PCTG Consumer Complaint Report Record ID#: 470635557

''This complaint is being sent to the DOI on behalf of Mr. Kafelas regarding the unprofessional conduct of State Farm employees Ken D'Annibale and his manager Les Jagger. These two State Farm employees have made it a point to intentionally misuse their power and disregard their responsibilities as a team to harass Mr. Kafelas from day one beginning at the time that he established a 3rd party claim and informed State Farm that he would have his vehicle repaired at GA Collision Center. ''After the claims Rep. was unsuccessful at steering this consumer to their affiliated shop they then began to initiate the hardship by telling Mr. Kafelas that State Farm is not allowed to go to GA Collision Center and requested that he have his damaged vehicle removed from GA Collision Center's property so they could assign a staff appraiser to appraise his vehicle. ''We accommodated Mr. Kafelas in an attempt to overcome the unprofessional conduct initiated by State Farm. In order to aleve future problems Mr. Kafelas chose to be part of the appraisal process and made arrangements to meet with a State Farm appraiser outside at our property.'Mr. Chris Pozzuolo was the assigned appraiser for this claim and he came out on June 5, to meet with Mr. Kafelas outside of our shops parking lot. ' Mr. Kafelas was given GA Collision Center's repair order and attempted to go over the vehicles damage and address his concerns of how the repairs will be reviewed.'' 1 (SRS) air bag light stays on since the incident 2 The vehicle needed front wheel re-alignment due to the impact on both front wheels 3 The vehicle front wheels also had be checked and re-balance 4 The left fender had a mark, which he believed it happen from the incident. '(This was written the same day as unrelated damage on another estimate, for $45.37) 5 Opposite side left front wheel had scuffmarks from being pushed on the curbside 6 The appearance of his vehicle after the repairs and refinishing process was completed ' Mr. Pozzuolo was very professional and courteous when he explained his written estimate cost to the owner. He assured Mr. Kafelas that all of these items would be reviewed with the inside claim handler and he would be kept informed. Mr. Kafelas was later told that these items which were clearly results of the accident were denied by the inside Rep as unrelated damages or as unnecessary procedures few days later. ' After the appraisal was completed GA Collision and Mr. Kafelas signed a Repair Contract and we both reviewed the estimated cost that Mr. Pozzuolo just appraised. Our pending repair order was $ 2,396.18 and State Farms estimated cost was $1704.09. ' We started the repair process and we sent out a supplemental damage analysis to State Farm on June 11, and informed State Farm to notify the vehicles owner to be present for the supplemental review. ' On June 20, Mr. D'Annibale was assigned to the claim and he made arrangement with Mr. Kafelas to be present as he was going to be at our facility completing a scheduled supplemental inspection with another customer that same day. When Mr. Kafelas arrived Mr. D'Annibale left our premises for unknown reasons and sat inside his vehicle on the telephone outside our property. We placed Mr. Kafelas' vehicle on the same spot where minutes ago Mr. D'Annibale review the other vehicle and waited for Mr. D'Annibale to come back and introduce himself to Mr. Kafelas. ' Mr. Kafelas waited for 20 minutes near his vehicle until he realized Mr. D'Annibale was not coming out of his vehicle. He had to walk to meet Mr. D'Annibale still inside his vehicle on the telephone. Mr. D'Annibale then came out of his vehicle and informed Mr. Kafelas that he had to now move his vehicle from our property and bring it to Mr. D'Annibale so he could review the supplement without myself being present, and that these were the demand that his manager Les Jagger had just instructed him to do by telephone. ' When I attempted to go and find out what the problem was, Mr. D'Annibale informed me that he was instructed to leave if I interfered, only Mr. Kafelas along with any other of my shops employees could be near the vehicle during the supplemental process. ' I requested that his manager contact me imedeatly to explain this unprofessional behavior and again requested that this conduct stop for respect to the consumer and these restrictions and demands be forwarded to my attention in writing. Mr. D'Annibale smiled and responded that this was not possible. I left them alone and so he proceeded to complete his appraisal. ' Mr. D'Annibale found again an opportunity to mislead this consumer thru the supplemental review, avoiding to address the physical damage still visual on the vehicle, dismissing all safety issues and concern on the vehicle, dismissing needed parts and removing prior addressed parts, dismissing invoiced material and supplies and not properly addressing all necessary procedures to complete this vehicle to its pre damage condition. Stating that he paid for these items or that they were addressed before, even though he provided no documentation to support his statements. This malicious behavior was escaladed every time Mr. D'Annibale went inside his vehicle and discussed this claim with someone over the telephone. ' After two hour of this behavior an exhausted Mr.Kafelas, requested to be given Mr. Les Jaggers telephone number so he could talk with him in person but he only got his voice mail, and no returned telephone calls. We send out our final supplemental analysis request on June 20 after we reviewed Mr. D'Annibale's estimated cost, only to be denied by a telephone call. ' Mr. Kafelas now is financially responsible to compensate us for the denied items & procedures to complete his vehicle. On behalf of the consumer I ask the DOI to look into this matter. (1) Not have a conflict of interest in the making of an appraisal. This chapter and the act, and this section in particular, shall be strictly interpreted to protect the interest of the consumer and place the burden upon the appraiser to eliminate any conflict of interest in the making of an appraisal. (2) Obtain the consumer's consent before authorizing the removal of a motor vehicle from one location to another (3) Review the appraisal with an authorized representative of the repair shop which is selected by the consumer or with any other person'reasonably necessary to demonstrate that the actual costs of repairs are adequately covered in the appraisal.