Print the value of index0
GEICO forces injured to file insurance complaint and lawsuit. BAD FAITH, Illegal Claims practices. MUST READ TO BELIEVE!!!! SAID because I Called 911 I Was NOT IN DANGER???? DALLAS, Texas
Amy Akins
Geico Claims Supervisor
This claim is a first party claim as it is a hit and run which falls under the uninsured/underinsured. I have been insured under Geico for approximately 5 years. I am owed common courtesy and professionalism. In first party claims Geico should consider my interests as their own and negotiating in good faith to resolve this matter and not as adversaries. Claims adjuster, Mr. Brandon Berry, has repeatedly been excessively rude and condescending. He says an item is needed in order to process the claim and then once it is given he quickly says that he needs a different item. The only point of asking for an excessive amount of things is to delay, stall and attempt to unfairly resolve losses for this car crash. During a phone call on May 8, 2009, Mr.
The non-stop accusations, assertions and implications and suspicious mistrust about this claim is outrageous. I am an ordained minister, former special education school teacher, and former childrens councilor, the idea that an entire community can trust me with their children but somehow my own insurance company cant trust what I say is outrageous. In addition, the evidence supports my claims.
I have finally recovered from PTSD and can drive normally and I would like to settle this claim so I can move on with my life. It appears to me that Mr. Berry has no interest in reasonably, and fairly, settling this case. He has not reviewed or addressed the review of certain pieces of evidence and pretends to have more knowledge than a Doctor of Psychology and a Doctor of Chiropractic Medicine. He also makes accusations and assertions about the car crash even though there is evidence to the contrary and on top of it all, he was not there. His constant speculation and attempting to look for some possible alternative explanation, that would not hold up in court is illogical and bad faith. If this goes to trial, it will be a civil trial, and the preponderance of evidence it what is considered. If forced to sue GEICO then I will additionally pursue a bad faith and unfair negotiations claim. I believe that the circumstances and ample evidence make this claim an easy one to solve.
Multiple attempts have been made to misconstrue what I say over the telephone. Examples include my saying that the video at the scene of the crash proves a certain point. Then an attempt is made to imply that I was recording or otherwise using a video camera WHILE I was crashing. Preposterous! Adjusters needs to stick with the facts of the case and the actual evidence submitted and stop engaging in weird attempts to misconstrue what I say and make alternate interpretations and theories based exclusively on an attempt to wiggle out of paying an honest, fair, and fairly straight forward claim. I have no pre-existing conditions, several witnesses, relatively low medical bills, when you consider that the vehicle was 100% totaled and ample evidence to support my claim.
In a nutshell, the basic facts are this:
1. This is covered under uninsured motorist/hit and run.
2. Medical bills are a little under 7000 and is 100% CAUSED by the car crash.5. I have a permanent 5% loss of motion in the left side of my neck due to one of the three left scaline muscles being ripped. (scaline muscles hold your neck and ribcage up) This additionally causes pain and discomfort on a re-occurring basis.
Mr.
First, the most obvious and ridiculous attempt. This was a hit and run and is covered under
my uninsured motorist policy. At the
scene of the crash, Geico determined that this was covered under the uninsured
motorist policy. Geico reaffirms this
continuously in every conversation and every offer. Liability on this claim is abundantly clear. Liability IS NOT AN ISSUE AND NEVER HAS
BEEN. In the letter dated October 21, 2009,
for the first time in over 2 years, Mr.
2. In the crash some
personal property was broken due to the impact.
I spoke with Mr.
3. A wage and income verification form and copies of bank statements were requested to evaluate lost wages on 7/11/09. I submitted these and am now being told I need tax returns from 2005 to 2010! This is excessive. 5 years of tax returns is highly unrelated and unneeded to evaluate a single month of lost income. The Wage and Income verification form provided by Geico asks for 13 weeks of income verification. I provided a full 5 months of income (21 weeks). 160% of normally requested verification, which is substantially above what was requested and in addition the wages are consistent across the months, were verified by the CEO of the company, and additional financial documents are included to verify these amounts were deposited into my account.
4. In the letter
dated October 21, 2009, Mr.
5. In the letter
dated October 21, 2009, Mr.
6. All crashes are emotionally distressing and pain and suffering is accounted and compensated for but this crash had some factors that were excessively emotionally distressing and causing lots of pain and suffering. These factors include 1. That another person was 100% responsible. 2. Police would not be able to find the responsible person. 3. It was a perfect storm in that, there was absolutely NO WAY for me to do anything but attempt to minimize damage. The crash was imminent. 4. I was knocked back into traffic partially (remaining in danger). 5. The doors were smashed shut so I could not get out of the vehicle. 6. I witnessed another crash. 7. Emergency personnel were diverted to other crashes/or otherwise did not come to my aid until I called 911 a second time and then only the police arrived. 8. While crashed and trapped in the vehicle another irresponsible dangerous driver attempted to drive up the emergency lane to bypass the heavy traffic, putting my life in danger yet again! Ordinary common sense would assume that these factors make the crash more traumatizing and emotionally distressing. All of these factors are clearly documented and verifiable. None of these factors were mentioned or accounted for in evaluating my claim. If, through some miracle, I would have suffered no injuries whatsoever, the fact is, this additional emotionally traumatic aspect of the crash, would still need to be accounted for.
7. Mr. Berry asserts
that my 2 calls to 911, to Geico, and to WITNESS show that I was of enough
sound mind and this is his proof that I was not experiencing any trauma. He is NO psychologist or mental health
practitioner of any kind and has no authority or training to assert ANYTHING
about my state of mind! Outlandish! I am not asserting that I became mentally invalid. I was knocked unconscious as I was crashing
into the concrete barrier and I regained consciousness as other people had parked
and ran towards my car. I assume that
the length of time was less than a few minutes. Mr.
8. Mr. Berry has additional facts mixed up and has completely overlooked or ignored other facts. The first fact that is mixed up is the fact that I called 911 just as I was becoming conscious. You can hear on the 911 call that I said Hi twice to the 911 operator as this was the only word that came to my mind. In fact, besides saying hi twice the very first things I said were completely indecipherable. I did not know where I was, and in fact was not even sure what state or city I was in at the time. This is easily verified by the fact that I asked a witness who ran to my passenger side shattered window where am I as I was trying to tell the 911 operator where I was and I did not know. In general the call was also chaotic, as at certain times I blurted out information that was relevant to the crash but was not relevant to the questions asked of me by the 911 operator. Including It was a yellow SUV and the car is broke and other random bits of information. It is clear that I suffered some temporary brain trauma at the moment of impact.
9. Mr. Berry asserts that I contacted WITNESS moments following this loss. This is stated as supposed support for his assertion that I was of sound mind and therefore was not knocked unconscious. Again, I do not assert that I lay there knocked unconscious for hours without end. And in fact I did not call WITNESS immediately. I called her because I was panicking and freaking out. As she states in her witness letter I was crying so much that I could not speak and that in her opinion I was panicked, terrified, extremely frightened, and crying hysterically. I called her because I felt like I needed to run away from the crash and was certain I was going to die if I stayed there. She calmed me down and encouraged me to do something to take my mind off of the crash and to stop looking at the more deadly crash across the street. It was at this point that I began to video record from the inside of the car. I state the time (337) and then say I need to keep my mind off and then talk about the pain in my neck. In this video and even in the 2nd video I took when police arrived you can easily see that my face is wet with tears and my eyes and nose are puffy and red from crying. Common sense would suggest that this crash was emotionally and mentally traumatic, but in addition, I just happen to have several pieces of evidence to support this fact.
10. Mr. Berry asserts that in video 2, I was of enough sound mind to get a camcorder to begin recording this loss, walking out, unprotected, onto a busy roadway from what appears to be a considerable distance from your vehicle. What he says is a considerable distance is the space between the concrete wall I smashed into and the distance the car traveled as it bounced off the concrete wall and back into traffic. This second video was taken when the police arrived. I was protected by the police, who had parked behind me. The suggestion that I would somehow stay in a crashed car instead of speaking with the police, is ludicrous. The implication that this is somehow to his favor in negotiations is additionally ludicrous. When the police finally arrived, over an hour later, was the first moment I finally felt safe at the scene of the crash. Even if only for a moment.
11. The entire phrase of enough sound mind makes no sense. If one is crying at a funeral, then they are grieved, but may or may not be of sound mind. If one is laughing profusely at a funeral and talking to a rock then that person is most likely not of sound mind. Being terrified, fearful and grieved after a crash is being of sound mind. Calling for help is also of sound mind, as is recording a video to take ones mind off of the crash. No one claims that I went mentally insane at the crash.
12. Mr. Berry stated that it was not clear that I went to Dr. O. for Post Traumatic Stress Disorder related to this crash and so I have included additional documentation from Dr. O. that states the following: 1. That all psychotherapy sessions were for PTSD. 2. That treatment was medically necessary. 3. That treatment was about the car crash that took place on October 15, 2007. Witness letters additionally verify the symptoms and emotional stress experienced throughout these 2 years. For your reference, I have included the Full DSM Diagnosis of Post Traumatic Stress Disorder.
309.81 DSM-IV Criteria for Posttraumatic Stress Disorder
The traumatic event is persistently reexperienced in one (or more) of the following ways:(1) recurrent and intrusive distressing recollections of the event, including images, thoughts, or perceptions. Note: In young children, repetitive play may occur in which themes or aspects of the trauma are expressed.
(2) recurrent distressing dreams of the event. Note: In children, there may be frightening dreams without recognizable content.
(3) acting or feeling as if the traumatic event were recurring (includes a
sense of reliving the experience, illusions, hallucinations, and dissociative
flashback episodes, including those that occur upon awakening or when
intoxicated). Note: In young children, trauma-specific reenactment may
occur.
(5) physiological reactivity on exposure to internal or external cues that symbolize or resemble an aspect of the traumatic event.
C. Persistent avoidance of stimuli associated with the trauma and numbing of general responsiveness (not present before the trauma), as indicated by three (or more) of the following:(1) efforts to avoid thoughts, feelings, or conversations associated with the trauma
(2) efforts to avoid activities, places, or people that arouse recollections of the trauma(4) markedly diminished interest or participation in significant activities
(5) feeling of detachment or estrangement from others(6) restricted range of affect (e.g., unable to have loving feelings)
(7) sense of a foreshortened future (e.g., does not expect to have a career, marriage, children, or a normal life span)D. Persistent symptoms of increased arousal (not present before the trauma), as indicated by two (or more) of the following:
(1) difficulty falling or staying asleep
(2) irritability or outbursts of anger
(3) difficulty concentrating
(4) hypervigilance
(5) exaggerated startle response
F. The disturbance causes clinically significant distress or impairment in social, occupational, or other important areas of functioning.
13. Concerning permanency of physical injuries, as documented by Dr. B. I have a 5% loss of motion on the left side of my neck. For your reference, at request, I have additional medical studies for your review concerning permanency and lasting effects after car crashes. The fact is, before this crash, I experienced NO pain in my neck/ scaline muscles or back, no discomfort, and no inability to move freely without any restraint. I did not EVER need to be extra careful about activities involving my neck and I did not experience any pain as I tried to sleep on an ordinary pillow. Now, a full 2 years after the crash, I remain with some pain, discomfort and loss of motion in my neck. I have to sleep on specially designed pillows in order to reduce discomfort. I additionally have a new concern in evaluating daily activities and adjusting my life to not further reinjure my neck or back as it is weaker than before. As expected with ANY injury or ANY damage, things are not the same as before. I am an athletic person, and love to exercise as a stress relieving activity, and previously have never needed any medical care for my entire adult life. This injury and reoccurring pain and discomfort are very intrusive and disruptive to my otherwise healthy lifestyle.I have provided the suggested documentation from my doctor stating that treatment was directly related to the car crash and was medically necessary. Regarding medical record releases: They have had medical releases in their possession for quite some time. If GEICO led you to believe, they do not have medical releases they are being untruthful. I also have a confirmation letter stating that they received the medical releases. Despite having received all of this GEICO has made no additional contact with me concerning resolving this claim. I feel they are stalling.
I initially contacted the insurance commission substantially before a demand letter or the full package of evidence had been submitted to GEICO because of the way they were behaving. I thought it amounted to bad faith and wanted to know the laws concerning this. I was told by Morris Chavez to wait until I had an official response in writing before submitting an official complaint. Which I did.1. Immediately after the crash they raised my premium by $20/month without any notice. (It is set for automatic debit paid in full for 6 months at a time). When I asked why the premium had been raised they
2. Refusal to provide a copy of the contract covering the time during the crash, the current contract and the contract from when I first signed up. I asked for a contract policy a minimum of 12 separate times and have been told the following:
3. They have repeatedly minimized liability and said the following things.
4. Geico repeatedly has been difficult and uncooperative in evidence about the case.
5. GEICO has been uncooperative and condescending with no interest in reasonably solving this claim
6. They have completely ignored certain factors in the crash