Which insurance company to go with?

She is one good looking State Farm agent! I think the local person in my area is a dude. I ran the numbers and State Farm would run me roughly a little more than a grand per year..

Wow. The Trooper runs ~$420 a year, with liability limits double SC law requirements.

My wife was with State Farm before we were married. Her agent said he would not renew her policy when we got married because as a professional driver I was a very high risk.

My friend too was with Allstate (20+ yerars) and went to State Farm and is saving $200 every six months. The Allstate guy called him and asked why he left and he told him.

He said the agent told him he should have said something earlier as he could have found him some savings through Allstate.

I'm with E-surance, have been for 5 years or so. I've got the max (4) cars insured with them. All 4 are beaters. I pay about $110 a month for all 4 cars with minimum coverage. When I had full coverage on the old van they were great to deal with on the fender benders we had,

I've been very happy with Progressive. No one has been able to beat them on price either.

ddavidv wrote: All insurance companies suck to some degree with a large dose of ineptitude, some are just better than others. The only one that consistently gets high marks is USAA but you have to be military or government to get in with them.

They've opened their doors wider recently. Which will likely mean a tanking of quality.

Sorry, I guess I take a different slant than many others here. I'm in the auto insurance claims business, and have been for quite a while. I'm a claims manager now, but I've been a staff appraiser, multi line adjuster and fraud investigator during my career.

There is a general mistrust of insurance companies, which in many ways is a shame. I've never met one adjuster who intentionally tries to withhold money that a customer is entitled to. In fact, all the companies I know of teach their adjusters to pay what they owe..and often pay even if it's questionable. It's a hell of a lot cheaper to pay a claim, even if you have questions, than to face fines and penalties from the state DOI or deal with shark attorneys. For example, when a state comes in and audits an insurance companies claims, if they find unfair claims practices violations, fines run in the thousands of dollars per claim. That is NOT to say that adjusters never make mistakes. They're human. But there's no conspiracy to not pay claims.

I also definitely 100% disagree with the statements that insurance companies are ruining the body shop industry. Again, my view may be slanted, but I could make the argument that shops themselves cause a whole host of problems. I won't go into a long rant about it, but it's not so simple as a shop just blaming the insurance company and spinning it that way to their customer...insurance companies are an easy scape goat.

At the end of the day, my advice for which insurance company to go with is really a personal preference. Shop around for a great price. Check their financial stability. Most imporantly know and understand your policy. Should you have a claim, stay involved. After all, it is your car.

Klayfish, thanks for the insight. As a past adjuster/investigator for the theft unit I find the main reason that people think insurance companies are "out to screw them" stems from being ignorant of the "insurance contract."

People don't take the time to understand the contract they are entering (it is a contract folks, that says if x, y, z happens we will pay, if not we won't) but people ASSUME they are covered for anything and everything under the sun.

The particular agent involved can also affect the experience. Pete240Z shouldnt have to request a policy review to save money. The agent should also explain in detail what the customer is getting and what he is giving up to save money.
I am on rant right now about people trying to save money on their insurance when what they really need to be doing is increasing their limits. I have a case right now where motorcycle rider in a low speed accident has more than $125k in medical expenses for a broken leg(badly broken, yes) and there is only $100k in UM limits. The claim would be worth $400k if there was enough money in a pot someplace to pay. As it is, the rider will get what is left over from payment of attorney and medical expenses(if I can get them to agree to reduce their claim).

If everyone took the time to read every contract, mortgage, insurance policy and cell phone service agreement the country would come to a screeching halt.

I said they're a bunch of crooks earlier but was halfway jesting. Plenty of good folks in every industry. It's "THE SYSTEM" that I have a general problem with.

It's a product we are forced to buy by law, but there is no protection against someone who doesn't buy it. (Unless you basically pay for them via uninsured motorist coverage). Yes, you can take a person to court....Ha! They can't even afford insurance.

There is a reason there is a large amount of other crooks (lawyers ) aggressively going after insurance companies. It ain't because you're in good hands.

I really don't want to be too down on a 'necessity', and in general believe we should be forced to buy auto insurance.

It's just that they have a business to do, and that business is to make money. The rest is just PR.

Like I said earlier, you might have to fight with the best and the worst of them, with a lawyer.

-James

-2 for Progressive. They sent my wife a letter telling her they would be canceling her after she ran over a large chunk of concrete (knocked loose from a center barrier by a semi headed in the other direction) that destroyed the undercarriage of her car.

It was covered under comprehensive, but the "customer service" 2ND LINE SUPERVISOR told her "You've caused us too many headaches, and we don't believe you regarding the cause of the accident." We immediately called around for quotes, and Progressive had apparently RETROACTIVELY canceled us. Because of this, Farmers and Nationwide refused to even give a quote.

We ended up with State Farm, who were more than understanding. Been with them for 2 years, and other than the constant postcard solicitations from our agent for life insurance and financial services, we've been happy.

Also, my brother in law has been fighting with Progressive for 11 months now. One of their insured backed into his parked car (guy admitted he couldn't see around his own slide-in camper while backing up). BIL called Progressive the day of the accident, they verified that the guy's insurance was valid, now they're claiming they dropped him 2 months before the accident.

I'm with State Farm/Bristol.

With a 24 year old Male, and a 20 year old Female, 3 cars, all on the same policy, it's a whopping $87 a month.

A company worth looking into as well would be Titan. I've used them in the past, and had NO complaints. Price was cheaper than State Farm as well. I'm only with State Farm at the moment because the gf didn't feel like moving everything over.

My wife was with SF before we got married and 17 years later we still are. Over that time I have had a few speeding tickets and totalled one vehical (my fault) had they have never threatened to drop us, on top of that the rates are great. I think a lot of it comes down to the Agent, find one you like.

jamscal wrote: There is a reason there is a large amount of other crooks (lawyers ) aggressively going after insurance companies. It ain't because you're in good hands. It's just that they have a business to do, and that business is to make money. The rest is just PR. -James

With all due respect, that is absolutely incorrect. Well, except for the part about lawyers being crooks....
In some respects, it's a "chicken and egg" argument. Did the lawyers come about because of people looking for a payday, or did the people come out for a payday because of the lawyers who advertise on TV? Either way, the attorney comes after the insurance company for one reason...money. They know if they push hard enough, they can get cash, even for total b.s. claims. I can't tell you how many times I see claims where neither car has any damage, but 2 people in the car went to a chiropractor for 6 months...and coincidentally they didn't start going to the chiro until after they retained their attorney. Stuff like this is a huge driving factor in why insurance premiums are what they are. Attorneys aggressively pursue insurance companies simply for money...and they know which ones cough up the most and which ones defend.

Sure, insurance companies are in business to make money...they obviously don't pass enough to their staff...I can't afford to race as much as I want... But actually, their profit margins from insurance premiums is very, very low...if not at a loss. Profits they make, at least in the auto insurance biz, are mostly from investments.

92dxman wrote: State Farm looks like the front runner right now. Any personal insight out there anyone would like to throw out?

I've been insured with State Farm for almost 20 years and really have no complaints. Cost is reasonable, I get tons of discounts for multiple cars, education, etc. and they are great with policy changes. I moved the ancient no-claims-bonus policy from my old Pontiac onto my 17-year-old daughter's car when we got it and saved something like 30% over what it would have cost to start a new policy for her. Then I just started a new policy for the Poncho which is cheap to insure anyway. I'll probably do the same with the 'van when DD#2 gets her license in a couple years.

Plus, a few weeks after her birthday, they sent me an unsolicited refund because her premium went down when she turned 18. And a couple times over the years, I've gotten unsolicited refunds when they have had extra-profitable years.

Absolutely incorrect?

Ha!

I'll admit to WAYYYY too many frivolous lawsuits by individuals and lawyers looking to get paid. In general, I'd support ways to limit them.

BUT:

There is a history of insurance companies not wanting to pay for reasonable costs.

Isn't that part of the reason we're going through this health care thing? I know it's not the same, but everyone has a sad story about person X who was denied coverage or dropped under suspicious circumstances.

What happens when there is a disagreement between two peoples interpretation of a contract? The lawyers come in.

The insurance companies have lawyers too, no?

I may not need the tropical rub in Bali as part of my convalescence, and I don't want millions in pain and suffering $$$, but if your driver berkeleys up my year, I am going to get some grade A care and if it takes a lawyer to get it, that's fine.

i'll disagree that no adjusters look to deny claims just because. my g/f used to work as a workers comp adjuster, someone she worked with had come from being an adjuster at progressive, and they got "spiffs" for having the most claim denials for that week, month or whatever.

its totally illegal, but they did it anyways, which is why that person left

Klayfish wrote: I've never met one adjuster who intentionally tries to withhold money that a customer is entitled to.

I can think of several I've encountered who did exactly that.

It's a hell of a lot cheaper to pay a claim, even if you have questions, than to face fines and penalties from the state DOI or deal with shark attorneys.

Yet over and over again, this is what the claims agents and insurance companies demonstrate prefering. For only when the shark attorneys and regulators are brought in do they finally decide to pay the claim or honor the contract.

Shopping around, reading your contract and all are good things to do. But when you're stuck dealing with the other guys insurance company, it's a moot point.

pete240z wrote: He said the agent told him he should have said something earlier as he could have found him some savings through Allstate.

But in the mean time bend back over and let me bury this thing again.

Klayfish... you're fighting a losing battle, trust me. I work in insurance as well, and there's no convincing anyone.

I work as a third party multi line adjuster (basically contract work for other companies). I handle both property and casualty claims.

I get settlement and payment authority from the client I am working for. I make an offer based upon what they wish to settle for and what I think is fair. I routinely offer the full amount of my authority if thats what I think is fair.

I also routinely deal with the minor accidents where the claimant doesn't treat for a month until they hire an attorney. Then this minor accident turns into 3-6 months of physical therapy and a request for a $7-15k settlement. Lawyer gets 33% and hopefully restless nights sleep for life.

For example I am dealing with a claimant right now who was in an accident on 7/18. Would not return calls to settle property damage even after I spoke with his attorney. He was driving his sisters van at the time. We did not know where the van was unitl 8/2. We had it appraised and it was a total loss. I informed them of this on 8/13 but did not get a call from the sister until 8/17. I spoke with both the driver and shop and was advised that there were no storage charges. I go to have the vehicle picked up for the salvage auction and am met with a $1600 tow and storage bill.

Wait a minute it was listed drivable on the police report AND was driven away AND I was told there was no storage. I tell the shop owner we are not paying it and they can keep the van and go after the owner. The attorney says the van broke down a couple of blocks from the accident after he left. Shop owner says it was towed in on 7/23/10 (not 7/18/10) with two flat on the passenger side and a bent rim and would not start. Funny the accident damage was on the drivers side and was a light scrape from a sideswipe incident.

I just settled the property damage claim today 9/8/10 after arguing over tires they bought in January, a shift linkage etc. Decide to pay them extra for the tires.

The attorney wants 30 days loss of use since she has been without a vehicle for over a month. I have offered 15 days since we were unaware the vehicle and its location unitl 8/2 and it was totalled and they were notified of the total loss on 8/13. That gives them a couple days to find a new car. I do not feel we are responsible for the time they choose not to accept the offer or the time they would not contact us and let us know where the van is.

You tell me who is trying to be fair?

I've never done third party arbitration with an insurance claim. I have done it with other things. It can be most interesting. Overall, I'd say it's a positive experience, but boy can it take you places you weren't anticipating.

Greg, I fully agree with you that many a claimant is dishonest. And if you were to say most were delusional about the value of their property and the extent of their injuries, I'd agree with you on that as well.

One of the nasty problems though is also the law. Many states prohibit you the injured from being able to start a claim until you reach an expense threshold. So you've got to make a lot of semi-pointless doctors visits just to run up the bill to get started. Many settlements are binding and closed, so if you find more damage or injury later, you're sol. Better pad it up front, to make sure you don't take it in the rear later.

And for the record, I do not think all claims adjusters are scum. But it is one of those things where it only takes one to do a lot of damage to the image. Sorta like nasty cops and bad waiters. The good ones are forgotten, but the bad ones stick in your mind forever.