Geico Corporation Complaint - Beware of GEICO "customer service". - Automobile Insurance
Automobile Insurance - Complaint
IOWA -- GEICO wrote and billed us for an insurance policy we did not want. We recently moved to a new state. We insured our two vehicles with GEICO in a decision partially based on their assurances of low premiums and "superior" customer service. We live very close to our worksites and elected to temporarily store one of our cars (a classic that is seldom driven anyway) with a relative in another state.
I properly updated our policy, triggering a "third-degree" treatment by GEICO. GEICO demanded personal (driving record, etc.)information about the relative who's involvement was to simply permit us to temporarily store our un-driven vehicle in a safe location. We were treated like uninsurable scum. When we declined to provide the relative's personal information, GEICO simply wrote a duplicate policy and billed us. We were not given an opportunity to decline or review the proposed coverage. The policy was simply written and billed. GEICO's action appeared to be retaliatory "If you don't provide information we want, when we want it, you'll be put in a position where it'll cost you dearly."
E-mail to the GEICO underwriter issuing the policy demanding its cancellation was not answered. I demanded, and was never provided with, the name of someone in management to whom I could complain about their staff writing a policy and billing for it without giving consumers an opportunity to review, accept, or decline a policy. Finally, I received an e-mail instructing me that the policy could only be cancelled with a telephone call...intended to be a GEICO opportunity to badger or instill fear into the consumer in a design to retain unhappy customers. When I finally reached a human to cancel the policy, the customer service representative attempted to reference an unrelated policy and began to lecture me about the consequences of "leaving the vehicle uninsured". The matter has been referred to our state insurance commission and to the Consumer Protection Division of our state Attorney General.
We believe the GEICO employee retaliated by writing a duplicate policy when only a short-term storage rider was indicated. If such coverage is not available, a simple e-mail from GEICO stating so would have been appropriate. Instead, it appears they simply attempted to double their income by writing a full policy (including emergency road service coverage!!!) for a vehicle in storage.
Because it appears GEICO's customer service reacts with a cold-blooded, primitive brain...perhaps the lizard mascot is appropriate. I can only imagine the nightmare of having them handle a claim.