided liability coverage, after Geico informed me that they had disqualified me from the Geico General company and would not continue to provide coverage under that policy.
Q2) Would Geico or the Insured be considered to have canceled the lienholder's coverage in this situation?
Thanks very much for your thoughts on the matter.
I re-initiated a full coverage auto policy with Geico after having kept my car in storage for 6 months, while being overseas. My Credit Union was listed on the policy as the lienholder; a 'Loss Payable Clause'was attached to my policy and Geico informed my CU of coverage being in place.
Approximately 10 days later, Geico contacted me and informed that an underwriting review had determined that I didn't qualify to be written under the preferred rating company (Geico General Insurance Company). The underwriter provided me with a quote for my same coverages in the standard rating company (Geico Indemnity Company). The 6 month premium went from $803 to $3,760. Bewildered, and completely unable to afford that cost, I went through several coverage options with the underwriter and finally determined that I could only afford the state required liability at $1,270/6 mos.
A liabilty policy was issued with Geico Indemnity, and the Geico General policy was canceled. Though the Indemnity policy has the same policy number as the original General policy, it has a different term date: effective 1/26, as opposed to 1/12. Further, when I look on the Geico website under policy documents, one folder representing each of the term dates mentioned above. Finally, the Indemnity policy effective on 1/26 is listed as 'New Business.'
A few days later, an insurance agent friend convinced me that I was putting myself at great financial risk considering my outstanding auto loan. Together we logged on to the Geico website and he was able to tweak coverages so that comprehensive coverage could be added for $180. Living in NYC and I don't drive very much anymore, we decided my risk of an accident was lower and left off the collision coverage. We submitted the changes online, and Geico sent me a confirmation email of the coverage being added.
My car was stolen about 10 days later. NO, I am not joking.
I filed a claim and Geico is currently denying it. Their denial of the claim is based on a complicated issue that actually doesnt relate to my question. So, I won't get into now, but can explain later.
My question actually goes back to the original full coverage policy initiated on 1/12, and the attached 'loss payable clause.'
New York State has no statutes or regulations reagarding the obligations of an Insurer to notify a lienholder or loss payee of coverage changes. The Insurance Department does have a published opinion on their website stating that while there are no state regulations, any policy provisions regarding notification must be abided by.
In regards to notification of coverage changes, the loss payable clause states:
"We will mail notice to the Lienholder at least 10 days before we cancel his interest in the policy."
Here is my question:
In the above cirumstance, did Geico have a responsibility to send notification to the lienholder of the cancellation of the 1/12 Geico General Policy, according to this statement in the 'Loss Payable Clause.'
Its unclear to me due to the following:
Q1) What does 'cancel' mean?
-- Does 'cancel' simply mean any elimination/removal of coverage impacting the lienholder?
-- Would 'we cancel' specifically indicate removals/revocations of coverages initiated by Geico, or would 'we cancel' also indicate a request from me the Insured to remove coverages impacting the lienholder?
I, the insured, did not request that Geico remove coverages from or cancel the 1/12 General policy. In actuality, all I did was purchase a new policy from Geico Indemnity that provided liability coverage, after Geico informed me that they had disqualified me from the Geico General company and would not continue to provide coverage under that policy.
Q2) Would Geico or the Insured be considered to have canceled the lienholder's coverage in this situation?
Thanks very much for your thoughts on the matter.
Posted: Sat Feb 20, 2010 06:22 pm Post Subject:
Q1) What does 'cancel' mean?
Exactly what it means, cancel. However, what exactly were the terms of the original policy? Assuming, that you made payments on it before the underwritting and disqaulification part, I am not clear on that length of time. There should have been coverage before that new policy took effect.
I filed a claim and Geico is currently denying it.
Why, didn't you buy comp 10 days before?
Would Geico or the Insured be considered to have canceled the lienholder's coverage in this situation?
Depends, I would assume that naming the leinholder would have taken care of it, but maybe not.
Posted: Sun Feb 21, 2010 05:03 pm Post Subject:
This claim has giant red flags all over it...How you were able to NOT have coll and comp on a vehicle with a lein holder I don't know...but to add, and have friend 'tweak' some coverages on line, leaving collision off, but adding comp, then your car is stolen ten days later, well...you're going to have problems..
In order to assist you we need to know the wording of the written denial you received from Gieco.
Q2) Would Geico or the Insured be considered to have canceled the lienholder's coverage in this situation?
Neither one can...it is your duty, and agreement with your lien holder to carrier coll/comp (only they don't care about liability)..If you fail to do so that is on you. If Gieco had a policy on that vehicle knowing there was a lein holder, and proof of coverage was sent to that lein holder..per your post..the state of NY does not require them to advise the lein holder of this change/lapse/cancelation. But apparently they have this written into their contract..as.."We will mail notice to the Lienholder at least 10 days before we cancel his interest in the policy."
. When you wrote the policy on 1/12--at THAT time did you list the lein holder? Also who had the policy that you 'canceled' when you went overseas for six months? And how did your lein holder allow it to set uninsured for this six month term? Are you 100% sure that your leinholder hasn't placed manditory coll/comp on that vehicle and are adding this to your note?Q1) What does 'cancel' mean?
gone, over, finished, no more--Does 'cancel' simply mean any elimination/removal of coverage impacting the lienholder?
no I wouldn't think so at all..your policy should 'define' what it means...all policys have definition pages, usually in the front of the policy then again at the beginning of each coverage.--
Would 'we cancel' specifically indicate removals/revocations of coverages initiated by Geico, or would 'we cancel' also indicate a request from me the Insured to remove coverages impacting the lienholder?
In this context I would think it would me if Geico initiates the cancelation, be it for mis-rep, non-payment, whatever reason.It sounds like you are "looking" hard for coverage for this stolen vehicle, and I don't blame you, but if the reason for their denial is valid, this makes no difference at all.
Posted: Sun Feb 21, 2010 05:24 pm Post Subject:
leaving collision off, but adding comp, then your car is stolen ten days later, well...you're going to have problems..
True, but as long as the comp coverage is in place and the vehicle is not recovered, the lienholder would be covered. But can you really buy comp only coverage from Geico?
Posted: Sun Feb 21, 2010 05:56 pm Post Subject:
But can you really buy comp only coverage from Geico?
You CAN buy comp only from any carrier (meaning no collision)..also carriers that allow 'sleeping' or 'parked' coverage will allow comp only (period no other coverages at all)...but lein holders sure won't....lot of insured's with older vehicles do this...but what I don't understand is how his lein holder allowed this, and how/why they allowed the six months of no coverage at all! :?Posted: Mon Feb 22, 2010 12:11 am Post Subject:
.also carriers that allow 'sleeping' or 'parked' coverage will allow comp only (period no other coverages at all)...but
Thats kinda of what I thought. I meant say insurers not just the Geco.
Add your comment