Complaint: The ormond agecny is threatening to cancel homeowners policy over a bogus inspection report. Ormond agency is charging a surcharge fee which is unfair We purchased a home on December 28, 2012. On January 27, 2013 we had a new roof put on the house. We got homeowner's insurance through the Ormond Agency on February 7, 2013. One of the requirements was to get a 4 point inspection completed in order to finish writing the policy, which we had done. We paid a year's advance of the homeowner's policy which is supposed to be effective through February 7, 2014. Out of the blue we get a call from someone from Frontline who wants to do their own inspection of the house. That person comes out on February 28, 2013. On March 20, we get a letter signed by *** ******** listing problems with the house to include the roof, screen door damage, soffits eaves, rotting and paint peeling and the siding crumbling, rotting and paint peeling. On top of the ormond agency's letter another bill sent by Frontline charging us $132 for some type of "surcharge" in which ****** ****** from the Ormond Agency told us we would not have to pay becuase we got the insurance in time. Then ****** turns around and tells us that we have to pay it. Everyone at the ormond agency and Frontline knew that there was a new roof put on and the other"stuff" listed as cosmetic. In fact the one item is not even part of the house. It is fencing. My husband is fightning Melanoma cancer and I feel that we are being harassed and discriminated against in because we have been making many trips to the Mayo Clinic for cancer treatment and I don't have the time or money to fix the items. My husband is too sick from the cancer treatments to really do anything right now. We are now being told (though nothing is in writing) that if this isn't done in 30 days our insurance will be cancelled. We have had homeowners insurance in Ohio for over 26 years and never had any claims on our Ohio homes.
Business' Initial Response The insurance carrier (Frontline Homeowners Insurance) conducted an inspection on the home of the insured/consumer and noted several areas of concern from an underwriting perspective. The Ormond Agency notified the consumer in writing of these concerns in a prompt manner. The consumer was verbally informed of the inspection by the insurance agent prior to binding coverage and there is a section on the policy application containing verbiage that the consumer authorizes the carrier access to their premises for the purpose of an underwriting inspection.
The only two parties that may cancel a policy are the named insured(s) and/or the insurance carrier. As such, The Ormond Agency has never threatened to cancel a policy as we have no such authority or desire. We did communicate to the consumer that it has been our experience that a policy may be cancelled by the carrier if their underwriting request for repairs is not evidenced within the requested time-frame.
The $132 surcharge is a carrier imposed fee as there was a lapse (approximately 42 days) between the closing date of the consumer purchasing the house and the policy effective date. The insurance agent previously informed the consumer that she can bind the policy if the lapse is less than 45 days but made not statement to the consumer about waiving the fee.
Despite threatening comments by the consumer to The Ormond Agency, we continue to work with both the carrier and consumer in this matter. As recently communicated with the consumer, the carrier is only requiring proof of repairs to large stucco crack by May 3, 2013 in order to avoid policy cancellation.
Complaint Resolution: Company addressed the complaint issues. The consumer failed to acknowledge acceptance to BBB.
Complaint Category: Sales presentation used dishonest sales practices
Complaint: Misrepresentation of what is required under Florida Law. I informed Front Line Insurance and the Ormond Agency that I would not renew our homeowner's policy on the due date. Someone from the Ormond Agency phoned me and informed me that if I did not provide proof of new insurance on our home that they would turn over to a collection agency the amount due for the policy I informed them I would not renew. The person with whom I spoke informed me that "Florida Law" required them to turn over to a collection agency the amount due on the policy that we were not renewing.
Today (03-06-13) I went to the Ormond Agency and asked for proof that "Florida Law" required them to turn over to a collection agency the amount due on the policy that we were not renewing. The persons with whom I spoke today stated that they had no policy of turning over to a collection agency collections for policies not renewed. I was then informed that nonrenewals of policies resulted in notices of "cancellation due to nonpayment." I informed them that I was not cancelling our policy, but rather declining to renew it and certainly not refusing payment. This information led to a repeat statement that they would issue a notice of "cancellation due to nonpayment."
The person with whom I last spoke told me that they did not turn over to a collection agency accounts terminated because of nonrenewals. I was not given an answer to my question "Why did someone from your agency tell me that you were compelled by Florida Law to turn me over to a collection agency for nonpayment when I simply chose to not renew our policy." I was informed that no one from their agency would make such a claim.
I am of reasonably sound mind, have considerable education and so far as I know do not hallucinate. My impression of the phone conversation I had with a person from the Ormond Agency is that the person attempted to scare me into submitting to a sales presentation at their office when I complied and brought in proof of new insurance. I very much resent sales tactics designed to frighten and bully.
I suffered no finical loss from this unfortunate experience (at least as far as I know).
I expect a formal apology for the unsuccessful sales scare tactics and a record of the Ormond Agency's behavior.
Business' Initial Response To whom this may concern:
I do believe there was some minor miscommunication between the client and our employee, however our employee's choice of words were poor and obviously offensive to the client, and for that, we sincerely apologize. This is not a normal practice of our agency and the employee involved has been reprimanded accordingly. A formal apology has been sent (via mail) to Mr. ****** as well.
Consumer's Final Response I do not accept the "linguistic fig leaf" from the person at the Ormond Agency. There was no "miscommunication" between me and the person with whom I spoke. I have an earned Ph.D. in communication and for sure know when people have a "miscommunication". I understood exactly what the Ormond Agency's sales person was attempting to communicate. I repeatedly questioned her about the alleged Florida law that "required me to submit proof of insurance on our home" and she repeatedly assured me that such a law existed. The Ormond Agency's sales person repeatedly insisted that I had to come to their office with my proof of insurance. As you can discover for yourself, no such Florida law exists. Repeatedly offering the same blatant misrepresentation of Florida law significantly reduces the chance for "miscommunication". I very much resent language that reduces a blatant effort to pressure me into subjecting myself to a sales effort into a "misunderstanding". What is wrong with simply admitting an unethical and offensive sales attempt did not succeed? The reply from the Ormond Agency shows me their concern is with "covering up" an offensive practice and not with accepting responsibility for their actions.
Complaint Resolution: BBB determined that despite the company's reasonable effort to address complaint issues, the consumer remained dissatisfied.
The information in the table below represents an industry comparison of businesses which are of the same relative size. This is based on BBB's database of businesses located in Central Florida. Businesses may engage in more than one type of business. The percent of time the business engages in a type of business is not accounted for. There is no known industry standard for the number of complaints a business can expect. The volume of business and number of transactions may have a bearing on the number of complaints received by BBB.
BBB records show the issues raised in the complaint have been resolved. Either customer confirmed the complaint has been resolved, or business confirmed the complaint has been resolved and customer did not respond to BBB correspondence informing customer that complaint will be considered resolved unless BBB hears otherwise from customer.
BBB found business made good faith effort to resolve complaint but customer not satisfied with business response
BBB found that business adequately addressed the disputed issues and made a good faith effort to resolve them; however, customer has informed BBB that he/she is not satisfied with the outcome. In some cases, business may have agreed to mediate or arbitrate the complaint but customer declined to participate in mediation/arbitration.
Customer not satisfied with business response; BBB did not find business made good faith effort to resolve complaint
BBB did not find that business adequately addressed the disputed issues and made a good faith effort to resolve them, and customer has informed BBB that he/she is not satisfied with the outcome. In some cases, customer may have agreed to mediate or arbitrate the complaint but business declined to participate in mediation/arbitration.
BBB did not receive a response from business
BBB did not receive a response from business after two attempts to contact business, and BBB communications with customer do not show that business contacted customer to resolve the complaint.
BBB cannot process complaint
This includes situations where BBB cannot locate business, business is no longer in business, or business is in bankruptcy and complaints must be submitted through bankruptcy trustee.
Your complaint will be forwarded to the company within two business days. The company will be asked to respond within 14 days, and if a response is not received, a second request will be made. You will be notified of the company's response when we receive it (or notified that we received no response). Complaints are usually closed within 30 business days.
BBB promotes truth in advertising by contacting advertisers whose claims conflict with the BBB Code of Advertising. These claims come to our attention from our internal review of advertising, consumer complaints and competitor challenges. BBB asks advertisers to prove their claims, change ads to make offers more clear to consumers, and remove misleading or deceptive statements.
Some Better Business Bureaus offer additional content and services in BBB Business Reviews. The additional content and services are typically regional in nature or, in some cases, a new product or service that is being tested prior to a more general release. Not all enhanced content and services are available at all Better Business Bureaus.
We offer free reviews on businesses that include background, licensing, consumer experience and other information such as governmental actions that is known to BBB. These reviews are provided for businesses that are BBB accredited and also for businesses that are not BBB accredited.