I am applying for consumer complaints against CCC Valuescope (CCCG) and insurance company USAA because I misrepresent the car's fair "market value".
My insurance company USAA has breached the obligation to maximize the sincerity of insured persons. By using the CCC Valuescope (a company claiming that I am in violation of the Federal RICO Act), the USAA intentionally intends to obtain unreasonable and unfair reconciliation with my car We offered me a low fraudulent assessment.
CCC Valuescope (formerly known as CCC Information Services Group Inc - CCCG) offers far lower ratings than real fairs because CCC Valuescope is used only for insurers and is not regarded as a fair and marketable car There is an economic interest in doing the market value of the insured's vehicle that is truly worth it.
In the insurance industry, it is known that CCC collects value from "the retail value of similar cars before accident" rather than selling vehicles at underground wholesale prices by car dealers By Florida's insurance regulations . In addition, the CCC Valuescope aggregated the assessment in order to pay the minimum "value" possible for the customer of the insurance company to present insured persons, before the use of mixed vehicles of leased, second-hand and second-hand vehicles using.
Ironically, almost all cars of the CCC Valuescope 's car evaluation received consultation with vehicles with more than 20 records indicating problems such as accidents and broken cars. Some of the reports had 28, 31, 32 records.
Historically proving that reducing costs and "paying the best attention" to the insured began in a class action against King A, King County of March 12, 1999, USAA, while at the same time a policyholder I hide this practice from. In addition to car insurance, USAA has raised numerous complaints in 27 states throughout the country.
Since CCC Valuescope is an insurance company's employment gun, the evaluation is not independent! When carrying out the VIN search of the vehicle in CCC report 39813905, many vehicles had over 20 records showing numerous collisions, vehicle problems, and some changes in ownership. Depending on deliberately low assessment of my car's CCC, USAA violates my confidence obligation to act faithfully on my claim. The insurance company has contracted as the primary objective of minimizing the money paid by the insurance company to the trustee, so fair and honest assessment of claims can not be carried out by CCC. By using CCC Valuescope, USA A clearly, Baxter v. In response to Royal Indemnity's request, we do not exercise "paying utmost care" for the insured.
CCC acknowledges in the SEC filing statement on March 16, 2005 that "we may pay new customers due to the remaining promise as an incentive to a previous contract with a third party" . Regarding regulation, the CCC stated in the same document that "in most states there is no formal approval process for total loss assessment products." There is CCC's own confession in the same report that "Individual state departments of insurance are taking a stand as to whether the use of CCC Valuescope valuation complies with state billing regulations."
"We have been advising the California State Department's Department of Insurance since 2002 that the management team has advised some of our customers (management has approximately 14% of the total revenue from our CCC Valuescope evaluation in 2004 CCC Valuescope Claiming that the use did not comply with California's insurance regulations that came into effect before October 4, 2004.
On April 24, 2003, the California State Department of Insurance officially adopted a new regulation to change the method of calculating the total loss appraisal value in California. Therefore there is a reason to believe that the evaluation method of CCC Valuescope is severely flawed and distorted to be advantageous to insurer customers.
In the CCC's annual report filed on February 13, 2004, legal proceedings and numerous class action laws against the CCC are documented on pages 35, 42, 43, and 44 of the 53 page report I will.
On page 35, CCC Valuescope allows to estimate $ 4.3 million as a potential settlement prospect "to solve potential claims arising from about 30% of the transaction value of CCC Valuescope".
CCC Valuescope announces that it expects a substantial proportion of litigation for unfair and unfair assessment by allowing 30% of transaction amount to be a potential claim. Only such a high transaction volume percentage proves the flawed methodology of the CCC report, its malicious transactions, its full commitment to protect the financial benefits of the insurance companies it provides I will.
Ironically, four of the customers of CCC Valuescope 's auto insurance company are making contract claims, in some cases CCC, for legal costs, lawyers & lawyers and lawyers. Charges, fees, settlement fees and other expenses incurred incurred in connection with litigation concerning the use of CCC's flawed loss assessment product.
Indeed, the myriad class practice law raised against CCC Valuescape throughout the United States provides further evidence for the overall low assessment and inaccurate assessment of vehicles they provide to insurance companies. Among the many are the following:
CCC solves a class action lawsuit against total damages (July 15, 2005)
CCC Information Services Inc. (CCC Information Services Inc.) based in Chicago, 15 companies and its customers signed a settlement agreement with plaintiffs in various class actions pending in Madison County, USA We announced. In addition, it is related to the evaluation of the vehicle whose total damage amount by the insurance company has been determined.
Due to the terms of the settlement agreement, the CCC is required to pay notice and administration fee and other expenses related to the settlement. The company estimates that these costs will include a total of approximately $ 8 million and an available insurance cost of $ 1.8 million, and the company is fully reserved for these payments. The other settlement expenses (including the request of the group) are paid by the insurance company participating in the settlement.
CCC and USAA property and casualty insurance company (Peter Sintes et al., V. USAA property insurance company and CCC information service, CCC information service, Inc. No. 00-006308) at the Circuit Court of Hillsboro County, Florida on August 23, Plaintiffs argue that USAA has contracted with CCC to provide a "total loss" valuation and CCC deliberately provided an assessment that is less than the insured's actual fair market value.
The insurance company "has an obligation to do the maximum sincerity to the insured" Baxter v. Royal Indemnity Company, 285 So.2 d 652 (Fla. 1 st DCA 1973).
Given the countless ongoing class action laws against CCC Valuescope, the CCC Valuescope is currently not independent in the assessment of cars, and has crimes violating the Federal RICO Act and the National Insurance Regulations , USAA, etc. who spontaneously consciously uses their products with fraud intention are available.
EmoticonEmoticon