Progressive should have done a better job letting the insured family know how the claim was going to work. Lack of communication between the adjuster and insured is the number 1 complaint.
Ellie, I agree completely. Communication is key to demystifiying the process, avoiding mistaken perceptions and setting realistic expectations. This is true for many client facing situations; however it is absolutely crucial in claims.
For a trial to take place involving this kind of limit is unusual unless the liability question is in such dispute as to require that drastic course of action. Because the courts normally ask for mediation as part of the settlement process plus the pre trial litigation process which includes discovery by all sides, including testimony from all witnesses, what we read from Progressive, as to
their defenses, is hardly illuminating and probably slanted for there needs. In short, this company decided that they were not going to pay unless a Judge or a Jury told them so.
The cost of defending the action was probably close to what Progressive eventually paid out…whew! They must have felt really good about finding fault on their insured; Maryland is a contributory fault venue, so if they found real fault on her, her claim would have been barred from recovery. It was a gamble…appears it didn’t work to their favor. It doesn’t mean they are a big, bad company. They are just using the legal system to protect their payouts…as any stockholder, or policyholder WHO WAS NOT BEING PAID on that claim would expect…remember, when the payouts go up, so do the premiums. Maybe they’ll get rid of that obnoxious Flo or whatever her name is now.
We have updated our privacy policy to be more clear and meet the new requirements of the GDPR. By continuing to use our site, you accept our revised Privacy Policy.
Progressive should have done a better job letting the insured family know how the claim was going to work. Lack of communication between the adjuster and insured is the number 1 complaint.
Ellie, I agree completely. Communication is key to demystifiying the process, avoiding mistaken perceptions and setting realistic expectations. This is true for many client facing situations; however it is absolutely crucial in claims.
For a trial to take place involving this kind of limit is unusual unless the liability question is in such dispute as to require that drastic course of action. Because the courts normally ask for mediation as part of the settlement process plus the pre trial litigation process which includes discovery by all sides, including testimony from all witnesses, what we read from Progressive, as to
their defenses, is hardly illuminating and probably slanted for there needs. In short, this company decided that they were not going to pay unless a Judge or a Jury told them so.
My opinion.
The cost of defending the action was probably close to what Progressive eventually paid out…whew! They must have felt really good about finding fault on their insured; Maryland is a contributory fault venue, so if they found real fault on her, her claim would have been barred from recovery. It was a gamble…appears it didn’t work to their favor. It doesn’t mean they are a big, bad company. They are just using the legal system to protect their payouts…as any stockholder, or policyholder WHO WAS NOT BEING PAID on that claim would expect…remember, when the payouts go up, so do the premiums. Maybe they’ll get rid of that obnoxious Flo or whatever her name is now.