Amy Akins
Geico Claims Supervisor
P.O. Box650253
Dallas, Texas 75265-0253
Dear Supervisor Amy Akins
I hope you will remedy this situation now that it has beenbrought to your attention. This isregarding what I consider unfair claims practices, unprofessional behavior, stonewalling, and engaging in bad faith negotiations.
This claim is a first party claim as it is a hit and runwhich falls under the uninsured/underinsured. I have been insured under Geico for approximately 5 years. I am owed common courtesy and professionalism.in first party claims Geico should considermy interests as their own and negotiating in good faith to resolve this matterand not as adversaries. Claims adjuster, Mr. Brandon Berry, has repeatedly been excessively rude and condescending. He says an item is needed in order to processthe claim and then once it is given he quickly says that he needs a differentitem. The only point of asking for an excessive amount of things is to delay, stall and attempt to unfairly resolve losses for this car crash. During a phone call on May 8, Mr. Berry yelled at the top of his lungs, continuously for approximately 35 minutes even though I repeatedly attempted toget off the phone as I had an appointment to attend. His yelling was so extensive I had to set thephone down and walk away. I checked inevery few minutes to see if he had stopped yelling or if I could politely endthe phone call. He refused to end thecall politely and continued yelling until eventually he rudely hung up onme. Thisbehavior is outrageously unprofessional and took place while I had beensuffering from repeated and extensive nightmares about the crash and PostTraumatic Stress Disorder, which makes this behavior cruel. The non-stop accusations, assertions and implications andsuspicious mistrust about this claim is outrageous. I am an ordained minister, former specialeducation school teacher, and former childrens councilor, the idea that anentire community can trust me with their children but somehow my own insurancecompany cant trust what I say is outrageous.in addition, the evidence supports my claims. I have finally recovered from PTSD and can drive normallyand I would like to settle this claim so I can move on with my life. It appears to me that Mr. Berry has nointerest in reasonably, and fairly, settling this case. He has not reviewed or addressed the reviewof certain pieces of evidence and pretends to have more knowledge than a Doctorof Psychology and a Doctor of Chiropractic Medicine. He also makes accusations and assertionsabout the car crash even though there is evidence to the contrary and on top ofit all, he was not there. His constantspeculation and attempting to look for some possible alternative explanation, that would not hold up in court is illogical and bad faith. If this goes to trial, it will be a civiltrial, and the preponderance of evidence it what is considered. If forced to sue GEICO then I willadditionally pursue a bad faith and unfair negotiations claim. I believe that the circumstances and ampleevidence make this claim an easy one to solve. Multiple attempts have been made to misconstrue what I sayover the telephone. Examples include mysaying that the video at the scene of the crash proves a certain point. Then an attempt is made to imply that I wasrecording or otherwise using a video camera WHILE I was crashing. Preposterous! Adjusters needs to stick with the facts of the case and the actualevidence submitted and stop engaging in weird attempts to misconstrue what Isay and make alternate interpretations and theories based exclusively on anattempt to wiggle out of paying an honest, fair, and fairly straight forwardclaim. I have no pre-existingconditions, several witnesses, relatively low medical bills, when you considerthat the vehicle was 100% totaled and ample evidence to support my claim.
In a nutshell, the basic facts are this: 1. This is covered under uninsured motorist/hitand run. 2. Medical bills are a little under 7000 and is100% CAUSED by the car crash.
3.income lost was conservatively 2,800.
4. Emotional distress and suffering wereEXTENSIVE.
5. I have a permanent 5% loss of motion in theleft side of my neck due to one of the three left scaline muscles beingripped. (scaline muscles hold your neckand ribcage up) This additionally causespain and discomfort on a re-occurring basis. Mr. Berrymade an offer of $2550 (minus $1000 covered by my medical pay policy), which Ireceived on October 31. This isthe same offer he made many months ago and then quickly said well I take itback, and then rudely hung up.inaddition, the previous adjuster (the 2nd adjuster), Andrea Restuccia, hadalready indicated that $5000 was her maximum authorization. (Which I had discussed with Mr. Berry.) This was BEFORE any medical recordsfor PTSD, witness letters or a vast majority of evidence was submitted.
I demand to have a claims adjuster who would actually liketo settle this claim without forcing it into court action, which, in the end, is more costly, and a waste of time and effort for us both, and a claimsadjuster who understands that I AM INSURED WITH GEICO. And that, as a CUSTOMER, I am owed an honestattempt to settle this fairly. Allattempts to look for tiny loopholes or possible alternate explanations to getout of paying an honest claim are not examples of good faith.
Examples of attempts to get out of fairly settling thisclaim include the following:
First, the most obvious and ridiculous attempt. This was a hit and run and is covered undermy uninsured motorist policy. At thescene of the crash, Geico determined that this was covered under the uninsuredmotorist policy. Geico reaffirms thiscontinuously in every conversation and every offer. Liability on this claim is abundantly clear. Liability IS NOT AN ISSUE AND NEVER HASBEEN.in the letter dated October 21, for the first time in over 2 years, Mr. Berryattempts to assert that there is some question of liability on the phone and inwritting. Quote from paragraph 1 ofletter dated Oct 31, In review of this loss there appears to bequestions of liability There is NOquestion of liability, at all! Geico, is100% liable for all damages resulting from this car crash. All attempts to assert otherwise areunprofessional, illegal and immoral.
2.in the crash somepersonal property was broken due to the impact. I spoke with Mr. Berryand Ms. Restuccia several times about this. The only time I have been told I needed tosubmit any proof of the property damage is in a letter dated 5/11/09, in whichI am asked to simply list the item. Ilisted the item and additionally sent proof of property damage and value and Iam told in a letter dated 10/21/09 that this is covered under a separate issueand to send the broken item to you. Thebroken item is available to be inspected by a Geico representative at any ofthe local offices but under no circumstances am I required to let it out of mypossession until an offer to compensate has been made.in addition, if this broken item falls undera different policy, then either adjuster, if attempting to negotiate in good faith, could have simply let me know earlierin the process and would not have misled me to list the items and thenturn around and say they need something else. 3. A wage and incomeverification form and copies of bank statements were requested to evaluate lostwages on 7/11/09. I submitted these andam now being told I need tax returns from 2005 to 2010! This is excessive. 5years of tax returns is highly unrelated and unneeded to evaluate a singlemonth of lost income. The Wage andIncome verification form provided by Geico asks for 13 weeks of incomeverification. I provided a full 5 monthsof income (21 weeks). 160% of normallyrequested verification, which is substantially above what was requested and inaddition the wages are consistent across the months, were verified by the CEOof the company, and additional financial documents are included to verify theseamounts were deposited into my account. 4.in the letterdated October 21, Mr. Berryfirst misconstrues the crash. Assertingthat I was in the slow lane when in fact I was next to the fast lane (where theoffending vehicle was). He asserts thatI had an emergency lane directly next to me when in fact I had 2 traffic filledlanes between me and the emergency lane. The first lane next to me was filledwith cars and the next lane (slow/merging lane) contained more trafficincluding a semi-truck when I finally got to that lane. When I finally reached the emergency lane Iwas facing the concrete barrier head-on. I used the emergency lane to quickly re-align the vehicle with trafficas the Rav-4, as many models of Rav-4s do, began to attempt to flip overimmediately and multiple times throughout the incident. I did extremely well in avoiding hitting theother cars and the semi-truck, and avoiding letting the car complete itsattempt to flip over entirely, and avoided hitting the concrete barrier headon, and instead smashed into it from the passenger side and passenger fronttire (which broke off). On top of this, the other driver was marked 100% at fault. If I had been in any way at fault or suspected at fault the police wouldhave noted it or Geico would have mentioned it at some time early on, beforemedical bills were submitted. 5.in the letterdated October 21, Mr. Berryaddresses the time I received medical care as an issue. First, he asserts that there were medicalpersonnel who came to my aid. There werenone. As I addressed multiple times, emergency personnel who were supposed to come to my aid instead went to anothercrash exactly across the street. Thepolice only came AFTER I called a second time. A tow-truck arrived shortly after the police. At no point, did any medical personnelarrive! However, the police did noticemy swollen and red neck and collarbone area. I informed GEICO of my injuries immediately at the scene of thecrash. I additionally stated that I didnot know if any of my body had directly hit any parts of the car as I wasknocked out during the impact.in myimmediate call to Geico I was told people would be calling to assist me. Two days later, and multiple other times Icalled Geico to ask about getting care for my injuries. I was told someone would be calling me withinformation about medical care and that customer service could not helpme. I also asked the person who assesseddamage to my vehicle. Again I was toldit would be handled by someone else. Eventually, I received a letter from Paul Moran who said he would behelping me with my injuries and calling me soon. I heard nothing from him and when I calledGeico I was told he was unavailable or no longer worked there. A new adjuster, Andrea Restuccia, wasassigned. I asked her what had happenedto the previous adjuster, and was told very rudely that it was none of mybusiness. I was under the assumptionthat, like potential car repairs (car repair shops were calling me severaltimes a day), that I had to see a Geico approved medical provider. I stated this assumption to customer servicerepresentatives multiple times. It wasonly after a third or forth call that I was informed I could see any medicalprovider. I promptly made an appointmentand began medical care. The delay intime and the extension of my suffering was 100% caused by Geico. Geicosown stalling to provide accurate information and prolonging my suffering is notsomething that Geico can now claim in their favor but instead shows a lack ofcare and operating in bad faith. Geico additionally continuously refused to send out the contract on thispolicy during this entire time, which had been requested and recorded 12 separatetimes! 6. All crashes areemotionally distressing and pain and suffering is accounted and compensated forbut this crash had some factors that were excessively emotionally distressingand causing lots of pain and suffering. These factors include 1. Thatanother person was 100% responsible. 2. Police would not be able tofind the responsible person. 3. It was aperfect storm in that, there was absolutely NO WAY for me to do anything butattempt to minimize damage. The crashwas imminent. 4. I was knocked back into traffic partially (remaining in danger). 5. The doors were smashed shut so I could notget out of the vehicle. 6. I witnessed another crash. 7. Emergencypersonnel were diverted to other crashes/or otherwise did not come to my aiduntil I called 911 a second time and then only the police arrived. 8. Whilecrashed and trapped in the vehicle another irresponsible dangerous driverattempted to drive up the emergency lane to bypass the heavy traffic, puttingmy life in danger yet again! Ordinarycommon sense would assume that these factors make the crash more traumatizingand emotionally distressing. All ofthese factors are clearly documented and verifiable. None of these factors were mentioned oraccounted for in evaluating my claim. If, through some miracle, I would havesuffered no injuries whatsoever, the fact is, this additional emotionally traumaticaspect of the crash, would still need to be accounted for. 7. Mr. Berry assertsthat my 2 calls to 911, to Geico, and to WITNESS show that I was of enoughsound mind and this is his proof that I was not experiencing any trauma. He is NO psychologist or mental healthpractitioner of any kind and has no authority or training to assert ANYTHINGabout my state of mind! Outlandish! I am not asserting that I became mentally invalid. I was knocked unconscious as I was crashinginto the concrete barrier and I regained consciousness as other people had parkedand ran towards my car. I assume thatthe length of time was less than a few minutes. Mr. Berryasserts that because I called for help, to 911, GEICO, and WITNESS that thissomehow proves that I was not injured.in fact, my calls for help were ONLY because I was in trauma and neededhelp. Most children know to call 911when in danger.in addition, in my callto Geico AND to WITNESS I was crying profusely and was obviously upset andcrying and in my 911 call I was having trouble breathing and thinking. Theassertion that if someone calls for help then it is proof that they are NOT inneed of help is preposterous and obviously an attempt to negotiate with nointension of being fair or attempting to resolve this issue. 8. Mr. Berry has additionalfacts mixed up and has completely overlooked or ignored other facts. The first fact that is mixed up is the factthat I called 911 just as I was becoming conscious. You can hear on the 911 call that I said Hitwice to the 911 operator as this was the only word that came to my mind.in fact, besides saying hi twice the veryfirst things I said were completely indecipherable. I did not know where I was, and in fact wasnot even sure what state or city I was in at the time. This is easily verified by the fact that Iasked a witness who ran to my passenger side shattered window where am I as Iwas trying to tell the 911 operator where I was and I did not know.in general the call was also chaotic, as atcertain times I blurted out information that was relevant to the crash but wasnot relevant to the questions asked of me by the 911 operator.including It was a yellow SUV and the caris broke and other random bits of information. It is clear that I suffered sometemporary brain trauma at the moment of impact. 9. Mr. Berry assertsthat I contacted WITNESS moments following this loss. This is stated as supposed support for hisassertion that I was of sound mind and therefore was not knocked unconscious. Again, I do not assert that I lay thereknocked unconscious for hours without end. And in fact I did not call WITNESS immediately. I called her because I was panicking andfreaking out. As she states in herwitness letter I was crying so much that I could not speak and that in heropinion I was panicked, terrified, extremely frightened, and cryinghysterically. I called her because Ifelt like I needed to run away from the crash and was certain I was going todie if I stayed there. She calmed medown and encouraged me to do something to take my mind off of the crash and tostop looking at the more deadly crash across the street. It was at this point that I began to videorecord from the inside of the car. Istate the time (337) and then say I need to keep my mind off and then talk about the pain in my neck.in this video and even in the 2ndvideo I took when police arrived you can easily see that my face is wet withtears and my eyes and nose are puffy and red from crying. Common sense would suggest that this crash was emotionally and mentallytraumatic, but in addition, I just happen to have several pieces of evidence tosupport this fact. 10. Mr. Berry assertsthat in video 2, I was of enough sound mind to get a camcorder to beginrecording this loss, walking out, unprotected, onto a busy roadway from what appears to be a considerabledistance from your vehicle. What hesays is a considerable distance is the space between the concrete wall Ismashed into and the distance the car traveled as it bounced off the concretewall and back into traffic. This second video was taken when the policearrived. I was protected by the police, who had parked behind me. The suggestionthat I would somehow stay in a crashed car instead of speaking with the police, is ludicrous. The implication that thisis somehow to his favor in negotiations is additionally ludicrous. When the police finally arrived, over an hourlater, was the first moment I finally felt safe at the scene of the crash. Even if only for a moment.
11. The entire phraseof enough sound mind makes no sense. If one is crying at a funeral, then they are grieved, but may or may notbe of sound mind. If one is laughingprofusely at a funeral and talking to a rock then that person is most likelynot of sound mind. Being terrified, fearful and grieved after a crash is being of sound mind. Calling for help is also of sound mind, as isrecording a video to take ones mind off of the crash. No one claims that I went mentally insane atthe crash.
12. Mr. Berry statedthat it was not clear that I went to Dr. O. For Post Traumatic Stress Disorderrelated to this crash and so I have included additional documentation from Dr. O. That states the following: 1. That all psychotherapy sessions were for PTSD. 2. That treatment was medically necessary. 3. That treatment was about thecar crash that took place on October 15. Witness letters additionally verify thesymptoms and emotional stress experienced throughout these 2 years. For your reference, I have included the Full DSMDiagnosis of Post Traumatic Stress Disorder.
309.81 DSM-IV Criteria for Posttraumatic StressDisorderThe traumatic event is persistently reexperienced in one (or more) of thefollowing ways:
(1) recurrent and intrusive distressing recollections of the event, including images, thoughts, or perceptions. Note: In young children, repetitive play may occur in which themes or aspects of the trauma areexpressed. (2) recurrent distressing dreams of the event. Note: In children, there may be frightening dreams without recognizable content.
(3) acting or feeling as if the traumatic event were recurring (includes asense of reliving the experience, illusions, hallucinations, and dissociativeflashback episodes, including those that occur upon awakening or whenintoxicated). Note: In young children, trauma-specific reenactment mayoccur. (4) intense psychological distress at exposure to internal or external cuesthat symbolize or resemble an aspect of the traumatic event.
(5) physiological reactivity on exposure to internal or external cues thatsymbolize or resemble an aspect of the traumatic event. C. Persistent avoidance of stimuli associated with the trauma and numbing ofgeneral responsiveness (not present before the trauma), as indicated by three (or more) of the following:
(1) efforts to avoid thoughts, feelings, or conversations associated withthe trauma (2) efforts to avoid activities, places, or people that arouse recollectionsof the trauma
(3) inability to recall an important aspect of the trauma
(4) markedly diminished interest or participation in significantactivities (5) feeling of detachment or estrangement from others
(6) restricted range of affect (e.G., unable to have loving feelings) (7) sense of a foreshortened future (e.G., does not expect to have a career, marriage, children, or a normal life span)
D. Persistent symptoms of increased arousal (not present before the trauma), as indicated by two (or more) of the following:
(1) difficulty falling or staying asleep
(2) irritability or outbursts of anger
(3) difficulty concentrating
(4) hypervigilance
(5) exaggerated startle responseE. Duration of the disturbance (symptoms in Criteria B, C, and D) is morethan one month.
F. The disturbance causes clinically significant distress or impairment insocial, occupational, or other important areas of functioning. 13. Concerningpermanency of physical injuries, as documented by Dr. B. I have a 5% loss ofmotion on the left side of my neck. Foryour reference, at request, I have additional medical studies for your reviewconcerning permanency and lasting effects after car crashes. The fact is, before this crash, I experiencedNO pain in my neck / scaline muscles or back, no discomfort, and no inability tomove freely without any restraint. I didnot EVER need to be extra careful about activities involving my neck and I didnot experience any pain as I tried to sleep on an ordinary pillow. Now, a full 2 years after the crash, I remainwith some pain, discomfort and loss of motion in my neck. I have to sleep on specially designed pillowsin order to reduce discomfort. Iadditionally have a new concern in evaluating daily activities and adjusting mylife to not further reinjure my neck or back as it is weaker than before. As expected with ANY injury or ANY damage, things are not the same as before. I aman athletic person, and love to exercise as a stress relieving activity, andpreviously have never needed any medical care for my entire adult life. This injury and reoccurring pain and discomfortare very intrusive and disruptive to my otherwise healthy lifestyle.
I appreciate your attention in helping successfully resolvethis claim. If one looks at the totalityof the evidence, instead of spending time and energy on looking for storytelling opportunities then this case is easy to close and settle withoutneeding further legal, regulatory and public action, though I am prepared totake this as far as it needs to go to be resolved successfully.
TO NM INSURANCE COMMISSION:
I have provided the suggested documentation from my doctorstating that treatment was directly related to the car crash and was medicallynecessary. Regarding medical recordreleases: They have had medical releasesin their possession for quite some time. If GEICO led you to believe, they do not have medical releases they arebeing untruthful. I also have aconfirmation letter stating that they received the medical releases. Despite having received all of this GEICO hasmade no additional contact with me concerning resolving this claim. I feel they are stalling. I initially contacted the insurance commission substantiallybefore a demand letter or the full package of evidence had been submitted to GEICObecause of the way they were behaving. Ithought it amounted to bad faith and wanted to know the laws concerningthis. I was told by Morris Chavez towait until I had an official response in writing before submitting an officialcomplaint. Which I did.
My initial concerns are as follows.
1. Immediately afterthe crash they raised my premium by $20/month without any notice. (It is set for automatic debit paid in fullfor 6 months at a time). When I askedwhy the premium had been raised they
1st
Said they did not know why and I would have to call back to speak to
Someone else. 2nd
Time I called they said I called after hours and they can only answer
Those kind of questions during business hours, and they would leave a
Message for someone to call later. 3rd
Time I called they said they did not raise my rates, that they are the
Same as before. I
Asked for a supervisor, they then said oh I see you had elected to use
Your car for business. I told the
Person I did not do that, and that clearly it was because of the claim and
That since this was an uninsured motorist and have no blame in this crash
My personal rates should not be raised.
They said they would look into it and to call back after some time
(I think they said 5 business days, but I am not sure). I then
Called back and they said that they no longer cover any business vehicles
And that the rate was dropped back to what it was pre-crash. When I
Called a couple days later to confirm the rate, they said it had never
Been changed and they have no evidence of any changes in rate. (The debit card was refunded)
2. Refusal to providea copy of the contract covering the time during the crash, the current contractand the contract from when I first signed up. I asked for a contract policy a minimum of 12 separate times and havebeen told the following:
By the
Claims adjuster, that I would need to contact customer service for that
Information. Customer
Service repeatedly sent me the policy coverage document, though I read it
Word for word and told them that was not what I wanted but I wanted the
Actual contract with the legal terms.
That
They (the person on the phone) dont have access to contracts and someone
Would call back with access. When I
Would call back, they would say they have nothing in their file confirming
The previous conversation or that someone would call back. Over
The email, they said email was not secure and could not be used for
Official business. Several
Customer service representatives argued with me about why I needed the
Contract and insisted I do not need one.
That
The renewal notice has the policy changes on it, and that is all I need to
Know. That
If I want to know the policy I just need to call and ask them and that
Would suffice. That
They find it suspicious and doubt my motives for wanting a copy of the
Contract and will be putting that in my file. That I
Should have kept the original contract from 2001. That
They did not store records that long and since I am an older customer they
Would have to research it. Then
Upon a call back was told that they can not do this because I am now
Enrolled in e-policy and have no paper documents. I must
Go to the online customer service center and the contract would be
There. I went to the customer
Service center online and the contract was not there. I repeatedly was told that they had
Updated it in the system and if I go look in 24 hours the contract would
Be there. It was not, and continues
To not be available online. Eventually
I received a generic copy with legal terms but I do not know what exactly
This refers to since I asked for the original contract, the contract that
Covered the crash, and the current contract.
3. They haverepeatedly minimized liability and said the following things.
You
Are not even the primary driver, so we really dont owe you anything. You
Arent on the title of the crashed car, so you really have no claim. The
Payment comes in the primary drivers name so you really are trying to
Collect on a policy that isnt really yours. We
Dont owe you anything, this offer is just out of courtesy and to avoid
Hassle. If I
Had health insurance, part of the bills would be covered by them, so they
Only owe part of the health care and they should not be penalized because
I do not have health insurance. If I
Had workers compensation, then part of the lost wages would fall under
That insurance so they do not cover lost wages. (I was not working during
The crash).in
Regards to paying the current Chiropractic charges, which was completed
Earlier, that they are not responsible for the interest charges, can only
Issue 1 check, and if I am concerned about my credit and accruing interest
Then I should just settle the entire claim now. (This was before medical treatment and
Evidence was complete)
4. Geico repeatedlyhas been difficult and uncooperative in evidence about the case.
They repeatedly
Said they could not look a video or an mp3 at the crash. They
Said they do not need and will not look at witness letters and that
Witnesses are not considered. They
Said they do not care what the CEO of my company says my wages are. When
They have refused to look at and evaluate evidence I have submitted I
Asked what would be acceptable evidence and they said they can not tell me
What they will accept or they make a ridiculous demand (prove that you
Have no pre-existing conditions, prove your income for the past 5 years,
Prove you didnt have nightmares about your head being cut off before this
Crash) When I
Have gotten them to say what they will accept/need as evidence, after it
Is submitted, they say they want something different. (My letter to Supervisor Amy Akins
Explains this in more detail).
5. GEICO has beenuncooperative and condescending with no interest in reasonably solving thisclaim
Quote
I have been in an accident before and I didnt have any problems. Paraphrase
You are athletic and healthy, so you recovered quickly and there really
Wasnt much damage, besides, if there is any you would heal quicklyThey
Continuously make up stories and alternate explanations instead of simply relying
On facts and then tell me I must counter their alternate explanation. Ex, Can you prove that you had not had
Medical treatment before. Can you prove that your lost wages are not due
To simply going on vacation after the crash, Why didnt you just work
Later in the day to make up for work lost while at the doctors. Saying
That since I called 911 there was no real damage or stress. Calling
At exact opposite hours that I requested and not being available when I
Set up a time in advance to speak with them. When I
Told them I would like them to stop calling me until I had fully
Recovered, as I was feeling more upset and aggravated by their constant
Adversarial calls, they called more often and continued pressuring
Me into accepting low ball offers below medical bills and lost wages. Regularly
Sent letters saying that they will close the case in 15 days. Would
Call and leave blank messages on my voice mail, using mute. They
Have refused to give accurate information from the beginning concerning
Medical care, forms/evidence needed and claims processing. Said
They needed my statement 3 separate times. On the last occasion, I said why do you
Need another statement, and was told that if I dont do another statement
Then I am probably guilty or have something to hide. (I did the 3rd statement).in a
Call by Brandon Berry, he screamed at the top of his lungs for 35 minutes
Straight and continuously tried to get me to say inaccurate things. GEICO adjusters,
Have in a non-stop manor, tried to get me to say inaccurate things and
When I will not they get abusive and angry. Refusing
To give me the supervisors information (Andrea Restuccia did this).
6. They havecompletely ignored certain factors in the crash
That I
Was trapped in the car, in heavy freeway traffic, as the doors were
Inoperably smashed. That
Another car crash happened exactly opposite of me. That
Emergency personnel went to the more deadly crash, instead of me,
Prolonging my wait. I had
To call 911 twice before anyone came to my aid. That
Another illegal driver came speeding up the side of the road in an attempt
To illegally pass traffic, putting my life in danger yet again. The
Fact that the police were unable to catch the other driver combined with
The fact that I was 100% innocent and this crash was inevitable made this
More emotionally traumatizing.
To date, I have not seen or even heard of a singlepiece of documentation that GEICO has that contradicts anything I haveasserted.
0 comments