Are you the Owner of this Business? ×
BBB® Accredited Business Seal

Are You the Business Owner of Acuity, a Mutual Insurance Company?

If yes, click here to login.

Are you...?

BBB Accredited Business since

Acuity, a Mutual Insurance Company

Additional Locations

Phone: (920) 458-9131 Fax: (920) 458-7843 View Additional Phone Numbers 2800 S Taylor Dr, Sheboygan, WI 53081 http://www.acuity.com


BBB Business Reviews may not be reproduced for sales or promotional purposes.

Description

This company offers property and casualty insurance.


BBB Accreditation

A BBB Accredited Business since

BBB has determined that Acuity, a Mutual Insurance Company meets BBB accreditation standards, which include a commitment to make a good faith effort to resolve any consumer complaints. BBB Accredited Businesses pay a fee for accreditation review/monitoring and for support of BBB services to the public.

BBB accreditation does not mean that the business' products or services have been evaluated or endorsed by BBB, or that BBB has made a determination as to the business' product quality or competency in performing services.


Reason for Rating

BBB rating is based on 13 factors. Get the details about the factors considered.

Factors that raised the rating for Acuity, a Mutual Insurance Company include:

  • Length of time business has been operating
  • Complaint volume filed with BBB for business of this size
  • Response to 10 complaint(s) filed against business
  • Resolution of complaint(s) filed against business


Customer Complaints Summary Read complaint details

10 complaints closed with BBB in last 3 years | 5 closed in last 12 months
Complaint Type Total Closed Complaints
Advertising/Sales Issues 0
Billing/Collection Issues 4
Delivery Issues 0
Guarantee/Warranty Issues 0
Problems with Product/Service 6
Total Closed Complaints 10

Customer Reviews Summary Read customer reviews

9 Customer Reviews on Acuity, a Mutual Insurance Company
Customer Experience Total Customer Reviews
Positive Experience 1
Neutral Experience 0
Negative Experience 8
Total Customer Reviews 9

Additional Information

BBB file opened: December 01, 1958 Business started: 01/01/1925 in WI Business started locally: 01/01/1925
Licensing, Bonding or Registration

This business is in an industry that may require professional licensing, bonding or registration. BBB encourages you to check with the appropriate agency to be certain any requirements are currently being met.

These agencies may include:

Commissioner of Insurance
125 South Webster Street, Madison WI 53703
http://oci.wi.gov/oci_home.htm
Phone Number: 6082663585 8002368517
Fax Number: (608) 266-9935

Type of Entity

Corporation

Business Management
Mr. Edward Felchner, Vice President Jamie Loiacono, Vice President/Claims Mr. Benjamin M. Salzmann, President & CEO
Contact Information
Principal: Mr. Edward Felchner, Vice President
Business Category

Insurance Companies Insurance - Accident & Health Insurance - Auto Insurance - Homeowners Insurance - Property Insurance - Workers Compensation Insurance Services Insurance Services - Commercial Direct Property and Casualty Insurance Carriers (NAICS: 524126)

Alternate Business Names
Acuity
Industry Tips
Discount Medical Plans Wisconsin Auto Insurance Requirements

Customer Review Rating plus BBB Rating Summary

Acuity, a Mutual Insurance Company has received 0 out of 5 stars based on 0 Customer Reviews and a BBB Rating of A+.

BBB Customer Review Rating plus BBB Rating Overview

Additional Locations

  • 2514 S 102nd St Ste 110

    West Allis, WI 53227

  • 2800 S Taylor Dr

    Sheboygan, WI 53081 (920) 458-9131 (800) 242-7611

  • PO Box 58

    Sheboygan, WI 53082

X

BBB Customer Review Rating plus BBB Rating Overview


BBB Customer Reviews Rating represents the customers opinions of the business. The Customer Review Rating is based on the number of positive, neutral and negative customer reviews posted that are calculated to produce a score.

Customer Review Experience Value
Positive Review 5 points per review
Neutral Review 3 points per review
Negative Review 1 point per review

BBB letter grades represent the BBB's opinion of the business. The BBB grade is based on BBB file information about the business. In some cases, a business' grade may be lowered if the BBB does not have sufficient information about the business despite BBB requests for that information from the business.
Details

BBB Letter Grade Scale

BBB Rating Value
A+ 5
A 4.66
A- 4.33
B+ 4
B 3.66
B- 3.33
C+ 3
C 2.66
C- 2.33
D+ 2
D 1.66
D- 1.33
F 1
NR -----
Star Rating scale

  Average Score
5 stars 5.00
4.5 stars 4.50-4.99
4 stars 4.00-4.49
3.5 stars 3.50-3.99
3 stars 3.00-3.49
2.5 stars 2.50-2.99
2 stars 2.00-2.49
1.5 stars 1.50-1.99
1 star 0-1.49

BBB Customer Review Rating plus BBB Rating is not a guarantee of a business' reliability or performance, and BBB recommends that consumers consider a business' BBB Rating and Customer Review Rating in addition to all other available information about the business. If the BBB Rating is NR then only Customer Reviews are used for the Star Rating.

Complaint Detail(s)

4/12/2015 Billing/Collection Issues
2/28/2015 Problems with Product/Service | Read Complaint Details
X

Additional Notes

Complaint: I was injured at a restaurant that Acuity insures. I ate a foreign object in my food that caused a broken tooth. I filed a report and a few weeks later, Acuity contacted me with some forms to fill out. I filled the required forms and sent them back. A few days passed without me hearing anything from the adjuster. I then proceeded to call, and left a message on voice mail stating that I was checking on the status of the paperwork that was sent days prior. When I finally received a callback the adjuster told me that the paperwork was received and that I needed to send any bills that were related to the injury and I would be reimbursed for those. So I send the bill to the adjuster. A few days pass and I get an email from the adjuster saying that a reimbursement check was issued. In a reply email I asked about compensation for the permanent damage to my otherwise perfect teeth, at which time He stated that as soon as all the bills were sent, we would talk about injury settlement. It has been about 3 days since the last bill was sent. I have emailed the adjuster on several occasions with no response.

Desired Settlement: I would like to speed this process up. Get done and be done! 

Business Response:

 

This will address the BBB item filed by ****** ***** for the above captioned claim. Mr. ***** alleges that he injured his tooth due to a foreign object in his food which occurred at the insured’s restaurant located in ******** ****. According to our ******* *******, the injury was first reported to them on 1/13/2015 and an incident report was completed.

The first notice to Acuity Ins. was on 1/20/2015. Contact was made with both the insured and Mr. ***** the same day. Mr. ***** declined to provide his social security number so a Social Security Request Form was sent to him on 1/20/2015 per the Medicare guidelines.

The first bill for $143.90 was received on 2/6/2015 and payment was issued the same day. The second bill of $86.35 was received and paid on 2/9/2015. Mr. ***** sent an email on 2/9/2015 stating his treatment had been completed and that he wished to settle his injury claim. I responded with an email on 2/13/2015 (Friday) advising him that I would be in contact on 2/16/2015 (Monday) to discuss settlement.

1/9/2015 Billing/Collection Issues | Complaint Details Unavailable
12/5/2014 Billing/Collection Issues | Read Complaint Details
X

Additional Notes

Complaint: On Aug. 15, 2014, I opened my online banking portal and discovered that my checking account was overdrawn. I quickly transferred money from a savings account to cover this charge. I then looked at the reason why and discovered that Acuity Insurance Co. had charged me 5 times that month. I tried to contact my insurance agent, but his office is closed on Fri. afternoons. So I then called ***** **** and they confirmed the mistake. 4 $190.43 charges had gone through my account and there was still one pending. The customer service representative at the bank, sent the pending one back and credited my account for 3 of the 4 $190.43 charges. On Mon. I contacted my insurance agent and he called Acuity to put back the mistaken charges. They put back only 2 of the 3 mischarged debits. I had tried to deal with Acuity directly by giving them my bank statement, but they kept insisting that they got one returned and it was one of the three charges. i, however got charged for 4 payments per my bank statement. So they still owed me one. on September 9th, they again charged me another payment of Sept. 11, 2014 I was charged for $262.35, which my bank rejected because Acuity had not dealt with the previous month's overcharge. At this point I had wasted too much time trying to deal with this situation and I decided at my banks suggestion to cancel the policy and look for new insurance. So, i did just that. Acuity then sent the cancellation notice of Oct. 1, 2014. They said billing to follow. Okay, so they sent me the bill on Oct. 1 saying that i still owed from Aug. 22, 2014 through Oct. 1, the amount of $325.77. I figured this to be a fair charge for the 5 wks. so I paid it. Thinking it was finally over.... Wrong again, I received another letter from them today (dated Oct. 22, 2014), stating thank you for my payment of $325.77 and a collection payment notice that I still owed $380.86. I was livid. i called my agent and she said that when she called them, they wanted their money back from the 2 $190.43 payment that they had refunded me???? They should not have taken it to begin with. I believe them to be highly incompetent and radically encourage other consumers to stay away from Acuity. Thank God I did not have any accidents when I was insured with them. Please, maybe you can get them to make some sense of all this, I for one am very displeased. Sincerely, ******* *****

Business Response:

This policy was issued new on 5/5/2014. The insured's 3rd installment of $223.33 was returned
from her bank for insufficient funds on 7/14/14. The policy cancelled on 7/29/14. The insured
made an online payment for $47.80 and the underwriter agreed to reinstate the policy. The
agent requested that the policy be set up on Electronic Funds with new bank information. The
policy reinstated.
The mistake on ACUITYs part came when policy was reinstated and set up on EFT. The policy
was behind in payments and the incorrect number of installments were set up. Four
withdrawals were attempted from the insured's bank. One of the four was returned as an
unsuccessful payment. We were given documentation showing 3 were successful. We then
returned 2 of the three to the insured's account to correct the mistake. The insured and agent
were notified of the situation. ACUITY kept one of the installments as one was due. After we
returned the $380.86 (2 of the 3 payments) we were notified that the insured had stopped pay
on those 2 installments that we returned.
The insured lapsed for non-pay. Since the insured placed a stop payment on the two payments
requested in error, the refund for the two payments is due back to ACUITY.
Please find the attached documentation that we received from the insured showing the
payments and the summary showing that we returned these payments. This was prior to her
stopping payment on the payments. The agent requested a new bank statement to verify that
she received the refunds from ACUITY and she refused.
We are now billing the insured for the return of the refund. The insured had insurance 5/6/14 to
10/1/14. Please let us know if we should send a copy of explanation to insured again.

6/7/2014 Billing/Collection Issues | Read Complaint Details
X

Additional Notes

Complaint: Acuity insurance is denying us full reimbursement on our GMC Sonoma truck that was hit head on by their insured. Pictures of the accident scene clearly show their insured completely on the wrong side of the road with the collision completely a frontal head on collision. Our son had 3 options, honk his horn and apply his breaks (which he did), jump up onto the sidewalk (which he did not do) or veer into the lane of oncoming traffic (which he also did not do). The other driver's (Acuity's insured)first statement after the accident was that he did not see our truck until he looked up. Acuity admitted their driver was at fault, but assigned us 10% fault and is refusing to reimburse us the full value of our totaled truck which they valued at $2,302. The determination of our son's percentage of fault was made immediately after Acuity was informed that there would be no subrogation because we only carry liability on our truck. We have been without the use of our truck for four months now and do not have the money to replace it. We are simply asking for full reimbursement for an accident our son was unable to avoid. The policewoman's comment after I called her was that it was "very clear who was at fault in that accident and that she wished the insurance company wasn't doing that."

Desired Settlement: Full remibursment from Acuity in the amount of $2,302 for the loss of our vehicle upon receipt of which we will turn over the title of the vehicle to Acuity

Business Response: This letter will represent our response to your letter of May 21, 2014 regarding the above mentioned matter.
Our office had received a total of three complaints written by ***** ******. Those being to the State of Wisconsin - ****** ** *** ************* ********* ********** ** ******** and the ********* ******** *******’s office. We made a business decision after the third complaint to go ahead and reimburse the vehicle owner at 100% given the amount being withheld for comparative fault was only $187.40. The claim was therefore resolved on April 25, 2014 for the full amount of $2302.00.
Below is how we had responded to each of the other complaints; we wanted to share that with your office so you knew how we investigated the claim and had come to our initial decision.
We advised each of the other offices as follows:
This claim involves a motor vehicle accident where our insured’s 22 year old son, ******* ******* was a driver of his parent’s 1996 Mercury. The other vehicle driver was Mrs. ******’s son, ***** ******. Who was driving a 1995 GMC. We conducted an investigation into the facts of this accident, which included talking with both drivers, obtaining the police report and the review of vehicle photos, scene photos and a diagram of the loss location. Based on all that information we determined that our insured was the majority at fault and advised the vehicle owner that we were accepting

11/2/2013 Problems with Product/Service | Read Complaint Details
X

Additional Notes

Complaint: My daughter was hit at a *******'s gas station by a client of Acuity -- after speaking with ****** on the phone and her telling me to continually to contact my insurance company they basically stated there was no proof that their client hit my car. My daughter called the police but they couldn't send anyone to private property. She will be filing a police report & stopping back by the gas station to see if she can get signed statements and video of the accident. The damage was minimal but the agent stated they only video the pumps but according to my daughter it was right by the front door so we will follow up. It was very upsetting that they immediately washed there hands of this. They may have good rates but only because they will not pay claims they owe. I will continue to try to get information regarding proof of fault. It is questionable why a ** driver would have a WI company.

Desired Settlement: They need to pay for fixing the damage their client caused to my vehicle. I see that this is not the 1st complaint against them!

Business Response: Please accept this response from ACUITY, A Mutual Insurance Company to the complaint filed by ****
*******.
The loss involves a vehicle collision that occurred in a gas station parking area in *********** **. *****
******* was operating the 2005 VW Passat owned by **** *******. ***** ******* was operating the
2002 Chev 3500 owned by ********* ******* ******* ***.
The investigation occurred between 8/23/13 and 8/26/13. The claim was assigned to ****** ***** for
handling. The investigation activities are listed below.
• 8/23/13, ****** ***** verified Collision and Liability coverages were in place for the claim.
Phone contact was made with ***** *******. Mr. ******* stated he entered the gas station from
the street and was stopped behind a row of parked vehicles waiting for a gas pump to become
available when Ms. ******* backed from her parking stall and hit the stopped vehicle of Mr.
*******. Mr. ******* stated at no point after entering the property from the street did he make
any backing maneuver. The point of impact to the 2002 Chev 3500 was the passenger side rear
corner. It was also stated the police were called but would not come due to the collision having
happened on private property. There are no independent witnesses.
• 8/23/13, Phone contact was made with ***** *******. Ms. ******* stated she was backing from
her parking stall and she saw the vehicle of Mr. ******* backing also. Ms. ******* stopped her
vehicle and was backed into by the vehicle of Mr. *******. The point of impact to the 2005 VW
Passat was the trunk near the license plate. Ms. ******* verified the police were called but
would not come and there are no independent witnesses.
• 8/23/13, A phone call was received by ****** ***** from **** ******* stating the gas station
cashier witnessed the collision and Ms. ******* wants Acuity to process the claim for her vehicle
damage.
• 8/23/13, ****** ***** called ********'s gas station and spoke with ***** and *****. *****
indicated he is the ******** ****** and ***** is a Cashier. ***** stated their video system is
aimed at the pumps and there is no footage of the parking stalls nor the aisle behind the stalls.
***** advised she did not witness the collision but did see Ms. ******* exiting her vehicle and
talking with Mr. *******.
8/23/13, Photos of the 2005 VW Passat were received by ****** ***** from **** *******. The
photos verified damage to the vehicle but did not indicate how the damage happened. Ms.
******* was advised Acuity is not disputing there was a collision.
• 8/23/13, Based on the above investigation (****** *****'s conversation with Mr. *******, Ms.
*******, Ms. *******, ***** and *****. Also viewing of the damage photos of Ms. *******'
vehicle.) ****** ***** called **** ******* and explained this is a word vs word collision with
each driver saying the other backed into them. When neither party is able to prove their version is
the accurate one, an offer of payment from the policy of ********* ******* ******* *** cannot be
made. Ms ******* was advised to contact her insurance carrier for coverage consideration. Ms.
******* expressed frustration with the decision and abruptly ended the conversation. A Liability
denial letter was emailed to **** ******* on 8/23/13 and the claim file was closed on 8/26/13.
I trust this is the information you require. Should you need any additional information, please call me at
the number indicated below.
Sincerely,
****** *****
**** ***** **** ****** ****** ****** **************
###-###-####
###-###-#### fax
*****************

3/5/2013 Problems with Product/Service | Read Complaint Details
X

Additional Notes

Complaint: Claim ** **** Trailer was hit by your insured, By the law you guys(insurance) must help/workout everything and sent a prompt payment to the party whos vehicle was damaged. ******* with ****** **** ******* is stating that ***** ******** at Extention **** told to go to his insurance because Acuity is denying to pay and will close the claim. If you reject to help, then we may contact department of insurance and have them decide what to do. By the law, you must work with all people/partys who's vehicle was damaged due to your insured. We got pictures on file of all the damage, There was a camera on front of this 2 trucks and if we have to, we will ask for the recording. Please contact ****** **** ******* and/or ******* ******* who is ********* of ****** **** *******, Inc and help ASAP Thank you

Desired Settlement: ******* ******* is asking for $500 dollars to compensate all the damage was made to his trailer

Business Response:

Good Morning,

It appears as though Vicki Schlafke responded to this complaint via fax on January 30th, but did not respond through your website. Attached is her response.

Thanks!

Mindy Fickett

Executive Administrative Assistant

ACUITY, A Mutual Insurance Company

###-###-####


Dear Complaint Supervisor:

This letter will serve as our formal response to Mr. *******'s concerns expressed in his complaint filed with your office on January 20,2013. In summary, the complainant presents a
number of unsupported allegations as facts. More specifically, that our insured trailer hit the complainant's trailer, that damage occurred as a result of this incident and that the damages
amount to $500.00.
Our investigation found nothing in support of Mr. *******'s claims but it did reveal a number of conflicting accounts of what happened. While in a parking lot of a
truck stop, the complainant alleges our insured backed his trailer into his. Mr. ******* acknowledges he did not actually see the collision occur, but due to the close proximity
of our insured's truck he feels our trailer hit his trailer. Upon approaching our driver, ******* ******, and telling him he backed into the complainant's trailer. Mr. ******
adamantly denied doing any such thing. Both the complainant and our driver inspected the alleged damage which amounted to some paint scuffs on one of the rear door
hinges as well as a broken hinge pin. The complainant asked our insured driver for $100.00 and when he refused Mr. ******* lowered his demand to $70.00. Our driver
suggested they call the police, but Mr. ******* was not receptive to that. Our insured driver called dispatch who spoke to the complainant and offered to come out and
inspect his trailer, but Mr. ******* refused and said he had to leave.

In addition, there is a witness, **** ********, in support of our insured's position who was also at the truck stop fueling station. His account is he watched our insured
back his trailer and saw no such collision take place. Mr. ******* sent follow up photos of damage to his trailer which reflect damage to the right top rail which when compared
to the shorter height of our trailer is physically impossible.
Although, our investigation revealed conflicting accounts of what happened, we feel Mr. ******* fell short of meeting his burden of proof on all aspects of his claim
including liability, corresponding damage and dollar amount of that damage.
In conclusion, we had no alternative but to respectfully deny Mr. *******'s claim and ask he redirect his efforts to his own carrier if he feels this matter warrants it. If you have any
questions please feel free to contact me at *********** extension ****

Consumer Response:

Better Business Bureau:

I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID *******, and have determined that this does not resolve my complaint.  For your reference, details of the offer I reviewed appear below.

By talking to Mr *******,  when the accident happened he was sitting inside his truck waiting to get fuel when your insured was making an U turn to make to ***** ******* when he hit Mr ******* Trailer.  Then he backed up and try to go by when he did not make it again.

Everything happened by the camera from the scale, it shows that when he was making a U turn, he did hit Mr ******* truck, we can see it was moved.  the pictures that Mr ******* provide shows freshly scratched paint and cheeps of paint from the container that your guy was hauling.  ******* ******* has a co driver Mr. *** who was with him at the time of accident and also he got a witness Mr ********* who was parked close to the scene.


As far as $100 or $70 dollars he asked, Mr ******* said they say they will pay for the damage and they should contact him with amount and never did. They did ask Mr ******* to wait for the comcheck but he had to leave due to his delivery appt and also they did send an another driver(his witness) who drive for the same company to look and we can not really have him as a witness since he did not seen how accident happened plus he work for the same company.


In this case we may have to turn in this case to Small Claims and notify of any moves to Department of Insurance.  According to Dept of insurance policy and law, you not supposed to send Mr *******  to his insurance company to seek for help and you did, thats what Mr ******* saying and also you must help and must resolve all the issues.


Also, we would like to get contact info for the Driver and for his witness(co-worker).  We need to contact them for the statement as well.


Please let us know if or how you want to resolve this issue

Regards,

 

 

 

Business Response:

Please allow this letter to serve as a follow up to the complainant’s response.

We attempted to secure the gas station video the complainant mentions, but we have been informed no such video exists.

Based on the facts presented by the complainant and our corresponding investigation this is a doubtful and disputed claim, but in a mood of compromise we offered the complainant his initial demand he made of our driver in the amount of $100. The complainant has rejected our offer and continues to seek $500.00. Unfortunately, with our insured driver’s adamant position he did not hit the complainant’s trailer as well as no documentation in support of these alleged damages we have not alternative to deny the complainants demand. With the complainant’s continued pursuit of this course of action our insured welcomes the escalation of this matter into the local court system venued in ******* ****** *********.  At this stage our insured is looking for their day in court to exonerate themselves from these allegations as well as pursuit of any means possible to levy costs against the complainant in hopes of deterring any similar future endeavors.

 

Consumer Response:

Better Business Bureau:

I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID *******, and have determined that this does not resolve my complaint.  For your reference, details of the offer I reviewed appear below.

[After reviewing everything, we suggest you to contact again Mr ******* and resolve the issue.  We agreed to close the case with $100.]

Regards,

******* *******

 

 

1/14/2013 Problems with Product/Service | Read Complaint Details
X

Additional Notes

Complaint: The company cancelled my homeowner's, umbrella, automobile, and motorcycle insurance policy for non-payment. I did not discover this had happened until 30+ days after the fact. Although the insurance company insisted they sent me the appropriate notices, I did not receive any. I live in an area where there are regular problems with accurate delivery of mail. I only discovered that I was completely uninsured when I needed to check my auto insurance for another business matter. I offered to bring my premiums up-to-date in exchange for reinstatement of my policies, but the company declined. Instead, they have offered to re-write the policies, but all at an increased premium due to my lapsed coverage. All insurance companies will rate me higher due to the "lapsed coverage" being on my record. This company could have purposefully let my policies "lapse" in order to attempt to obtain a higher premium. Also, why would they cancel ALL my policies based on failure to receive payment on one (auto)? hb

Desired Settlement: I propose the following: 1. Any info suggesting that my insurance lapsed for lack of payment must be rescinded, removed, or corrected. 2. I will pay the cost of policy renewal from the original due date, and all policies will be re-instated. or... 1. Any info suggesting that my insurance lapsed for lack of payment must be rescinded, removed, or corrected. 2. I will agree to accept completely new policies as long as they are written at the original rate.

Business Response:

We are not able to comply with this customers request.    When a person purchases an insurance policy there is one major requirement that must be fullfilled.  The customer has to pay the premium when it is due.  In this case we sent the customer multiple invoices which were not paid.  As a a result, we were forced to cancel the policy for nonpayment of the premium.   We can not allow Mr ********* to retain coverage without paying his premium when it is due.  To do so would not be fair to all of our other customers who do pay their premiums on time.

Other facts as presented are not accurate.  The customer is implying that he has been without coverage for approximately 30+ days.  This policy was cancelled 3 months ago on Oct 10, 2012.   He also complained that all of his coverages were cancelled.  The policy that he had was a package which included Home, Auto and Umbrella under one policy with one premium. It is an indivisible package.  If you do not pay the premium, the entire package must  be cancelled.

Further,  he is asking us to alter our records to state that his policy was not cancelled for nonpayment of premium. We can not do this. The reason that policy was cancelled is that he did not pay his premium.

Finally, the allegation that we somehow forced his policy to lapse so that we could charge a higher premium is ludicrous.  We did not cause his policy to lapse.  Whether a policy  lapses or not is entirely within the customers control.  It lapsed because he did not pay the premium despite our sending out multiple notices.

Consumer Response:

Better Business Bureau:

I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID *******, and have determined that this does not resolve my complaint.


The insurance company suggests that its responsibility to service its customers does not extend beyond having a computer send notices via US mail.  I happen to live in a rural area that is known for poor mail service, including mis-delivery and non-delivery of mail.  I received no billing statement or cancellation notices on these policies.  I believe that prior to cancelling any policies, the insurance company should have made certain of positive contact with their customer.  The company had access to my e-mail and phone number, and could have sent the cancellation notice via a method requiring my signature.

 

Again, I believe that the insurance company's responsibility is to contact their customer, not merely to send notices.  I pay my bills when I receive them, as my high credit score and past experience with the insurance company shows.  Adherence to even minimal standards of business ethics required Acuity to contact me prior to cancelling my insurance.  In lieu of business ethics, the simple desire to retain rather than to lose customers should have dictated at least slightly more effort to contact me about this issue.

 

Acuity's failure to achieve "positive" contact with me prior to cancelling this policy reflects very poor customer service and a complete lack of valuation for their customer's business.  A phone call, e-mail, or registered letter would have prevented this situation.

 

At this point, I feel that the only fair resolution is for Acuity to rewrite my policies ASAP, ignoring the gap in coverage and rating me as if it had not occurred.  I don't think this is asking very much, except that Acuity take responsibility for their lack of consideration of me in this matter.

Regards,

****** *********

 

Business Response:

I am sorry that the customer is not satisfied, but our postion has not changed and his proposed solution is not acceptable.  The ** ****** ******* is our method of sending out policies and notices. He has received our policies and notices in the past so there was no reason to assume that his mail would not be delivered in the future. Since we have no other reasonable options to send out mail, we must assume that the ****** *******, as a ********** ******,  is competent in delivering the mail.  It is not practical to automatically assume that the ****** ******* is at fault whenever a person does not respond to our notices. If he has a problem with the ****** ******* he should address that problem with them.

The policy was cancelled for nonpayment of preminum on October 10, 2011

Finally he mentions that it is our responsibility to make sure that the his mail is delivered.  I am sorry but as mentioned, it is not practical for us to "follow up with the ****** *******" to make sure that it is doing its job.  Also as to responsibility, he did receive our original policy and he knew that he had not made a payment.   At some point, if he thought that he was not getting his mail, he could have taken some responsibility and checked with us or his agent. 

Consumer Response:

Better Business Bureau:

I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID *******, and have determined that this does not resolve my complaint.  For your reference, details of the offer I reviewed appear below.

The response from Acuity makes my point!  Given that I had responded to previous mailings, it should have "raised flags" when I did not respond.  At least, the basic principles of good customer service would dictate this response.

Also, Acuity says that it has "no other reasonable option to send out mail."  A certified or registered letter would be unreasonable?  How about a phone call or an e-mail? 


In my view, the bottom line here is that this company cares very little for individual customers.  Its cavalier attitude toward retaining my business makes my point.  In my experience, companies that sell a product or service want to keep business; their procedures and practices are set up to make certain they do.  Acuity's lack of desire to do everything they can to make sure they don't lose business by "accident" reflects a very poor customer service attitude .

In my experience, you never know how your insurance company will perform until something "happens," such as a claim or other issue.  I suppose I am fortunate to have found out the exact nature of Acuity's attitudes toward individual accounts prior to having an issue that truly required their help and cooperation.  For future customers and readers of this correspondence, I hope it is obvious that this company's response to my situation has been to blame the victim.

Regards,

****** *********

9/2/2012 Problems with Product/Service | Read Complaint Details
X

Additional Notes

Complaint: I recently found out that I had been reported at-fault by Acuity for two accidents for which I claimed loss. The at-fault report has caused an increase in my insurance premium with my current insurer. I contacted the adjuster who handled my claim asking for explanations for the at-fault reporting as I don't think I was at-fault for either of the accidents. The adjuster was either not willing or not able to understand my initial questions and refused to reply to my subsequent emails which rephrased the same question . I called and left a voice mail to the adjuster's supervisor, still, did not get any response.

Desired Settlement: explain and remove the at-fault reporting .

Business Response:   

I am responding to Huihao Fan’s BBB Complaint submitted on 8/15/2012.  Mr. *** refers to these two claims as being “at fault”. These are not liability claims, these are 1st party claims and both were handled as collision losses.  I will explain each claim separately.

 

First, claim ****** was reported as  a hit and run to Mr.***** vehicle while it was parked. I spoke to *** *** on May 13, 2011 and he advised that on the morning of  May 6 he discovered scratches and a crack on the rear bumper. He had his car parked in an apartment complex where he suspects this hit and run occurred.    

 

The second claim,  ******,  was submitted on December 7, 2010.  I spoke to Mr. Han on December 8, 2010  and he advised that while driving his vehicle he heard a noise coming from the bottom of his car. He noticed a hole in the lower part of the front bumper. He explained that the highway he was driving on did have chunks of snow.  This loss was handled as a collision loss as the information Mr. *** provided was that he was driving on a highway and heard a noise. He was unaware at the time what hit his vehicle but then stated there were chunks of snow in the road. It is likely that his vehicle struck a chunk of snow as the damages are a hole in the lower part of the front bumper.

 

In conclusion, we feel that all action in this matter taken by our claims professional to be proper. I can be reached at ************ ext 1843 if there are any further questions.   

Consumer Response: Better Business Bureau:I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID *******, and have determined that this does not resolve my complaint.  For your reference, details of the offer I reviewed appear below.[To assist us in bringing this matter to a close, we would like to know your view on the matter.]

First of all, the response did not explain the reason Acuity cited me at-fault for the  hit-and-run accident.  It makes no sense to me that someone hit my car and ran, I was held at-fault by my auto insurer after I reported and filed a claim.


Secondly, the adjuster's description of the highway accident was inaccurate. In the accident, my car was hit by a piece of debris that came off a car I was following in highway traffic. The consequence of the impact was a hole of around 2 inches in diameter in the lower end of the front bumper. The description that I hit a chunk of snow on highway is simply inaccurate as evidenced by the severity of impact. Hitting something on highway at 60mph could have caused  much sever damage to the bumper.  Acuity processed the claim and made a payment  as a comprehensive loss. What troubles me is that Acuity later reported the claim as a collision loss and cited me at fault without notifying me.   

Regards,

Huihao Fan

 

 

Business Response:

Business Response: Good Morning ********,

I am not able to reply to the customer's most recent correspondence online, so here is our response:

Per ** ********,
 Vice President - Marketing and Personal Lines:

** ******** *** ********** ********* ********* **
********* ** *** ******  response, the insured had two losses which were paid under his collision coverage per the terms of the insurance contract. Neither one of these claims was considered to be at fault nor did we report them as at-fault losses. It is apparent that whatever insurance company Mr. Fan is talking to about potential insurance is misinterpreting the information. Again, these were not at-fault losses and we did not report them as at-fault losses.


Thanks! 
***** *******
Executive Administrative Assistant
ACUITY, A Mutual Insurance Company
###-###-####

Business Response: Good Morning Cristela,

I am not able to reply to the customer's most recent correspondence online, so here is our response:

Per ** ********,
 Vice President - Marketing and Personal Lines:


We received the customer's follow-up question. As explained in Tom Gast's response, the insured had two losses which were paid under his collision coverage per the terms of the insurance contract. Neither one of these claims was considered to be at fault nor did we report them as at-fault losses. It is apparent that whatever insurance company Mr. Fan is talking to about potential insurance is misinterpreting the information. Again, these were not at-fault losses and we did not report them as at-fault losses.

Thanks!
***** *******
Executive Administrative Assistant

ACUITY, A Mutual Insurance Company
###-###-####

5/29/2012 Problems with Product/Service | Read Complaint Details
X

Additional Notes

Complaint: 2M Property Services damaged my vehicle while cutting the grass on 4/12/2012, their insurance company is refusing to pay the estimate $248.******* ****** ###-###-#### (MW6374******). Acuity requested a picture and estimate, once I gave her both she stated I have to investigate, so minutes later she called me back and stated the guy does not remember anything flying, so I will not pay; I guess he does not remember the grass flying on my car either. One of the custodian he ******* ******* saw the damage the same day it happened.

Desired Settlement: 2M Property Service or Acuity pay the claim.

Business Response: OF WISCONSIN10101 W GREENFIELD AVE STE 125MILWAUKEE WI 53214  Complaint Number:               *******Complainant:                         ******* ********Our Claim Number:               ********* Insured:                           2 M Property Services IncDate of Loss:                         04/12/2012 Dear Ms. ********: Please be advised I have received and reviewed the complaint filed with the Better Business Bureau on May 11, 2012 by ******* ********. ACUITY obtained Ms. ********’s information on May 2, 2012 and contact was made that day.  Ms. ******** filed a claim for damage to her**** ****** ***** stating when our insured was mowing lawn near her parked vehicle something must have been kicked up from the lawn mower and scratched her car door. Ms. ******** did advise that she did not see this happen nor were there any other witnesses who saw how her vehicle was damaged.  We spoke to our insured and his employee denies feeling, hearing or seeing anything kicked up from his lawn mower and hitting Ms. ********’s parked vehicle.  Ms. ******** stated that she just assumed the damage to her passenger side door was damaged by our insured. Due to the information received from the insured, employee and Ms. ******** there was no physical evidence our insured caused the damage. Therefore, we denied the claim as there was no supporting evidence our insured damaged the **** ******ACUITY can only pay claims which our insured is legally liable for and we did not feel that our insured was responsible for the damage to Ms. ********’s vehicle.