Geico - Debra Schmidt - Michelle Rutherford NY Insured in Hit and Run in Woodbury New York
In August this year my family and young daughter (19 months old at the time of the accident) NY insureds for minimum state requirements, were struck on our vehicle's driver's side rear quarter panel while traveling on I-95 N in Howard County, Maryland, about 10 minutes south of Howard County General (by ambulance, where I and my daughter were taken immediately after the accident - my husband stayed at the scene to collect our belongings from the highway and take care of the bus), causing us to spin, roll-over 3 times, bang and skid across the highway on the passenger side of our bright orange 1974 Volkswagon Bus Westfalia Camper, flipping again and landing upright in the grassy median during our once-a-year vacation to visit family. The offending vehicle fled the scene and has not been apprehended, nor was there any ascertainable license plate information from the witnesses, except that it was definitely a MD plate. The witnesses confirmed the vehicle was driving erratically before it struck us and there is no question as to the fault of the accident (the offending vehicle's). A police report and claim with our carrier, Geico, were filed immediately. All statements, by witnesses, us and the police corroborate this account and Geico has accepted our claim for No Fault benefits.
Geico agreed to pay (and has been paying) our PIP coverage. Our UM coverage applied only to NY state accidents, per our policy and would have only gone into effect if a "serious bodily injury" threshold were met. Just before Thanksgiving, Geico decided (after my repeated complaints to the NYSID and the NYS Superintendent of Insurance) to cover us under UM/SUM for the MD accident (i.e., applying out of state accident SUM). Detail: we had always had SUM coverage (policyholders for 4 years) but I admittedly (and stupidly) made an uninformed decision to opt for "min. UM coverage only" when documents were sent to us for signature '07 - my husband had renewed the policy over the phone, but I routinely handle bills/papers that have to go back out and I noted just under my signature on the policy that "no changes made to policy; cover letter said to sign and return" although I had checked min UM only. Apparently, my mistake was considered and why/how the NYSID compelled Geico to reinstate our SUM coverage back to the date of the accident (for which we are paying a retroactive premium). For this reinstatement and the hard work of the NYSID, I am grateful.
But I still have a problem. I am still being seen for bodily injury 4 1/2 months later and our vehicle is a total loss. I am not sure I will qualify for Serious Bodily Injury under NY's threshold laws. NY minimum UM is 25/50. MD's minimum is 20/40/15 without a serious bodily injury threshold. Clearly, we stand in a better position to be made whole if MD's limits are applied. MD was, after all, the "situs of the accident". And our vehicle is gone.
My original complaint to the NYSID included the fact that I have been researching NY and MD law and found that both state's laws support our reasonable expectations which are this: Our family should be compensated as if the driver of the other automobile had stopped and had minimum liability coverage as required by MD. MD & NY laws say, per statute, regulation, code/law, that the minimum mandated financial requirements of "situs of the accident" shall apply. Geico says that MD has no non-resident motorist requirements for financial responsibility and isn't a "deemer" (their word) state; therefore my policy won't pay under MD minimum requirements.
I have case law that supports our expectation of benefits, specifically stating that NY Law 5103e applies (if an accident happens in another state, that state's minimum requirements shall be paid by first party insurance if a hit and run); although this case references NJ accidents, it discusses NY's legislative intent of 5103e as it applies to NY law referencing directly UM coverage in a hit and run situation.
(see:http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/scripts/getcase.pl?court=ny&vol=080&invol=0162)
We are looking for the minimum UM coverage that MD supplies. Our wonderful vehicle (that we worked VERY hard to obtain) is totaled due to the felonious, negligent conduct of a criminal. We are not a family of means, but we carried the minimum automobile liability coverage we were required to by our state. We need real money for property damage and restitution for our bodily injury and emotional suffering; the entire ordeal has been extremely stressful for our entire family. MD law (and seemingly NY law, too) favors coverage, as far as I can understand and I have been researching for months now. Geico has denied further payment of benefits because they don't believe MD laws should be read into our contract. I thought state insurance laws were written so that someone in our situation was supported. We want MD law to apply.
Please note: we cannot collect from MAIF because we're not MD residents, nor from NY AIF because the accident didn't happen in NY. I have tried every avenue of restitution that I can find. I have researched everything I can and we are desperate for help.
I have a lawyer now but Geico is steering them to MD statutes that only show there is no mention of how MD laws are to be applied to non-residents, just like they did the NYSID. 5103e Article 51 of the NY State Insurance Law is what really counts here. I have a letter from the NYSID stating Geico is obligated to provide us with the minimum UM limits under MD law. Geico is saying that's just not right. NYSID has said they can't do anything else for us. The Governor's office, consumer advocacy groups and the media seem to be my only other options before this gets into litigation. Why should I have to sue for coverage I should be getting anyway?
Please note, I am not trying to kick a gift horse in the mouth. We just want what is due to us under the law. We'll be having a holiday of make-do this year like lots of people. We're out thousands of dollars in cash for our totaled vehicle and our recently purchased replacement vehicle. We don't do credit. We can't even get Geico to look at the bus. We should have gotten a property damage settlement months ago, but Geico is refusing to pay anything other than PIP so far. If anyone out there can shed some light on this situation for us, we would be deeply appreciative. Thank you.
BC
albany, New York
U.S.A.
Click here to read other Rip Off Reports on GEICO Insurance
17 Updates & Rebuttals
Joe
Austin,Texas,
U.S.A.
PREPROGRAM YOUR PERSONAL INJURY ATTORNEY'S PHONE NUMBER INTO YOUR CELL PHONE
#18Consumer Suggestion
Mon, January 19, 2009
STAYING WHERE I DO, AT PRESENT, IN A CITY FULL OF UNDOCUMENTED ALIENS AND COLLEGE KIDS AND WHERE THERE IS A BAR ON ALMOST EVERT CORNER -- AND NEARLY AN ENTIRE SHOPPING CENTER FULL OF THEM IN ONE CASE -- IT PAYS TO HAVE THE TELEPHONE NUMBERS OF A GREAT PERSONAL INJURY ATTORNEY AND AUTOMOTIVE BODY SHOP PRE PROGRAMMED INTO YOUR CELL PHONE.
TEXAS HAS THE HIGHEST NUMBER OF DWI ARRESTS IN THE COUNTRY AFTER CALIFORNIA AND YOU NEVER KNOW HERE WHEN SOME DRUNK DRIVER IS GOING TO HIT YOU. I HAVE BEEN HIT TWICE.
OK, WHENEVER YOU ARE STRUCK BY ANOTHER DRIVER YOU NEED TO HAVE AN AMBULANCE CALLED TO TAKE YOU AND ALL YOUR PASSENGERS TO THE HOSPITAL EMERGENCY ROOM.. THIS PROVIDES DOCUMENTATION OF THE INJURY AND THE INCIDENT AND YOU NEED TO BE CHECKED UP BY TRAUMA SPECIALISTS ANYWAY AFTER SUCH AN UNEXPECTED HIT TO YOUR BODY -- ESPECIALLY IF THERE ARE CHILDREN INVOLVED. COMPLICATIONS FROM THE ACCIDENT MIGHT NOT SHOW UP UNTIL A WEEK LATER AND BY THAT TIME, IT IS GENERALLY TOO LATE TO SEEK MEDICAL CARE.CHILDREN ESPECIALLY ARE DELICATE LITTLE PEOPLE.
IF YOU WERE DRUNK AT THE TIME OF THE ACCIDENT, YOU ARE OWN YOUR OWN, MY FRIEND.
IF YOU CANNOT CALL YOUR ATTORNEY AT THE HOSPITAL OR EN ROUTE TO THE HOSPITAL, GET A FRIEND OR FAMILY MEMBER TO DO SO --IDEALLY, THE ENTIRE FAMILY SHOULD HAVE THE ATTORNEY'S NUMBER , THEN YOU CALL YOUR INSURANCE AGENT AND THEN YOU CALL YOUR AUTOMOTIVE BODY SHOP AND HAVE YOUR VEHICLE TAKEN THERE. ( MAKE SURE A FAMILY MEMBER MEETS THE WRECKER AT THE SHOP TO TAKE OUT ANYTHING FROM YOUR VEHICLE THAT YOU DON'T WANT TO COME UP MISSING.)
DO NOT TALK TO THE OPPOSING PARTY'S INSURANCE COMPANY, AND MOST OF ALL DO NOT TALK TO THEIR SCUMBAG ADJUSTERS. THESE THUGS WILL DO ANYTHING AND EVERYTHING THEY CAN TO SCREW YOU OUT OF YOUR JUST FINANCIAL COMPENSATION. THEY ARE LIARS, CHEATERS AND CON ARTISTS SO REFUSE TO TALK TO THEM AND REFER THEM TO YOUR ATTORNEY.
DO NOT SIGN ANYTHING AND I MEAN ANYTHING WITHOUT YOUR ATTORNEY'S APPROVAL AND HAVING HIM/HER. THE PARALEGAL LOOK IT OVER FIRST. MAKE SURE THE SCUM BAG INSURANCE ADJUSTER DOESN'T TRY TO SNEAK IN A PAPER FOR YOU TO SIGN AND PUT IT IN YOUR TREATMENT RELEASE FORMS AT THE HOSPITAL THAT YOU ARE THE PERSON WHO HAS SOLE RESPONSIBILITY FOR THE ACCIDENT IT HAS BEEN DONE.
THE ONLY PEOPLE YOU SHOULD TALK TO ARE THE POLICE. IF THEY PUT ACCIDENT INVESTIGATORS ON IT, BE AWARE THAT THEY WILL BE ABLE TO RECONSTRUCT THE ACCIDENT AND FIND WITNESSES, ETC. IF YOU AREN'T SURE BECAUSE YOU ARE ON MEDICATION ADMINISTERED TO YOU IN THE EMERGENCY ROOM, TELL THEM YOU CAN'T MAKE A STATEMENT AND CONSULT WITH YOUR ATTORNEY OR THE PARALEGAL INVESTIGATOR THEY SEND TO SEE YOU -- IF THAT IS HOW YOUR ATTORNEY WORKS.
DO WHAT YOUR ATTORNEY SUGGESTS HOWEVER DO NOT LET THEM CON YOU INTO A SERIES OF MEDICAL TREATMENT UNLESS IT IS ABSOLUTELY VITAL BECAUSE ANY UNNECESSARY TREATMENT WILL EAT INTO YOUR SETTLEMENT!
DO NOT PICK YOUR ATTORNEY BASED ON A TV COMMERCIAL. THE LOUDER AND MORE SPECTACULAR THE COMMERCIAL AND THE HIGHER THE DAMAGES THE FAKE CLIENTS CLAIMS THEY GOT ( MANY OF THE ALLEGED CLIENTS ON THE COMMERCIALS MAY BE STAFF OR FAMILY MEMBERS OF THE ATTORNEY IN QUESTION OR EVEN HIRED ACTORS AND WHAT ARE YOU GOING TO EXPECT THEM TO SAY?), GENERALLY THE WORSE YOUR LEGAL REPRESENTATION AND THE MORE LIKELY THE ATTORNEY WILL END UP SELLING YOU OUT TO THE INSURANCE COMPANY AND YOU JUST GET BARELY $2,000.
THIS IS A RIP OFF.
THE BEST THING TO DO IS JUST AVOID THE TIMES AND THE AREAS AND STAY HOME AND OFF THE ROAD WHEN THE BARS ARE AT THEIR BUSIEST AND AN HOUR OR TWO AFTER THE BARS CLOSE.
TRY TO AVOID THE WRECK IN THE FIRST PLACE!
I HAVE JUST STATED WHAT I KNOW ABOUT TEXAS PERSONAL INJURY LAW WHICH IS A TORT AND WHICH IS NOT NEARLY ENOUGH TO SUBSTITUTE FOR LEGAL ADVICE FROM AN ATTORNEY WHO IS LICENSED TO PRACTICE LAW IN YOUR STATE. I AM NOT AN ATTORNEY--YET!
CONSULT AN ATTORNEY WHO IS LICENSED TO PRACTICE LAW IN THE STATE WHERE YOU LIVE, THIS IS NOT LEGAL ADVICE. IT IS JUST A LOT OF REASONS WHY YOU NEED TO HAVE THE BEST ATTORNEY TO REPRESENT YOU THAT YOU CAN FIND.
Bc
albany,New York,
U.S.A.
Dear Geico Employee,
#18Author of original report
Mon, January 19, 2009
Hi, thanks for your reply. In response to your paragraph:
"Regarding the UMPD (uninsured property damage) claim you'd like to present: New York does not allow UMPD as a coverage available to New York residents, per state law. You cannot purchase UMPD coverages as a New York insured, regardless of who your insurance carrier is. It's not your fault, blame Albany. So because you do not have UMPD coverages on your New York policy, and no state requires UMPD as a mandatory coverage (it's an optional coverage), unfortunately you cannot claim via UMPD even if MD has it as an option for MD insureds. You are not paying for the coverage."
-Maryland does REQUIRE (by statute, the coverage is COMPULSORY) 20/40/15 UM - that means $15k in property damage. Granted, this coverage may not be something I paid for directly through my NY policy. However, Article 51, section 5103e reads:
"(e) Every owner's policy of liability insurance issued in satisfaction of article six or eight of the vehicle and traffic law shall also provide, when a motor vehicle covered by such policy is used or operated in any other state or in any Canadian province, insurance coverage for such motor vehicle **at least in the minimum amount required by the laws of that state or province**."
Maryland requires at least $15k UMPD. NY Case Law has decided since UM is a required part of every policy issued in NY State, that coverage is supported by this law. Frankly, I don't see where the confusion lies.
UPDATE: Late last week Geico sent me, in response to my conversation with Debra Schmidt 2 weeks ago requesting statutory support and a formal denial of claim for their denial of this portion of our claim, the letter they sent to the Better Business Bureau with no documentation to support their view. Woefully inadequate. This is going to litigation.
BC
Dcr
Buffalo,New York,
U.S.A.
A coverages clarification
#18UPDATE Employee
Thu, January 15, 2009
I work as a liability claims adjuster for GEICO but please be warned my comments of course don't represent the company as a whole.
While I can't speak for NY PIP as applied to MD losses (you'll have to find a PIP adjuster to do so), I can tell you that typically GEICO (as do all other carriers) go by the laws and regulations of the loss state unless state law specifies otherwise. When you travel from state to state, your coverages automatically adjust to meet that state's minimum requirements as specified by law.
For example:
New Jersey insureds with state minimum 15/30/5 liability coverages (15,000 per person/30,000 incident BI, 5,000 PD) will have their coverages adjusted whenever they cross state lines, as most states have higher state minimums than NJ. In your case however, since NY minimums are higher than MD minimums, you see no benefit here.
Many states have agreements between themselves regarding how to sort out the medical benefits in scenarios such as this. I have no idea if MD and NY have some sort of agreement but it wouldn't hurt to check with your Woodbury PIP adjuster.
Regarding the UMPD (uninsured property damage) claim you'd like to present: New York does not allow UMPD as a coverage available to New York residents, per state law. You cannot purchase UMPD coverages as a New York insured, regardless of who your insurance carrier is. It's not your fault, blame Albany. So because you do not have UMPD coverages on your New York policy, and no state requires UMPD as a mandatory coverage (it's an optional coverage), unfortunately you cannot claim via UMPD even if MD has it as an option for MD insureds. You are not paying for the coverage.
And again - I can't speak for MD state law but each state has specific guidelines when a person ***could*** use their UMPD coverages, if they carry it. Many states require the uninsured motorist to be identified before covering the loss, many states do not let it apply to true "hit and runs" where unknown claimant strikes your vehicle and flees the scene. The theory here is that if the claimant can be identified, the liability carrier can be tracked down (most people do carry liability coverages, despite what it seems), and their liability coverages would pay for your damages. In that case though, where the claimant is identified, and the liability carrier exists, you would need to be DENIED by that liability carrier (e.g. the claimant didn't pay their premiums and the policy was canceled for nonpayment) before you could use your UMPD coverages. Or, it would have to be proven that this identified claimant truly did not carry insurance.
It's tricky and can be very frustrating for all - believe me, your PIP adjuster at GEICO truly does care about your case and would certainly help you with this if they could, as would your liability adjuster, but we are all bound by state regulations which we cannot override.
dcr
Dcr
Buffalo,New York,
U.S.A.
A coverages clarification
#18UPDATE Employee
Thu, January 15, 2009
I work as a liability claims adjuster for GEICO but please be warned my comments of course don't represent the company as a whole.
While I can't speak for NY PIP as applied to MD losses (you'll have to find a PIP adjuster to do so), I can tell you that typically GEICO (as do all other carriers) go by the laws and regulations of the loss state unless state law specifies otherwise. When you travel from state to state, your coverages automatically adjust to meet that state's minimum requirements as specified by law.
For example:
New Jersey insureds with state minimum 15/30/5 liability coverages (15,000 per person/30,000 incident BI, 5,000 PD) will have their coverages adjusted whenever they cross state lines, as most states have higher state minimums than NJ. In your case however, since NY minimums are higher than MD minimums, you see no benefit here.
Many states have agreements between themselves regarding how to sort out the medical benefits in scenarios such as this. I have no idea if MD and NY have some sort of agreement but it wouldn't hurt to check with your Woodbury PIP adjuster.
Regarding the UMPD (uninsured property damage) claim you'd like to present: New York does not allow UMPD as a coverage available to New York residents, per state law. You cannot purchase UMPD coverages as a New York insured, regardless of who your insurance carrier is. It's not your fault, blame Albany. So because you do not have UMPD coverages on your New York policy, and no state requires UMPD as a mandatory coverage (it's an optional coverage), unfortunately you cannot claim via UMPD even if MD has it as an option for MD insureds. You are not paying for the coverage.
And again - I can't speak for MD state law but each state has specific guidelines when a person ***could*** use their UMPD coverages, if they carry it. Many states require the uninsured motorist to be identified before covering the loss, many states do not let it apply to true "hit and runs" where unknown claimant strikes your vehicle and flees the scene. The theory here is that if the claimant can be identified, the liability carrier can be tracked down (most people do carry liability coverages, despite what it seems), and their liability coverages would pay for your damages. In that case though, where the claimant is identified, and the liability carrier exists, you would need to be DENIED by that liability carrier (e.g. the claimant didn't pay their premiums and the policy was canceled for nonpayment) before you could use your UMPD coverages. Or, it would have to be proven that this identified claimant truly did not carry insurance.
It's tricky and can be very frustrating for all - believe me, your PIP adjuster at GEICO truly does care about your case and would certainly help you with this if they could, as would your liability adjuster, but we are all bound by state regulations which we cannot override.
dcr
Dcr
Buffalo,New York,
U.S.A.
A coverages clarification
#18UPDATE Employee
Thu, January 15, 2009
I work as a liability claims adjuster for GEICO but please be warned my comments of course don't represent the company as a whole.
While I can't speak for NY PIP as applied to MD losses (you'll have to find a PIP adjuster to do so), I can tell you that typically GEICO (as do all other carriers) go by the laws and regulations of the loss state unless state law specifies otherwise. When you travel from state to state, your coverages automatically adjust to meet that state's minimum requirements as specified by law.
For example:
New Jersey insureds with state minimum 15/30/5 liability coverages (15,000 per person/30,000 incident BI, 5,000 PD) will have their coverages adjusted whenever they cross state lines, as most states have higher state minimums than NJ. In your case however, since NY minimums are higher than MD minimums, you see no benefit here.
Many states have agreements between themselves regarding how to sort out the medical benefits in scenarios such as this. I have no idea if MD and NY have some sort of agreement but it wouldn't hurt to check with your Woodbury PIP adjuster.
Regarding the UMPD (uninsured property damage) claim you'd like to present: New York does not allow UMPD as a coverage available to New York residents, per state law. You cannot purchase UMPD coverages as a New York insured, regardless of who your insurance carrier is. It's not your fault, blame Albany. So because you do not have UMPD coverages on your New York policy, and no state requires UMPD as a mandatory coverage (it's an optional coverage), unfortunately you cannot claim via UMPD even if MD has it as an option for MD insureds. You are not paying for the coverage.
And again - I can't speak for MD state law but each state has specific guidelines when a person ***could*** use their UMPD coverages, if they carry it. Many states require the uninsured motorist to be identified before covering the loss, many states do not let it apply to true "hit and runs" where unknown claimant strikes your vehicle and flees the scene. The theory here is that if the claimant can be identified, the liability carrier can be tracked down (most people do carry liability coverages, despite what it seems), and their liability coverages would pay for your damages. In that case though, where the claimant is identified, and the liability carrier exists, you would need to be DENIED by that liability carrier (e.g. the claimant didn't pay their premiums and the policy was canceled for nonpayment) before you could use your UMPD coverages. Or, it would have to be proven that this identified claimant truly did not carry insurance.
It's tricky and can be very frustrating for all - believe me, your PIP adjuster at GEICO truly does care about your case and would certainly help you with this if they could, as would your liability adjuster, but we are all bound by state regulations which we cannot override.
dcr
Dcr
Buffalo,New York,
U.S.A.
A coverages clarification
#18UPDATE Employee
Thu, January 15, 2009
I work as a liability claims adjuster for GEICO but please be warned my comments of course don't represent the company as a whole.
While I can't speak for NY PIP as applied to MD losses (you'll have to find a PIP adjuster to do so), I can tell you that typically GEICO (as do all other carriers) go by the laws and regulations of the loss state unless state law specifies otherwise. When you travel from state to state, your coverages automatically adjust to meet that state's minimum requirements as specified by law.
For example:
New Jersey insureds with state minimum 15/30/5 liability coverages (15,000 per person/30,000 incident BI, 5,000 PD) will have their coverages adjusted whenever they cross state lines, as most states have higher state minimums than NJ. In your case however, since NY minimums are higher than MD minimums, you see no benefit here.
Many states have agreements between themselves regarding how to sort out the medical benefits in scenarios such as this. I have no idea if MD and NY have some sort of agreement but it wouldn't hurt to check with your Woodbury PIP adjuster.
Regarding the UMPD (uninsured property damage) claim you'd like to present: New York does not allow UMPD as a coverage available to New York residents, per state law. You cannot purchase UMPD coverages as a New York insured, regardless of who your insurance carrier is. It's not your fault, blame Albany. So because you do not have UMPD coverages on your New York policy, and no state requires UMPD as a mandatory coverage (it's an optional coverage), unfortunately you cannot claim via UMPD even if MD has it as an option for MD insureds. You are not paying for the coverage.
And again - I can't speak for MD state law but each state has specific guidelines when a person ***could*** use their UMPD coverages, if they carry it. Many states require the uninsured motorist to be identified before covering the loss, many states do not let it apply to true "hit and runs" where unknown claimant strikes your vehicle and flees the scene. The theory here is that if the claimant can be identified, the liability carrier can be tracked down (most people do carry liability coverages, despite what it seems), and their liability coverages would pay for your damages. In that case though, where the claimant is identified, and the liability carrier exists, you would need to be DENIED by that liability carrier (e.g. the claimant didn't pay their premiums and the policy was canceled for nonpayment) before you could use your UMPD coverages. Or, it would have to be proven that this identified claimant truly did not carry insurance.
It's tricky and can be very frustrating for all - believe me, your PIP adjuster at GEICO truly does care about your case and would certainly help you with this if they could, as would your liability adjuster, but we are all bound by state regulations which we cannot override.
dcr
Bc
albany,New York,
U.S.A.
Dear Confused,
#18Author of original report
Thu, January 08, 2009
I think your comment is fair. Maybe I am trying to get something I ultimately am not legally entitled to recover. I fully admit that we didn't purchase enough coverage (we have it now on our replacement vehicle). But I have to say, the wording of the law is what led me to these questions. Perhaps I too am simply confused, and I'm not being sarcastic. I can't figure out why the NYSID would send me an official letter stating the coverages Geico owes me (MD limits of 20/40/15), after a months-long investigation into the matter. I've asked Geico to put in writing the detailed reason (including reference to specific statutes) why they are denying the PD portion. Maybe that will clear things up, maybe not. I guess time will tell.
Thank you all for your input.
BC
Graphix
Virginia Beach,Virginia,
U.S.A.
Confused
#18Consumer Comment
Mon, January 05, 2009
Sorry but I am confused. You say you admit that you failed to insure yourself for several of these coverages but now you want the insurance company to pay you for what you rejected. So because you didn't need it then you didn't feel like paying for it but now you do need it so now you want them to pay you. You say it isn't your fault you got hit but that's what insurance is for. I am sorry but you should be thanking your insurance company for anything that they pay you that you rejected rather then threatening to sanction them. You irresponsibility to properly cover yourself is your fault not theirs. I am sorry you had an accident but you should not bash them for you mistakes. IMO.
Graphix
Virginia Beach,Virginia,
U.S.A.
Confused
#18Consumer Comment
Mon, January 05, 2009
Sorry but I am confused. You say you admit that you failed to insure yourself for several of these coverages but now you want the insurance company to pay you for what you rejected. So because you didn't need it then you didn't feel like paying for it but now you do need it so now you want them to pay you. You say it isn't your fault you got hit but that's what insurance is for. I am sorry but you should be thanking your insurance company for anything that they pay you that you rejected rather then threatening to sanction them. You irresponsibility to properly cover yourself is your fault not theirs. I am sorry you had an accident but you should not bash them for you mistakes. IMO.
Graphix
Virginia Beach,Virginia,
U.S.A.
Confused
#18Consumer Comment
Mon, January 05, 2009
Sorry but I am confused. You say you admit that you failed to insure yourself for several of these coverages but now you want the insurance company to pay you for what you rejected. So because you didn't need it then you didn't feel like paying for it but now you do need it so now you want them to pay you. You say it isn't your fault you got hit but that's what insurance is for. I am sorry but you should be thanking your insurance company for anything that they pay you that you rejected rather then threatening to sanction them. You irresponsibility to properly cover yourself is your fault not theirs. I am sorry you had an accident but you should not bash them for you mistakes. IMO.
Northwest
Gresham,Oregon,
U.S.A.
Other Suggestions
#18Consumer Comment
Mon, December 29, 2008
Often television stations and/or newspapers have a consumer help section where they will do a story on the situation if they deem it to have merit. I suggest checking those out. Oten on the websites for these entities there will be listed 'consumer help'; if not, make a phone call.
Bc
albany,New York,
U.S.A.
PD and BI a concern
#18Author of original report
Mon, December 29, 2008
Hello,
Thank you for responding. We would like Geico to pay us MD UM coverages for BI and PD (20/40/15 - compulsory UM for MD). MD has no serious bodily injury threshold and since I'm not sure I will qualify for serious bodily injury (although I'm still treating, more than 4 months after the accident, meeting NY's 90-day threshold for injuries of a non-permanent nature), we feel MD's UM is more favorable to us for BI reasons and for PD reasons; even though technically NY's BI limits are higher (25/50), MD's injury thresholds are lower thereby allowing us to collect for my husband and daughter's DR visits as well as mine. Plus there's the PD which brings the MD total (and trust me, I don't necessarily expect to get the full amount) to $55,000 and NY's (if I qualify for SBI) to $25,000 - no PD or settlement for husband and daughter. That's quite a big difference, and MD was the situs of the accident - hence their UM limits are supposed to be read into my contract.
I would not be asking Geico for property damage if I didn't feel the law supported coverage. 5103e does say that they must pay in "like kind and like amount" as required in such cases by the foreign jurisdiction. Although we did not have PD coverage on our vehicle (stupidly, we admit), we did carry the minimum SUM coverage required in NY. It's not our fault we got hit in a state that includes PD in their statutory UM coverage.
So I'm not sure what gives. NY law, governing NY case law and the insurance industry's regulatory agency in NY says Geico is obligated to pay us but they still won't. I just don't know what to do.
Next steps: Wrote letter today to Eric Dinallo at the NYSID to encourage him to fine Geico for non-compliance. I've filed w/ the BBB of NY. Next is contacting the Consumer Services Bureau Cheif of the NYSID, Mr. Gennaoui to see if he can perhaps persuade Geico to pay.
Any other suggestions?
Thanks,
BC
Bc
albany,New York,
U.S.A.
PD and BI a concern
#18Author of original report
Mon, December 29, 2008
Hello,
Thank you for responding. We would like Geico to pay us MD UM coverages for BI and PD (20/40/15 - compulsory UM for MD). MD has no serious bodily injury threshold and since I'm not sure I will qualify for serious bodily injury (although I'm still treating, more than 4 months after the accident, meeting NY's 90-day threshold for injuries of a non-permanent nature), we feel MD's UM is more favorable to us for BI reasons and for PD reasons; even though technically NY's BI limits are higher (25/50), MD's injury thresholds are lower thereby allowing us to collect for my husband and daughter's DR visits as well as mine. Plus there's the PD which brings the MD total (and trust me, I don't necessarily expect to get the full amount) to $55,000 and NY's (if I qualify for SBI) to $25,000 - no PD or settlement for husband and daughter. That's quite a big difference, and MD was the situs of the accident - hence their UM limits are supposed to be read into my contract.
I would not be asking Geico for property damage if I didn't feel the law supported coverage. 5103e does say that they must pay in "like kind and like amount" as required in such cases by the foreign jurisdiction. Although we did not have PD coverage on our vehicle (stupidly, we admit), we did carry the minimum SUM coverage required in NY. It's not our fault we got hit in a state that includes PD in their statutory UM coverage.
So I'm not sure what gives. NY law, governing NY case law and the insurance industry's regulatory agency in NY says Geico is obligated to pay us but they still won't. I just don't know what to do.
Next steps: Wrote letter today to Eric Dinallo at the NYSID to encourage him to fine Geico for non-compliance. I've filed w/ the BBB of NY. Next is contacting the Consumer Services Bureau Cheif of the NYSID, Mr. Gennaoui to see if he can perhaps persuade Geico to pay.
Any other suggestions?
Thanks,
BC
Bc
albany,New York,
U.S.A.
PD and BI a concern
#18Author of original report
Mon, December 29, 2008
Hello,
Thank you for responding. We would like Geico to pay us MD UM coverages for BI and PD (20/40/15 - compulsory UM for MD). MD has no serious bodily injury threshold and since I'm not sure I will qualify for serious bodily injury (although I'm still treating, more than 4 months after the accident, meeting NY's 90-day threshold for injuries of a non-permanent nature), we feel MD's UM is more favorable to us for BI reasons and for PD reasons; even though technically NY's BI limits are higher (25/50), MD's injury thresholds are lower thereby allowing us to collect for my husband and daughter's DR visits as well as mine. Plus there's the PD which brings the MD total (and trust me, I don't necessarily expect to get the full amount) to $55,000 and NY's (if I qualify for SBI) to $25,000 - no PD or settlement for husband and daughter. That's quite a big difference, and MD was the situs of the accident - hence their UM limits are supposed to be read into my contract.
I would not be asking Geico for property damage if I didn't feel the law supported coverage. 5103e does say that they must pay in "like kind and like amount" as required in such cases by the foreign jurisdiction. Although we did not have PD coverage on our vehicle (stupidly, we admit), we did carry the minimum SUM coverage required in NY. It's not our fault we got hit in a state that includes PD in their statutory UM coverage.
So I'm not sure what gives. NY law, governing NY case law and the insurance industry's regulatory agency in NY says Geico is obligated to pay us but they still won't. I just don't know what to do.
Next steps: Wrote letter today to Eric Dinallo at the NYSID to encourage him to fine Geico for non-compliance. I've filed w/ the BBB of NY. Next is contacting the Consumer Services Bureau Cheif of the NYSID, Mr. Gennaoui to see if he can perhaps persuade Geico to pay.
Any other suggestions?
Thanks,
BC
Bc
albany,New York,
U.S.A.
PD and BI a concern
#18Author of original report
Mon, December 29, 2008
Hello,
Thank you for responding. We would like Geico to pay us MD UM coverages for BI and PD (20/40/15 - compulsory UM for MD). MD has no serious bodily injury threshold and since I'm not sure I will qualify for serious bodily injury (although I'm still treating, more than 4 months after the accident, meeting NY's 90-day threshold for injuries of a non-permanent nature), we feel MD's UM is more favorable to us for BI reasons and for PD reasons; even though technically NY's BI limits are higher (25/50), MD's injury thresholds are lower thereby allowing us to collect for my husband and daughter's DR visits as well as mine. Plus there's the PD which brings the MD total (and trust me, I don't necessarily expect to get the full amount) to $55,000 and NY's (if I qualify for SBI) to $25,000 - no PD or settlement for husband and daughter. That's quite a big difference, and MD was the situs of the accident - hence their UM limits are supposed to be read into my contract.
I would not be asking Geico for property damage if I didn't feel the law supported coverage. 5103e does say that they must pay in "like kind and like amount" as required in such cases by the foreign jurisdiction. Although we did not have PD coverage on our vehicle (stupidly, we admit), we did carry the minimum SUM coverage required in NY. It's not our fault we got hit in a state that includes PD in their statutory UM coverage.
So I'm not sure what gives. NY law, governing NY case law and the insurance industry's regulatory agency in NY says Geico is obligated to pay us but they still won't. I just don't know what to do.
Next steps: Wrote letter today to Eric Dinallo at the NYSID to encourage him to fine Geico for non-compliance. I've filed w/ the BBB of NY. Next is contacting the Consumer Services Bureau Cheif of the NYSID, Mr. Gennaoui to see if he can perhaps persuade Geico to pay.
Any other suggestions?
Thanks,
BC
Truthadvocate
Virginia Beach,Virginia,
U.S.A.
Is PD your only concern?
#18Consumer Comment
Sun, December 28, 2008
I am very sorry for this accident and hope you all have a full recovery. Just some thoughts or concerns to consider.
I am not an adjuster or attorney, but I do know some insurance.
I am confused maybe, but are you trying to get the MD UMPD to cover your vehicle, and then the NY SUM to cover injuries?
The reason I ask is that if you want MD uninsured coverage to apply for the Vehicle, it may mean that you will also have MD uninsured coverage applied to the bodily injuries.
You stated that NY um was 25/50 (bi only right?), but MD um was 20/40(bi) and 25(pd)...
I fear you may lose out on the extra $5000 per person or $10,000 per accident on the Bodily Injury side... and that the NYSID, or a jury may decide that if you want MD limits to apply for one side of your claim then your NY SUM is null and void for the other side... it sounds like you want to have your cake and eat it too.
I am all for truth and try not to take sides... but:
You were not paying for any uninsured PD in NY right?
So, how is GEICO ripping you off for not covering something you weren't paying for?
I really do hope you get fair compensation no matter which state its covered under.
Bc
albany,New York,
U.S.A.
Title Revised: Geico Woodbury NY - NY Insured, Maryland Hit and run Accident No Fault/UM Coverage Issue
#18Author of original report
Mon, December 22, 2008
The previous title was incorrect and should be modified as above. Thank you.
The Governor's Office sent my complaint back to the NYSID. I used the "ask a question" feature on the NYSID's website last week, simplifying my issue to see what their response might be. I am now moving on to contacting the chief of the CSB since it appears Geico is not following governing case law.
Isn't there anyone out there who can advise me on this? Property Damage is the phrase of the day.
Bueller?
Bueller?