PCTG Consumer Complaint Report Record ID#: 1322945731

Pa. Department of Insurance On October 24, 2009 our customer's 2004 Honda Pilot was struck in the back by a State Farm Insurance Company insured driver. State Farm accepted responsibility to pay for the damages and prepared an estimate for $1,207.83. Our customer dropped her vehicle off on Tuesday, November 10, 2009 for repairs. We dismantled the vehicle and found additional damages to the bumper cover. While dismantling the rear tailgate we found the vehicle's rear view camera could not be remove without opening the hole for the cable at the gate panel and the license plate pocket. The cable also required us to drop the rear headliner for wiring harness connection and access. For these reasons we contacted State Farm on our consumer's behalf and requested a supplemental inspection for the additional procedures. State Farm contacted us on November 10th, to advise an appraiser would be out on Thursday to inspect our supplemental request. We asked State Farm to stop out sooner than Thursday as the vehicle was in process and we promised delivery on Friday however they refused. We asked them to copy us by writing that they would not be out until Thursday. A letter from the insurance company could help us show our customer why the delivery date was delayed. State Farm refused to send us a letter. On Thursday at 1:47 a State Farm appraiser, Mr. William Haggerty signed in at our facility to inspect the supplemental damages. While standing at our front counter Mr. Haggerty interjected a verbal comment about a discussion between my office manager and myself as we discussed the preparation of the supplemental paperwork needed for State Farm. It was Mr. Haggerty's observation and opinion we should be working in harmony. In my opinion, Mr. Haggerty was not at our facility to make comments or references about the inner office activities at our business and he was advised to keep his opinions of harmony to himself. Haggerty appeared annoyed with my words of advice. I then explained to Haggerty if people believed in harmony as he proclaimed then it would not be necessary for him to re-inspect our supplemental request as he would harmoniously reimburse the amounts needed to settle the claim on behalf our consumers. I asked Haggerty if was he ready to inspect the additional damages to our customer's vehicle and he followed me into our shop. At this point, I showed Haggerty the additional damages on the rear bumper cover and the reason the cover should be replaced. Mr. Haggerty denied our request, stating any shop would be able to repair the bumper cover for his allowed labor. I disagreed and advised the damages warranted a replacement cover however I would discuss the damages with our customer. I showed Haggerty the rear gate and explained the need for additional labor reimbursement for the panels damaged area. He advised he did not see the repair prior to our straightening process and would not reimburse any additional labor for the procedure. At this point I felt Haggerty was on a mission to deny reimbursement for additional charges. I began to become irritated however showed Haggerty the rear view camera and the reason we had to drill open the hole for the cable to run through the panels. I began to show Haggerty the reason we needed to drop the rear of the headliner interior panel and why we charged for the operation. Haggerty began to inspect the headliner and commented we should have waited until State Farm could have inspected prior to performing the procedure. As Haggerty started to shake his head denying additional reimbursement for the loss I began to feel uneasy and realized Haggerty was trying to antagonize the situation on purpose. I have witnessed this behavior with State Farm personnel in the past as they utilize reimbursement denial as a method to create an antagonistic, hostile environment. Once an aggressive environment is created the company refuses to recognize the loss therefore either underpaying or denying the claim entirely. I advised Haggerty that this is a waste of my time and he should leave. I escorted Haggerty to our front room, advised him to sign out and leave. The purpose of this play by play description of the methods State Farm used to handled this supplemental request is to help the Insurance Department get a better understanding of the claim manipulations going on behind the scenes in independent collision repair facilities across Pa. State Farm refuses to reimburse for necessary procedures unless they can inspect prior to the actual repair. This issue becomes a problem for repair shops when the claim is underwritten and ties up a shop's floor space as they wait for several days for the insurance company to re-inspect. The wait also creates havoc for the shop's delivery schedule as well. State Farm's estimate approval notice -------- "ANY SUPPLEMENT TO THIS ESTIMATE REQUIRES APPROVAL OF A STATEFARM REPRESENTATIVE PRIOR TO THE PERFORMANCE OF THAT REQUEST." ---- attached to each estimate is a direct conflict with a shop's ability to properly repair the damaged vehicle. We understand additional parts request and complicated labor procedures may require additional inspections but State Farm is using this approval notice as a method to deny even the simplest and necessary procedures such as our previous complaint filed with the Department File #09-125-76377 where State Farm refused diagnostic reimbursement for suspension damage and alignment due to their manipulations of their estimate approval notice. The Department of Insurance needs to investigate this market behavior as State Farm's misconduct only leads into increased pressure between the shop and the insurance company appraiser, who by State Law is to determine the loss independently without bias as per state law and regulation. Here the estimate approval notice creates a conflict of interest, harming the consumer who is an innocent party within this dilemma. Due to the Pa Department of Insurance's obligation to protect and safeguard the citizens of our Commonwealth an investigation into the wanton disregard State Farm Insurance Company and their representatives utilize to manipulate, underpay and deny claims of unaware consumers.' I contacted our customer and advised that State Farm had denied additional reimbursement for the repairs to her damaged vehicle. I suggested she contact the insurance company and discuss the issue with a supervisor. Our customer contacted State Farm Insurance Company and requested a second opinion regarding her loss however State Farm advised her they would not send another appraiser to inspect the damages. Please investigate the manner in which State Farm Insurance Company is conducting damage loss inspections and the tactics in which their appraisers are utilizing to deny and steer claims. Photos and documentations will accompany this complaint by mail. Thank you, Stephen E Behrndt, President Crawford's Auto Center, Inc