Conference 7.286::digital

>    < Note 824.0 by WMOIS::FARHADI >
>
>      1.Metpay is deducting $300. (they know who stole my car, so I don't 
>	think I should pay my deductible.

    Is your deductable $300?  If so, then this sounds about right. 
    However, they -should- try and get this from the individual who
    stole the car.  If they do, they will (or should) reimburse you 
    the deductable you paid (at least that has been my experience from
    another insurance company that made me pay deductable for an accident
    with an uninsured motorist).
    
>      2.Metpay is telling me that they negotiated my price of $1600 with the 
>	body shop and came up with the new price, $1100.

    Insurance companies have a lot of clout when it comes to dealing
    with body shops.  If they were able to negotiate the price down
    from $1600, it means less money out of their pocket.  So long as
    all repairs are done properly and to your satisfaction, this change
    in cost should be irrelevant.
    
>      3.Metpay is also telling me that if I decided not to repair my car that
>	they would only pay 75% of $1100 minus $300 (deductible)=$580.
    
    It wouldn't suprise me if all insurance companies (not just MET)
    didn't have to reimburse their clients more than 75% of repair cost
    if paid directly to the owner, but I have no knowlege of this...

>	Can they do this ? What can I do to fight this ??
>	Thnx in advance.
    
    It would be my guess that, yes, they can do this.  I don't agree
    with it (I sometimes think that insurance companies are the lowest
    form of low life) but they are trying to look out for themselves.

    Good luck...
    
-Andy

    I'm not sure if you can do this... but the 'thief' (if convicted)
    might be able to be sued for the $300 that you have to pay.  The
    thief is being tried under criminal laws... but you may be able
    to get him or her under civil laws.
    
    Just a guess,
    
    Don

>>
>>      3.Metpay is also telling me that if I decided not to repair my car that
>>	they would only pay 75% of $1100 minus $300 (deductible)=$580.
>>

This depends on the state your insurance policy was written in.  In MA, I 
don't know.  In NH 2 years ago, my car was hit my a MA driver.  The driver's
insurance company paid full damages.  I suspect that had to do with the 
insurance company and not state law.

The negotiation is normal, but make sure they don't compromise the work
(use substandard parts, repair parts that should be replaced, etc.)
as part of the negotiation.

Matt

>The negotiation is normal, but make sure they don't compromise the work
>(use substandard parts, repair parts that should be replaced, etc.)
>as part of the negotiation.

	  I'll second that! Make absolutely sure that the body shop
	fixes everything to your satisfaction before signing
	*anything* - I've had/heard about too many hooror stories to
	list, but suffice it to say that you have to watch them like
	a hawk. 

	  (OK, I'll tell one story. My wife's car was stolen, and
	part of the damage was a dent in the door and rear quarter
	panel. THe shop tried to get away with fixing only the part
	of the dent that was on the door, and the insurance company
	didn't care. It took a lot of screaming to make them do it
	right.)

	  As for the deductible, you're finding out why deductibles
	exist. Push your insurance company to go after the thief for
	the damages, and if they won't do it then sure him yourself. 

	  BTW - I don't like METPAY, and they consistently rank near
	or at the bottom of tenant satisfaction surveys that I've
	seen. Think about finding another company if you're
	dissatisfied.

	Roy

       2 places you might try:
    1. Insurance Commissioner in Boston
    2. Attorney General's Office of Consumer Affairs
                                                    Denny

Sounds like everything's right here.

You're responsible for the deductible unless your insurance company has a good
chance of collecting the money.  A car thief is not a good risk for your
insurance company -- he may not have $300.  However, a good insurance company
will provide the necessary legal assistance in getting the $300 out of the
thief.

When you choose to waive repairs, insurance companies reimburse you for the
reduction in the value of your car.  That reduction in value is less than the
cost of the repairs.

/john

    I can't imagine an insurance company trying to go after a thief.  If
    the driver responsible for damage was insured, his/her insurance
    company would normally pay all the damages, including the deductible,
    but most policies exclude damages resulting from an illegal act.
    
    I wish you luck.
    
    		Steve

    Can't pass up the opportunity to tell my Metpay story and to point out
    some small print in the automobile policy. 
    
    Do you know that you have agreed not to sue Metpay?  It is in the
    policy.  If they don't want to pay your claim, they don't have to!
    
    My wife was in an accident in Littleton a little over a year ago.
    She had pulled off route 119 and when no cars were coming, made a
    U turn.  The car stalled (raining) right in the middle of the road.
    She looked out the drivers window just as she got the car restarted.
    This car was bearing down on her and making no attempt to stop, she
    tried to get out of his way but he nailed her in the front panel.
    
    The local police came to the scene, asked my wife's statement, took
    registration etc. Went over to other driver's car, did same.  Other
    driver then got into police car.  Little while later tow truck came,
    towed cars.  Police officer told my wife to get in cruiser and he would
    take her to the Westford line.  When she got into the car, he presented
    her with a citation for "failure to yield". When she asked him what he
    meant he said that there were no skid marks and so it was clear that
    she pulled out of a nearby driveway and the other driver did not have
    time to stop.  He then said he could have written her up for more but
    he didn't. 
    
    As we found out later, the driver that hit my wife was an off-duty
    policeman and that the two of them had figured my wife was divorced
    and therefore an easy claim.  The police report was falsified and
    the other driver's report was identical.  The police report did not
    have one word of my wife's statement.
    
    Metpay paid the other driver's claim because the police report and
    his report matched.  As his car was not insured, he made a claim to
    Metpay and could bypass his own company.  So he totaled his ten year
    old car and got paid $1200 for it.
    
    We appealed the citation and the clerk magistrate declared the ticket
    never existed (magistrate read off 10 articles and asked the officer
    to tell him which one it matched up with).  We appealed the points in
    Superior court in Lowell and the judge declared my wife was not at
    fault (he asked the insurance representative if Metpay actually paid
    this claim).
    
    Anyhow, we got our car fixed except for $300 deductable and some rental
    car additions.  I asked Metpay about the $300 as the court declared the
    accident was not my wifes fault.  The Metpay rep said what the court
    decides has nothing to do with them.  I said, " I guess I'll have to
    file with small claims".  The rep said, "you can't, by taking our
    policy you have agreed not to sue us".  I checked, the policy says
    that.
    
    
    I not sure what to do from here either, money isn't so much, principal
    is.
    
    
   - Dick
    
    The policy does say that
     
     

    It might be worth your while to take them to Small Claims Court anyway.
    The legality of the no-suit clause might be in question, especially
    if it wasn't pointed out to you when you bought the policy and/or
    if it's not clearly evident in the document.
    
    Best bet is to get some legal advice first -- from a lawyer. 

There's nothing in my policy about not being able to sue my insurance
company (not METPAY), so unless that's a part of state law (which I doubt)
that's just another one of MET's games.  The only comment in my policy
about not being able to sue the insurance company has to do with disagreement
over the amount of damages.

    There is a Digital Liason person to Metpay listed in the DTN Directory. 
    When Metpay tried to cancel my home insurance after I made a claim, I
    called that person with my complaint and the issue was worked out. 
    Metpay has a LARGE investment in Digital...try to leverage it.
    
    Av

>    There is a Digital Liason person to Metpay listed in the DTN Directory. 

Does this same person also handle John Hancock/Digital Plan?

Betty

    
    I doubt if one person would handle both METPAY and John Hancock.
    However, I have had good luck getting information about all health
    care plans from the John Hancock Claim Office. They provide info
    or pointers as appropriate. If they couldn't handle what I needed
    done, I'd just call the Corporate Employee Relations Mnager and
    ask who could. How do you find these things - the Digital Telephone
    Directory - Personnel Department p 286 in the May 89 version.
    
    

    
    The Metpay Liason is Lisa Kane - 251-1232. 
    
    Hancock problems generally would be handled by 
    you first, if no succcess, yourlocal PSA. After
    that your Site Benefits Manager, who deals with
    Hancock directly. 
    
    You are right - no one could handle this alone -
    I sit next to the Metpay Liason. I'm glad I 
    don't have that job!   
    

    Where in  your  policy  does  it  say that you can't sue Metpay? I
    reread  mine  and  couldn't  find  that  section. The only related
    section  I  did find specifyed binding arbitration for the cost of
    repairs,  but  didn't  say  anything  about  no  sueing over other
    issues.  I have a 1989 Mass policy.

--David

    
     Metpay ranked pretty low, like near the bottom in a recent survey by
    Consumer reports.On the other hand, some of the previous notes about
    the insurance company not paying the deductible because the other guy
    was at fault ( the original note) don't ,ake sense. You apply for the
    deductible because it is less expensive- you , not the insurance
    company assume the risk for the amount of the deductible, that's why it
    is cheaper. Yopu can't get the bost of both worlds.
    
     As far as the insurance companies getting the body shops to reduce
    their inflated charges- what's wrong with that? Body shops are
    notorious for inflatin insurance estimates- why do they always ask you 
    "is this an insurance job?" when you get an estimate. Keeping the cost
    of insurance down means keeping the payouts down.
    
     THe state agency ( insuarance comission by whatever name)  that
    regulates insurance companies is the best recourse of action. I got 
    ( I should say was attempted to get) an real shafting by allstate
    insurance when I lived in Conn. They told me I had to take the car
    to a body shop that was 30 mi from the adjustor's office( which was 40
    mi from my home , and they would take care of the repairsbut reduced
    their estimate because " if the car hadn't had some rust, there
    wouldn't have been as much damage.
    
     had been rear-ended by their client who admitted going 45 to the
    police ( it was a 30 mph Zone and it was snowing!) He pleaded guilt to
    a number of charges including reckless driving and speeding. The local
    body shops( near my home, not 60 nmi away)  all gave me estimates
    within about 5% of each other, and which were almost double that which
    Allstate said they would settle for. I was smart enough to get
    estimates based on " it is not an insurance case" statement to them.
    
     Allatate wouldn't budge and really encouraged me to take a cash
    settlement.INstaed I went to the insuarance comission and they got
    after Allstate like ugly on an ape. I had documented my case and did
    not get emotional.
    
     The result was I took the car to a loca; body shop of my choice and
    got an apology from Allstate- it seems the cklaims agent was in some
    job difficulties and was attempting to make himself look good to his
    management by settling valid claims for much less than was coming to
    the claimant. Claims agent  made a major carreer change as a result of
    this incident. 
    
     there are good agents and there are bad agents. There are good
    companies and bad companies in terms of their business ethics.
    
    
    BY the way- the state mandates the rates on the MANDATORY insuarance
    coverage and some of the penalties. THe rest of the optional insuarance
    ( which if you look, constitutes the largest part of your bill) is
    competitive and based on history. We drivers in Mass have no one to
    blame but ourselevs- the high accident rates, and our driving habits is
    what causes a goodly part of our high insurance. THe high auto theft
    is what causes our comprehensive insurance to be so high- for that we
    can blame ol'MIkey.
    
     Back to the original subjec=t of this conference- METPAY- they don't
    fare too well in the customer satisfaction surveys- I would suggets
    going to the local library and getting some back issues of consumer
    reports buying guides and see which companies rate the highest- youre
    odds are much better there.Also- the Liasson contact seems like a good
    idea.
    
     My insuarance co?- USAA- I've been with them 25 yrs- rates are
    outstanding and they have always been rated as one of the top in 
    ratings- consistently. I recently had a accident with my boat trailer- 
    the claims service was exceptional and my satisfaction with the quality
    and the timing of the repair seemed to be th primary concern of the
    claims agent. he did a great job of finding the best repair cost (
    $1100 at the final shop vs $2100 at the place where I purchased the
    trailer.
                                              
    my 2�
    
    Dick
    
    
     

	In MA, you can get (for a small fee) what is known as "waiver of
deductible".  If you choose that option, in cases where the other driver is
at fault, your insurance company will waive the (now $300 - $500) deductible
(presumably taking it out of the other insurance company's hide.)

--Doug_who_just_renewed_and_took_the_waiver_since_$20_was_cheap_vs_$500_and_
      _since_my_1987_Subaru_wagon_is_considered_a_"sports_car"_because_of_
      _the_turbo...

    ``Waiver of Deductible'' is another way for a insurance company to unload
    some more of your money!  Have you noticed the fine print for a waiver
    of deductible claim to be valid.  It practically says that you must
    have identified the person whose fault it was.  If that is the case 
    then you can personally go after the guys insurance company if he had
    insurance or sue him.  I think it will take the same effort to get the
    claim from the other insurance company directly then from Metropolitan.
    Especially seeing Metropolitan's service records and estimation tactics!  

    
�                                     It practically says that you must
�   have identified the person whose fault it was.  If that is the case 
�   then you can personally go after the guys insurance company if he had
�   insurance or sue him.

    I don't know.  To me, the "other" (meaning the insurance company
    of the person at fault) company would be more apt to "deal" with
    another big insurance company than just an individual.  With an
    individual, they could red-tape (or ignore) him/her and what would they
    lose (until he went and got a lawyer)?
    
    I was hit twice by other people.  I have the waiver of deductible
    with MetPay.  Both times, MetPay payed my claim with my favorite
    body-shop (one in another state, no less!) with no deductible and
    no surcharges.  Then they went after the other guy's insurance for 
    the whole deal.  I didn't even really have to go through any big
    deal to prove he was at fault.  I realize that for every good
    experience, there will be a bad, but......
    
- Sean

�    <<< Note 824.23 by AYNRND::REILLY "Instant Pink Floyd! Just add Waters" >>>
�    I don't know.  To me, the "other" (meaning the insurance company
�    of the person at fault) company would be more apt to "deal" with
�    another big insurance company than just an individual.  With an
�    individual, they could red-tape (or ignore) him/her and what would they
�    lose (until he went and got a lawyer)?
    
    I think you missed my point, you are going to deal with some company
    in any circumstances.  In your example you dealt with Metropolitan.
    Because your experience with Metropolitan was good you lucked out,
    which seems to be a minority.  What is there to say that in some cases 
    getting the money from Metropolitan could turn out to be more difficult 
    then just getting it straight from the other insurance company?  

�                          ........ What is there to say that in some cases 
�    getting the money from Metropolitan could turn out to be more difficult 
�    then just getting it straight from the other insurance company?  

    None, I just assume *my* insurance company (being whatever) will
    be more apt to help me out than *his*, since I am paying mine 
    X hundred dollars a year and I am paying his nothing.  Or am I
    still missing the point?
         
- Sean

RE: waiver of deductible

.25 has it right.  This clause is part of the overall no-fault insurance stuff.
It is far, far less expensive for the insurance companies involved for them
to pay off each other's deductibles when their clients are at fault than it is
for them to pay all the costs involved with fighting it out in court.

A company that hassles its own policy holders about waiver of deductible runs
the risk that said policy holders will take their business elsewhere.  Some
companies don't care, of course.


RE: can't sue clause

One can always sue the company for breach of the contract (i.e., the terms of
the policy), provided that one hasn't already signed something releasing the
company from further obligations in a particular claim (and the check paying for
repairs usually comes with such a form).


RE: .0

Nothing in this note sounds out of the ordinary.  Read your policy.  As long as
they are abiding by what's said there, there's nothing unfair going on and
nothing to fight.  If you don't like the terms of the policy, you shouldn't
have taken it out.

Deductible means just that--the amount of financial exposure that you agree to
endure yourself.  In return for agreeing not to hold them responsible for small
damages, they give you a reduced premium rate.  If your insurer can get the
deductible and their own exposure paid to them by either the party at fault or
their insurer, then they will reimburse you for the deductible.  Usually,
though, the deductible represents the amount of money you agree to pay out of
your own pocket if there is a claim.

As long as the body shop does the same quality work for $1100 as for $1600,
this shouldn't be a problem.  Make sure they don't cut corners, though.

As pointed out previously, if you don't choose to have them repair the car, they
only pay for the reduction in its book value due to the accident.  Hence the
75% of repair costs.

--PSW

Re: .26

> If you don't like the terms of the policy, you shouldn't have taken it out.

That would be reasonable advice, if auto insurance weren't mandatory.  My
perception (which could possibly be wrong) is that I'm going to be ripped
off no matter what company I insure my car with, so it's not worth worrying
about.  If a politician makes a campaign promise to repeal the mandatory
insurance laws, though, there's a good chance that I'll vote for him/her.

				-- Bob

    If you want mandatory car insurance dropped, also try to institute real
    no-fault insurance - where your insurance pays for the damage to your
    own car (which would certainly be much cheaper than the lawsuit-ridden
    scheme we have instead in most states).  Otherwise, if your car were
    involved in an accident with an uninsured car which was at fault (since
    you don't have no-fault insurance), you could find yourself simply out
    of luck if the other driver doesn't have the money.
    
    New Hampshire used to (maybe still does; I haven't lived there for 15
    years) let you post a bond in lieu of car insurance - I think you could
    not do this if you had been in ac accident, though.  I wonder if this
    is still true - anyone know?  I seem to recall that it was $5000, but
    that was when I was in college up there; the few friends of mine who
    owned cars mostly had had their parents guarantee the bonds for them (I
    didn't own a car, of course - far too broke!).

    WHen I lived in Texas 20 years ago it was an "insurance optional"
    state.  A major consequence of this was that if you were insured, you
    ended up paying an extra premium for Uninsured Motorist coverage - this
    paid any and all costs you incurred in an accident - if  the other guy
    was uninsured.  It wasn't cheap, but the idea was that the guy who
    wasn't carrying insurance was probably litigation-proof as well
    (minimum-wage earner with no assets).  Neither you nor your insurer was
    going to get a penny from him.

    
�   WHen I lived in Texas 20 years ago it was an "insurance optional"
�   state.  A major consequence of this was that if you were insured, you
�   ended up paying an extra premium for Uninsured Motorist coverage
 
    We have this Uninsured Motorist premium in MA where the insurance
    is not optional.  In case we get hit by a Texas driver ;^)
    
- Sean   

> 	In MA, you can get (for a small fee) what is known as "waiver of
> deductible".  If you choose that option, in cases where the other driver is
> at fault, your insurance company will waive the (now $300 - $500) deductible
> (presumably taking it out of the other insurance company's hide.)

Are you should this isn't provided for automatically?  If the other driver
is "at fault" (according to Mass No fault law), doesn't your company
reimburse you in full, and automatically go after the other driver's
insurance company for the full amount, including the deductable??
(I seem to recall an incident a few years ago where this happened.)

Don

    Does anyone know if Metpay in Mass has added the new "high-theft
    vehicle" surcharge to anyone? My sister-in-law just got socked $130
    She does not have metpay. My car is on the list (what a list). I called
    metpay and she asked me for my policy #. Just in case they overlooked
    me I hung up.

If Metpay hasn't already, they will have to.  Retroactively, even.

In Massachusetts, nothing about rates is up to the insurance company.

The number given by VTX ATOZ is no longer valid.

    Insurance
    
      * Metropolitan (Metpay)
        (as of 03/15/94)
        Digital Policy Holder Services                      800 438-6383
    

    The new number is 1-800-get-met1 (438-6381) from flyer sent with recent
    policy renewal. Says "theis supercedes all previous metpay phone
    numbers".
    
    TDD number is 1-800-426-5718
    
    rick

    Thanks for the info.... the METpay number has been changed in AtoZ and 
    will be reflected in the next rev.