by Guest » Wed Jun 02, 2010 04:55 am
My agent sold me liability insurance twice on my s500 mercedes and I owed $50k on it. The car in registered to my daughter and the credit union. The first time the policy lapse before I noticed it. The second time he did it again, I called him up and asked him to change it 10 times over a 3 week period. Subsequently my daughter had a wreck in it and now the claim department says they have no record of me calling to change the policy and the agent lied and said I asked for it after the accident. What can I do?
Posted: Wed Jun 02, 2010 05:01 am Post Subject:
What can I do?
Post something that makes a little more sense.You mention liability insurance (which only applies to other vehicles) and that you owe $50k on your own vehicle. These two things have nothing to do with each other. You then mention that the policy lapsed and you called about this. Okay.... what is your point and what happened? Nothing and the policy was not in affect when she had the accident? If so, you might want to mention these "minor" details.
I also don't see how someone pays twice for liability insurance. Does this mean that there were two policies for the same vehicle? Was one supposed to be cancelled and that amount applied to the other?
Again, please provide _some_ details and be more clear. We, as is true of your insurance company, cannot read your mind.
Posted: Wed Jun 02, 2010 05:07 am Post Subject:
First of all this was a "friend" who sold me the policy I trusted him. After the policy lapsed I went to his office to pay the balance of the old policy, he then sold me another policy (liability). I was told because it was a lienholder that maybe he should have sold me full coverage and because it was in my daughters name that he should have insured her and me as an additonal driver.
Posted: Wed Jun 02, 2010 05:13 am Post Subject:
Still does not explain what the issue is. Okay... _was the policy enforce at the time of the accident_? If you paid on the old policy and paid on the new, then it appears that the policy was enforce. Is this correct and the policy lapsing is not an issue?
From you last post it appears that your daughter was in an at-fault accident and damaged the vehicle and that the policy you obtained did not have any collision coverage. I'm guessing at all of this as you never really mention any details or what the _real_ issues are.
If all of this is correct, did the old policy have collision coverage and was the lien holder on that policy? Was there a lapse in coverage or was the old policy continued?
I could go on to ask if your insurance has denied some type of claim and if so, what are the details of this denial and why was it denied.
Again, please take a moment and add some details.
Posted: Wed Jun 02, 2010 05:24 am Post Subject:
Posted: Wed Jun 02, 2010 05:26 am Post Subject:
'yes the policy was enforced at the time of the accident, it covered the other party car, yes my daughter was at fault. Neither policy had collision and neither policy listed the lien holde. There was a lapse in the policy for about 3 months. My daughter had the accident 3 weeks after I obtained the 2nd policy. My claim was denied because I did not have the proper coverage, I only had liability. They concluded that because I had liability twice then I intended to have liability. But I trusted my friend to do the right thing, my other agents have always given me the proper coverage
Posted: Wed Jun 02, 2010 05:27 am Post Subject:
I want my agent to pay for my car, $12k. He sold me the wrong insurance.
Posted: Wed Jun 02, 2010 05:37 am Post Subject:
The argument against you is that you were provided a copy of 2 policies showing no collision coverage and you never said anything about it. Also, you would have signed two applications... both on which you never asked for collision coverage. You can argue that you told your friend you wanted collision coverage or that you told him their was a lien holder but this would have been verbal. What they have is _two- of your requests not asking for collision coverage on the policy and when both the times that you were given a copy of the policy to review, you never mentioned not having this coverage.
Perhaps your friend is willing to confirm that you told him about the lien holder and, knowing this, he should have reminded you that you needed collision coverage. If so, he can either pay for your loss or you can file a claim with his E&O carrier (errors and omissions). But I'm going to guess that he will deny knowing their was a lien on the vehicle.
But that raises another question... your lien holder should have been informed that your policy lapsed. If so, they will usually force place collision coverage on the vehicle and have you pay the bill. Did your carrier notify them that your policy had lapsed? This does not help you but if there is a requirement that your carrier inform your lien holder of the lapse and they did not, then your lien holder might pursue a claim/complaint against your carrier. Now that I think about it though, this policy and the prior one did not list your lien holder. At what point was your lien holder dropped from the policy? In order to obtain a loan the lien holder is going to require collision coverage and that they be placed on the policy. Either this was never done or at some point they were dropped from the policy (and collision coverage was dropped). When did this happen?
Posted: Wed Jun 02, 2010 05:46 am Post Subject:
My agent also sold me the car and he new that my daughter go a loan from the credit union who paid him for the car, so he can't denied knowing that. The lien holder was dropped apparently when he sold me the insurance because they were on the insurance when I used another agent/company before and the collision was dropped at the same time, July 08. I don't know if the lienholder contacted him or not or if he contacted them.
Posted: Wed Jun 02, 2010 05:46 am Post Subject:
My agent also sold me the car and he new that my daughter go a loan from the credit union who paid him for the car, so he can't denied knowing that. The lien holder was dropped apparently when he sold me the insurance because they were on the insurance when I used another agent/company before and the collision was dropped at the same time, July 08. I don't know if the lienholder contacted him or not or if he contacted them.
Posted: Wed Jun 02, 2010 06:02 am Post Subject:
Usually the insurance company (not the agent) is required to notify the lien holder that the policy had ended. I don't know exactly what the law is on this and I'm sure it changes from state to state. But you may want to ask that old carrier if they ever sent the CU notice that your policy expired.
As I mentioned, you can send a letter to your agent explaining that he knew of the lien holder and ask him to pay for your loss. I'm guessing that he won't. If he won't, you can file suit against him and see where it goes.
But as I mentioned, you have huge hurdles against you. You signed a document, not once but _twice_ and you never asked for collision coverage. You were then sent not one, but _two_ policies confirming that you did not have collision coverage but you never raised this as an issue. So what a judge would look at is that even if your agent should have brought up the issue of no collision coverage, knowing you had a lien, who holds the ultimate responsibility in obtaining the proper coverage. Yes, the agent made a bad... but how much of this was his fault and how much was your own.
I'm not saying you don't have a valid argument... just that I suspect you would need to file suit against the agent and it probably is not likely you'd win.
Add your comment