ComplaintsforSecurity First Insurance Company

• Initial Complaint

  04/05/2023

  Complaint Type:

  Customer Service Issues

  Status:

  Answered

  More info

  This insurance company is a scam. I have paid over 40k to this company since first purchasing my house in 2008. I had two water damage claims a couple years between…. One being a backed up water line and the other being a faulty installed pipe that the person who sold me the house placed in the wall which I had no idea about. Total of both claims minus 1k deductible for each was 8k. And now they have dropped coverage and significantly increased. 8k for the year plus a 9k hurricane deductible. It’s absolute fraud on those who have paid in. You stole 32k from me and then dropped me. This is disgusting that this is happening to people in Florida right now.

  Business response

  04/29/2023

  We regret that our customer has these recent negative experiences and hope that our explanation will provide some understanding. Our customer is insured under the HO3 Signature Homeowners form, and properties with more than 1 water claim in the past 3 years are not eligible for continued coverage under that form.  To assure continued financial stability and competitive rates, dwellings must be properly insured to value, have an acceptable loss history, have updated utilities, be well maintained, and meet all the requirements outlined in the HO3 manual.  Thus, we cannot continue coverage under this policy form.
  

  While we also appreciate our customer’s disappointment that our premium rates have increased, please know that our rates are based on our actual loss experience, and they are approved by the Florida Office of Insurance Regulation. We work hard to ensure that we pay only legitimate claims, but fraud and unnecessary litigation have forced us to raise our premium cost to our customers.
  

  So, while we must re-write our customer’s coverage, the property may be eligible for coverage under our DF1 Dwelling Fire form provided that all New Business Underwriting Guidelines are met. We recommend that our customer contact the agent of record for a complete policy review and analysis of coverage options and potential premium savings opportunities. Our goal remains to be here for our customer storm after storm, year after year.

• Initial Complaint

  01/09/2023

  Complaint Type:

  Billing Issues

  Status:

  Answered

  More info

  I have a Renters' Insurance policy that includes "loss of use" coverage. My rental home was damaged by Hurricane Ian to the point is "unlivable". The homeowners stated they were not going to repair the house, in fact they are selling the house "as is" "handyman special" as the roof is damaged, there is substantial wood rot and missing exterior wood from the house with exposed insulation and evidence of mold and fungi growth and exposure. We moved into the opposite end of the house as far away from mold/fungi area to limit our exposure to toxic growth and found a new dwelling to move to. We submitted a claim for the bed that was in the room with the exposed installation and mold/fungi growth and the moving expenses plus the 6 days of double rent we had to pay for the time it took us to move into new home. The field adjuster that was assigned our claim, came to the house and after inspection said it was a valid claim that the house was "unsafe to continue to live in". The office claims adjuster said the field adjuster changed his findings and denied the claim. I asked to speak to field adjuster to verify this statement and they have refused to provide me with his contact information. My claim was submitted for $2,903.34, they denied the personal property as we did dispose of bed before the field adjuster examined it, so removing the value of the bed my claim for relocation costs is $1,877.88 with a $500 deductible; Security First owes us $1,377.88. Their denial letter states that they aren't paying the personal property due to the fact they did not get to examine the damaged property BUT they did not address the rest of the claim, which was expenses incurred for "loss of use" which I have up to 2 weeks coverage and I'm only claiming 6 days plus moving costs. To satisfy my complaint, I want the company to pay my claim in the amount of $1,377.88

  Business response

  01/23/2023

  We are pleased to learn that our customer has re-located to another property amid more satisfactory living conditions. SFI was unable to extend coverage for the additional living expense that our customer has inquired about because the loss to the building containing the property did not result from hurricane damage and because our investigation did not find that the circumstances regarding damage to the property had rendered the premises to be uninhabitable. Both of these circumstances must exist for SFI to extend coverage as our customer has requested.  The relevant language from the policy appears below.
  If our wishes customer to provide us with additional information that has not yet been considered during the investigation of this reported loss, we will be happy to give that information all due consideration.  
  
  1. Additional Living Expense.
  If a loss by a Peril Insured Against under this policy to covered property or the building containing the property makes that part of the "residence premises" where you reside not fit to live in, we cover additional living expenses incurred by you so that your household can maintain its normal standard of living.
  Payment will be for the shortest time required to repair or replace the damage or, if you permanently relocate, the shortest time required for your household to settle elsewhere.

  Business response

  02/02/2023

  SFI was unable to extend coverage for the additional living expense incurred by our customer because the loss that our customer believes made that part of the "residence premises" where our customer resided not fit to live in was not caused by a Peril Insured Against under this policy. Hurricane damage to the roof of the residence premises would be a peril insured against under our customer’s policy, however, wear, tear and deterioration to the roof is not a covered peril.
  We regret that there is no coverage for our customer’s additional living expenses under the circumstances revealed by our investigation, however, if our customer wishes to provide us with additional information that has not yet been considered during the investigation of this reported loss, we will be happy to give that information all due consideration.  
  
  We have provided the policy language regarding Additional Living Expense for review.
  1. Additional Living Expense.
  If a loss by a Peril Insured Against under this policy to covered property or the building containing the property makes that part of the "residence premises" where you reside not fit to live in, we cover additional living expenses incurred by you so that your household can maintain its normal standard of living.
  Payment will be for the shortest time required to repair or replace the damage or, if you permanently relocate, the shortest time required for your household to settle elsewhere.

  Customer response

  02/13/2023

  
  Complaint: ********
  
  I am rejecting this response because:  Security First continues to refuse to provide the field adjuster's contact information for me to speak once more with him.  The Field Adjuster told me in-person; that my claim was valid.  If they are standing on solid ground; they would not be hesitant to allow me to speak to field adjuster.  I have requested this information multiple times only to be brushed off and ignored. This makes me very skeptical that they are hiding the true evaluation of the field adjuster. 
  
  Sincerely,
  
  ***** ****

• Initial Complaint

  01/06/2023

  Complaint Type:

  Customer Service Issues

  Status:

  Resolved

  More info

  We filed a claim with Security First Insurance due to hurrican Ian in October 2022. This claim was due to a neighbors tree that fell onto our property and damaged our fence and our pool cage. Security First Insurance started a claim and after switching us through several claims examiners and issues with the communication of the company we finally got people out from Roof X to look at the roof, through some other unknown company to look at the pool cage damage, fence damage, etc. The inspector for Roof X (Jon) came on 10-14-2022 and advised that there was no damage seen by him to the roof from the tree hitting the attached pool cage or any other damage. Since that time Security First advised us verbally over the phone that they would not cover the damage to the cage or the fence as they were excluded during a hurricane per our policy. They advised where we could find this in our policy and we verified this. We advised that since our claim was started for the fence and the pool cage and since those would not be covered, we wanted to close the claim. Security First Insurance refuses to close the claim to this date. On January 6th 2023 claims examiner Kamecia P***** called and advised that they had notation from Roof X that they did an insection on Dec 26th 2022 and provided pictures of missing shingles and damage to our roof (note that there is no damage or missing shingles on our roof). She also advised that they paid us $1500 for tarping due to roof damage. We have received no money from Security First Insurance. I advised Kamecia that this is fraudulant and she continually argued that it is documented on her end and therefore is true. I told her that I wanted copies of the photos she has and the reports she has and she claimed I would get them eventually. I have asked in the past for copies and to this date have received no written information regarding this claim from Security First Insurance. Claim number ******

  Business response

  01/20/2023

  SFI is pleased to report that we have closed this claim that regarding our customer’s reported losses due to Hurricane Ian and that we also have provided our customer with appropriate documentation regarding our investigation. Although SFI was unable to provide coverage for the damage to the fence and pool cage, we continued the investigation regarding potential damage to our customer’s roof, resulting in our determination that the roof had been damaged. We did not issue payment directly to our customer regarding this damage, however, because the loss did not exceed the amount of the policy’s hurricane deductible. Nonetheless, SFI issued indemnity payments directly to vendors that we assigned to provide roof tarping and tree removal services. As these payments ($1,500 and $6,150 respectively) were issued directly to the vendors that provided the services, our customer may not have been aware that they were made at that time.
  

  Because this claim and its activities arose from losses related to Hurricane Ian, the reporting and the disposition of the claim will not adversely affect our customer’s claim record or insurance premium rates.
  

  We hope to have the opportunity to continue our promise to be there for our customers and agents storm after storm, year after year®

  Business response

  02/03/2023

  We recognize that our customer has expressed concernes that a tarp may not have been placed on the roof of the covered premises. Nonetheless, after investigating this reported loss, SFI issued payments as previously described for tarping and tree removal services and identified hurricane damage to the covered premises for which the cost of repair did not exceed our customer’s applicable annual deductible. The amount for indemnification of the hurricane damages, although not greater than our customer’s hurricane deductible in this case, would have been applied to meet our customer’s annual hurricane deductible if additional hurricane damage had later occurred from Hurricane Nicole or another storm during 2022. On January 11, 2023, SFI notified our customer that our investigation had concluded and provided correspondence documenting our final conclusions regarding this reported loss. We will provide another copy to our customer upon request. Florida law provides that claims on property insurance policies that are the result of an act of God may not be used as a cause for cancellation or nonrenewal, and SFI intends to comply with all Florida laws in this regard. 

  Customer response

  02/03/2023

  
  Better Business Bureau:
  
  I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID ********, and find that this resolution is satisfactory to me.
  
  Sincerely,
  
  ****** ******

• Initial Complaint

  11/22/2022

  Complaint Type:

  Customer Service Issues

  Status:

  Resolved

  More info

  We filed our claim as soon as possible for flood damage from Hurricane Ian. We did not hear anything for weeks after filing the claim. Since then we relocated from our home with 2 young children and have been living in a hotel since Oct 17th. This is when the mitigation began and the house continues to sit empty and not being repaired. As we are still waiting on approvals of the rebuild to come back today Nov 22. We are living in a hotel and waiting on checks that my policy covers for housing assistance. We have had at least seven agents assigned to our claim. How frustrating is it to communicate with one or two and continue to be moved around. There is absolutely no one to talk to as far as leads and management. I have requested to speak to someone about this a few times. I have been very nice considering. The current agent seems to be trying to help and work on approvals for us but sadly it seems there is always an accuse. I understand that it is stressful timely, however to be told, "I was working on your claim and an emergency came up". I want to be equally as important as anyone else. We have been forced into wasting our housing allowance on a hotel, while the house continues to sit empty. The ads for Security First are great and their Social Media makes me laugh, not to mention the emails saying they are there for you. 100% I do not get that customer service and attention from them. Not to mention the personal property agent. I heard from the very first person and she was very helpful. Never again did I get to someone. I have left messages, emails with no response. I have heard the entire personal claims department has COVID and apparently my agent is in the hospital for the second time. When I asked if anyone is picking up her claims the response was no, that everyone has their own claims. That is not service to me. It sickens me that our life and family are forced out of the house to sit and wait on people who do not have to life this nightmare. Never again.

  Business response

  12/23/2022

  Business Response /* (1000, 5, 2022/12/05) */ Security First shares our customer's frustration that market conditions following the recent hurricanes have not allowed the handling of this reported loss to be completed more quickly. As initially reported, this claim was described as a flood loss and was handled by an adjustment protocol appropriate to such a loss. Upon further investigation, however, we determined that we can extend coverage for all or a portion of this loss, and reassigned the matter to a different handling examiner as noted. We have reached out to our customer and discussed the status of our handling of this loss as well as the future course of the same. Our customer intends to utilize contractors through our ************ Repair Network and we have been able to provide best available information regarding the repairs to be performed and the length of time that the repairs should take to complete. We also have assisted with advanced additional living expenses that are expected to be sufficient for the time that our customer's home is undergoing repairs. We look forward to continuing this work with our customer to provide the full range of benefits available under the coverage afforded by this policy of insurance. Consumer Response /* (2000, 7, 2022/12/06) */ (The consumer indicated he/she ACCEPTED the response from the business.)

• Initial Complaint

  11/17/2022

  Complaint Type:

  Billing Issues

  Status:

  Answered

  More info

  We had our house badly damaged in a hurricane with a leaking roof and nearly 1/3 of an acre with a destroyed fence and multiple quotes from general contractors that said it was a good five figures to fix everything. Security worst, which is what everybody I know calls them, refused to pay for the damage and near the same time our neighbors house was struck by lightning and their house burnt down. Sweet young couple with a baby and security worst refused to pay them and it was so rude they should be labeled criminals for their behavior. So what happened? Thank God somebody at the church represented them and turns out he was one of the best attorneys in *************** and security worst not only had to pay a zillion times more than they offered, the tiny pittance for this couple, but they had to pay all his attorney fees. They should be out of business and I hope one day they are. There's a special place for them you know where.

  Business response

  12/01/2022

  We are disappointed to learn of our former customer's concerns about the handling of her property damage claim and are somewhat surprised to learn of those concerns at this time, since her loss arose from Hurricane ****, over 5 years ago, and because more than 4 years have passed since the claim to which she refers was paid and her policy coverage with Security First Insurance expired of its own terms. We take great pride in our claim handling and customer service and regret deeply that our customer harbors the feelings about ****************************************************************** that she has expressed. We are reviewing the Hurricane **** claim that seems to be the subject of her displeasure and a representative will contact her to thoroughly explain our handling of this matter, to discuss her concerns and to answer any questions that she may have. We also suggest that our customer provide us with any evidence that she may feel we should consider regarding her claim if she has not already provided that for us to review.

• Initial Complaint

  10/03/2022

  Complaint Type:

  Customer Service Issues

  Status:

  Answered

  More info

  My roof has a 3-year warranty from a licensed roofing company and I have 2 four-point/roof inspections certifying the roof is in good condition with no issues. This company canceled my policy in the middle of hurricane season. I need the reinstated ASAP and if you want to drop my policy please give a valid reason and time it so it is not so horrible of you. I will not be able to find new coverage in hurricane season. This is wrong on so many levels. Will be reporting you to every regulatory agency I can find and will be working on getting damages from your unethical actions covered on this as well.

  Business response

  12/01/2022

  Business Response /* (1000, 5, 2022/10/17) */ The information provided to Security First Insurance by our customer demonstrated that a portion of the roof of the insured property does not satisfy our underwriting guidelines requiring that the roof be shown to be no older than 20 years old, that it be free from damage and excessive wear, and that it have a useful life remaining. The reports provided by our customer revealed that the roof age for the right side is unknown and cannot be verified, and the related photos showed areas of excessive wear and existing damage. While it also was reported that some areas of the roof had been repaired, no repair documents or photos were provided that would demonstrate what repairs had been accomplished. Nonetheless, Security First Insurance reinstated the policy effective October 01, 2022, due to the Office of Insurance Regulations Emergency Order Filed on 9/28/2022. The policy is reinstated until the Emergency Ordered expires, which is 11/28/2022 or later. Based on present circumstances, after the order expires Security First will reissue a cancellation and the policyholder will receive a new cancellation notice. As the property may be eligible for coverage by another insurance company, we suggest that our customer confer with the Agent of Record at (800) 329-8462 for a full policy review. Consumer Response /* (3000, 7, 2022/10/18) */ (The consumer indicated he/she DID NOT accept the response from the business.) The insurance company never informed me of the rescinded cancelation due to the emergency thing. Seems it had something to do with the department of insurance being involved. Looks like they were expecting me to seek new coverage while I was in the dark on the cancelation being rescinded. Yet another unethical thing to review with DOI. That being said, my agent tried to resolve the issues they mentioned with them but they would not listen. I have documentation that overwrites all that they have said and would have been provided by the agent if they had let them provide it and in their own words 'their inspectors found ..." is not actually true. Very unethical company will make sure that they are accountable for the full extent of their ethical lapses. Some other items I will be bringing up only with the DOI so they can have a direct crack at them without them scrambling for poor excuses first. Business Response /* (4000, 13, 2022/11/15) */ Mr. *********'s policy was reinstated by SFI effective 10/1/2022 and coverage was extended per the Hurricane Ian Emergency Order. The reinstatement notice was both mailed and emailed to Mr. ********* on 10/19/2022. The home inspection provided by Mr. ********* shows the roof condition does not meet underwriting guidelines for coverage. The roof age for the right side is unknown and cannot be verified. Photos for this area show excessive wear and existing damage. While the inspection indicates that some shingles were remedied, no repair documents or photos were provided to SFI. Per our Dwelling Fire DP-1 Underwriting Manual: * Shingle roofs older than twenty (20) years are ineligible. * Roofs must be in an acceptable condition with no existing damage, excessive wear and with useful life remaining. Mr. ********* may be eligible for a policy with an alternative carrier, but he would need to contact his agent of record for a full policy review. Consumer Response /* (4200, 15, 2022/11/16) */ (The consumer indicated he/she DID NOT accept the response from the business.) Interesting how they sent the letter the day after i had brought it up and almost 3 weeks after reinstatement. All of this is documented. The inspections shows all good and my updated inspection shows the same. Will be escalating this further.

• Initial Complaint

  07/26/2022

  Complaint Type:

  Service or Repair Issues

  Status:

  Resolved

  More info

  Security First canceled my insurance to end in June of this year. I filed a claim anyway because they canceled me because of my roof. After months of emails and phone calls. My claim was approved for the roof replacement, on June the 14th but was told the roofing company, Sinclair Roofing was not in my area. After calling again then was given a date of June the 24th. When I return from my cruise on the 23 my roof was replaced on the 21st and by the time the workers left my property; without permission to be there on this date, my ac unit was not working. There was a chemical smell in my home for weeks. I called my mortgage insurance company which sent out an inspector to tell me that the workers put holes in my ducting when they put the roof on. My roof is a flat roof, which makes this completely possible. I tried to work with the insurance company and talked to the owner of the roofing company but to no avail. Their response was not to help me and my elderly father on dialysis with a heart monitor, and my blind brother whom I caregiver for, both live with me and were there when these Mexicans came on my property without my say so and I wasn't there to supervise! As of this date, we have no ac and cannot get insurance because of this negligent and horrible customer service. The roofing company Sinclair, contracts stated they would make it right, but instead, he told me my ac unit was just old. I feel like these people are calling me and my family liars! They even had their own ac inspector come out and now I am left with ac replacement or repair because these people made the mistake and now do not want to tear the new roof up to repair my ducting since the roof is flat. Please help me! this isn't fair or ethical!

  Business response

  08/30/2022

  Business Response /* (1000, 8, 2022/08/12) */ Our customer was notified by correspondence dated February 16, 2022, that this policy of residential homeowners insurance would not be renewed at its expiration on June 22, 2022 due to the age of the roof. In response, our customer chose to cancel the policy effective at 12:00 a.m. on March 23, 2022. Thereafter, on April 7, 2020, our customer notified Security First that the home had suffered roof damage almost two years before, on April 30, 2020. After investigating this reported loss, SFI replaced the damaged roof. In connection with the roof replacement, our customer requested that the roof be re-designed but opted not to pay for that additional work after being informed that could not upgrade the roof design unless our customer paid for the additional expense of doing so. After the roof replacement was completed, our customer reported to SFI that the HVAC unit had been damaged by the roofing contractor. Neither our customer nor our customer's HVAC contractor could produce evidence that the HVAC system was damaged as reported, and an HVAC contractor that inspected the property at the request of SFI reported that while there was no evidence of the reported damage, its inspection revealed that the system had been poorly maintained and had lost its freon charge due to wear and tear, which is not a covered cause of loss. SFI is pleased that it was able to assist our customer by providing the roof replacement, and regrets that the policy that our customer chose to purchase did not provide coverage for all of the items that were claimed. Consumer Response /* (2000, 10, 2022/08/18) */ (The consumer indicated he/she ACCEPTED the response from the business.) They are not a reputable, and honest company and they will go liquid soon!

• Initial Complaint

  06/01/2022

  Complaint Type:

  Product Issues

  Status:

  Answered

  More info

  I have been overpaying my homeowners insurance premium for numerous years as a result of an error on the part of Security First Insurance Company and the brokerage firm USI Insurance Services. For years, I have been requesting a review of my dwelling replacement limit because I felt it was exorbitantly high for my 1,000-square-foot home. I was continuously denied any assistance with reviewing this and was told the dwelling replacement is based on a "formula." In 2020-2021, the dwelling replacement increased $14,000, when the average increase has typically been $2,000 or less. This year, when my homeowners premium went up to nearly $7,000, I was finally able to connect with a representative willing to do a deep dive into my coverage. I learned that from the time I secured this coverage when I purchase my home 20 years ago, the dwelling replacement limit was based on a home with a two-car garage, among other incorrect features. Basically, my replacement value was being calculated on a much larger home than what I actually have. My home does not have a garage or any structure for parking a car. As a result of the new Reconstruction Cost Estimate the representative worked on with me, the dwelling replacement limit was reduced by $10,000, thereby reducing my overall premium. I have been trying to get reimbursed from the company for years of overpayment but my inquiries remain unanswered. Unfortunately, I cannot report on what the dollar amount would be. This is something the insurance company needs to calculate based on review of past policy declarations in order to reimburse me. I'm seeking assistance with getting this matter rectified as soon as possible as this is now theft and fraud. Thanking you in advance for your assistance.

  Business response

  08/08/2022

  Business Response /* (1000, 6, 2022/06/22) */ We have reviewed our customer's file and determined that during a recent policy review with her agent, the replacement cost estimate for her home was updated. As a result our customer's coverage was lowered and a premium credit will be sent to her on 06/30/2022 for the sum of $26.07. Our customer has insured her home with Security First for 14 years and a declaration page has been sent to her each year with the declared value of the home and all other pertinent information regarding coverage and premium cost. Although our customer and her agent are encouraged to engage in an annual policy review, as was done this year, Security First has not ever received any questions or concerns about these coverage or premium issues from either of them. It is our policy to respond appropriately to any such contact, as we did earlier this year. We regret that our customer has concerns regarding the coverage that she purchased over the preceding years, but we faithfully provided the full insurance coverage as reflected on the policy declaration sheets and we look forward to the opportunity of insuring her for many more years. Consumer Response /* (3000, 8, 2022/06/23) */ (The consumer indicated he/she DID NOT accept the response from the business.) Thank you for the response. It's unfortunate that it had to escalate to this point to receive communication back regarding this situation, but I am very appreciative. The agent *** Insurance Services is nonresponsive. I have only been able to communicate through the agent regarding my policy. Each time that I asked for a Security First manager, owner or representative, I was refused that information. It's evident that of the numerous times I've called *** and was told by the agent that my concerns would be discussed with Security First, they were not. Had they been, this response from Security First would be quite different. I call every year when I get my policy declarations to discuss how I can lower the premium, especially after an increase of $782 from 1/9/2019 to 1/9/2020. Typically, the average increase was about $200 a year. I have spoken with several agents from *** Insurance over the past several years and all would not entertain reviewing the dwelling replacement, which I knew was too high for my home. A few times I was told an email would be sent to Security First to run another replacement cost estimator. After chasing down the same person several times for lack of response, I was told dwelling replacement couldn't be changed. It was a complicated formula and it was correct. So who dropped the ball? *** Insurance Services or Security First? Is it a matter of just not wanting to do the work? It was excuse after excuse after excuse. I have documentation outlining the multiple calls and *** reps I spoke with, including dates and times. This year is the ONLY time that I was able to get a representative with *** that listened to my concerns and took action. Whoever crafted this response to me did not do his/her due diligence in obtaining the facts before positioning me as dishonest and incompetent when it comes to my insurance policy. This is not the first complaint I've made or the first time I reached out to ***. It's the first time someone took action. I had to create an extensive Excel spreadsheet and provide it to the representative to visually highlight my concerns, which I feel promoted an analysis of my policy. I have spent hours and hours on the phone, on hold, sending emails, etc. trying to get this addressed over the years. I'm only hearing from Security First now because as a last resort I utilized resources available to me to this resolve this to avoid the need for legal counsel. I do not agree with the premium credit of $26.07. I would like a breakdown of how Security First arrived at this amount after I've been overcharged for the dwelling replacement for 14 years! Just three adjustments to the premium for the dwelling placement alone from 1/9/2022 to 6/10/2022 resulted in a $1,677 premium savings (from $5,152 on 1/9/2022 to $3,475 on 6/10/2022). Again, that's just three adjustments. What about all of the previous years Security First was basing my dwelling replacement premium on erroneous information? Again, that's 14 years of being overcharged on my premium. How is it that the overpayment is just $26.07? Perhaps Security First did not understand the basis of my request/complaint. It's not for one policy period. It's for 14 years of being overcharged. To resolve this, someone would have to go back through my policy premiums to day 1 and adjust my replacement premium based on the correct information about my house and then calculate my refund. For example, for 14 years my premium was based on a two-car garage on my home. That's additional square footage that adds to the overall replacement cost. I have NEVER had a two-car garage. I am not convinced that the difference would be $26.07 for every single year I was overcharged. I would strongly encourage Security First to follow up with *** Insurance Services as they are not adequately or responsibly representing Security First's best interest. If we're going to point fingers/place blame, it should start there. This situation should have been addressed years ago at my request. However, I was shut down. Again, I am not satisfied with this finding but I am willing to continue collaborating and communicating until a satisfactory result is achieved. I feel anyone in my same situation would want this wrong made right, especially given the detrimental financial impact the error has had on my insurance premium. Thank you. Business Response /* (4000, 12, 2022/07/06) */ We have reviewed our files once again and want to be certain that our customer understands how this situation has transpired. At the time Ms. ******* applied for a homeowner's application, her agent input the characteristics of her home and calculated her reconstruction cost for the year. Mrs. ******* has the option of contacting her servicing agent to review and make any changes as requested. There were occasions in which Ms. ******* contacted Security First Insurance. She was never denied a review by our underwriting office, nor did she ask for one when contacting us. The agent of record, that services her policy, made the following changes on 4-7-22, which resulted in a change to the dwelling Coverage A amount to $158,696, from $169,000, for the 22/23 renewal year and created a credit of $221.28 on Ms. *******'s policy. Then Security First Insurance adjusted this further to 2-28-22 which gave another credit of $21.47 based on these changes. Finished floor area to 1002 square feet, from 1047 square feet Removed attached garage and added the 110 square foot attached other structure Wall coverings updated 56 square foot open porch added We use a tool to figure the dwelling reconstruction cost. This is an annual estimate and we do not have an option to make changes to prior estimates. Ms. *******'s declaration page containing the terms of our agreement regarding each 12-month policy is sent annually and reflects the premium and the basis upon which it is charged. Ms. ******* demonstrated her agreement to the coverages listed in each policy declaration by paying her premium, and until now has never contacted us regarding changes or a re-evaluation. Ms. ******* should contact her agent at (855-874-0774) with any questions or concerns. If there is any additional information for us to consider regarding this matter, we are happy to review its application to Ms. *******'s coverage and look forward to insuring her for years to come.

• Initial Complaint

  06/01/2022

  Complaint Type:

  Customer Service Issues

  Status:

  Answered

  More info

  A claim was filed over six months ago with Security First Insurance Company who contacted Paul ***** Restoration to get the job done. It has been since January and the job has been barely started.My wife and I have been without our bedroom all of this time.We had to make very difficult arrangements just to sleep.We would appreciate some help in speeding up this project.I have been more than reasonable about this situation.

  Business response

  08/03/2022

  Business Response /* (1000, 5, 2022/06/22) */ We are very sorry that you have experienced delays regarding the completion of your home repairs and we hope that you now are satisfied that our vendor is performing all appropriate repairs to your satisfaction. It appears that a subcontractor that was assigned a portion of the work at your home was involved in an accident that kept him from timely completing his portion of the repairs and our vendor did not make appropriate accommodations for this interruption to the schedule for completing your home repairs. We have counseled with our vendor and received assurances that it will communicate appropriately regarding the plan for your repairs, the status of the work, and regarding whatever other aspect of the job that you may have questions about. Moreover, we understand that the repair work should be approaching completion this week. Please know that Security First shares your frustration with the delays that were experienced by you, and we hope that you will continue to trust us with the privilege of insuring your home.

• Initial Complaint

  05/05/2022

  Complaint Type:

  Service or Repair Issues

  Status:

  Answered

  More info

  Hello, Good day to you. my name is Willie ***** ******, and my homeowners insurance company Security First Insurance, is fraudulent, has taken my money and denied my Roof claim. I have been insured with them since 2018, and have NEVER filed a claim, but PAYING BIG PREMIUMS! I filed a claim in January of this year about my roof. Living in Florida, we all know we are the headquarters for hurricanes. I didn't know that there was damage to my roof, until I saw water rings on my ceiling. My policy pretty much covered everything I needed it to, especially because of the weather we have here in Florida, I made sure my coverage was sufficient! What was the point of being insured with them all those years, paying those high premiums just to be denied on claim that you have coverage for? i might as well have saved all of that money and gotten my roof done myself! I see that this company has a Tremendous amount of complaints. They lied to me about making a payment in February this year, stating that the claim couldn't move forward without me making a payment. Which I found out was indeed a LIE!! they did this INTENTIONALLY and FRAUDULENTLY knowing that me making a payment when my policy was active already when i made the claim, and also knowingly that they were going to deny my claim!! This is Called Fraud!! I spoke on this before hand, and they assured me. ALL LIES! Its really a shame how these insurance companies Fraudulently take consumers hard earned money, and feel no obligations to honor their end of a contract agreement. I can send my policy upon request. I am attaching a copy of the email that was sent, which is the denial email. Please help me to get this resolved. I can send a copy of my policy per request. Thank You so Very much. I look forward to hearing from you soon. God Bless You!

  Business response

  08/12/2022

  Business Response /* (1000, 12, 2022/06/03) */ "Our customer reported this loss to us on January 6 of this year, stating that there were multiple water stains to the ceilings. In response, we have inspected our customer's roof on two occasions and have found no evidence that damage to the roof occurred during the term of the policy and resulted from wind or another cause that is covered the policy. Our inspections did reveal, however, that the water stains on the ceiling of our customer's home appear to have occurred during heavy rains and to have resulted from leaks caused by improper nailing of the roof shingles and by shingles that lifted freely as the result of wear, tear and deterioration. Any damage to our customer's roof that has resulted from wear, tear and deterioration, faulty, inadequate, or defective construction or improper installation of the exposed roofing nails, or which did not occur during the policy term, is not covered by our customer's policy. Therefore, because the damage to the roof is not covered, any resulting water damage to the interior of the home is not covered. We value our customer's patronage, and hope that our relationship continues." Consumer Response /* (3000, 14, 2022/06/09) */ (The consumer indicated he/she DID NOT accept the response from the business.) I DO NOT accept Security Insurance's response!! It's so ironic that I have had several roofing business's come out and evaluate my roof and say that the damage IS a result of heavy winds and rains as a result of our thunderstorms and hurricanes that we endure here in Florida. How they say it's because of improper nailing,, well,, with that said, my ceiling inside sure as hell wasn't leaking when I got a new roof last!! Do you not understand or know some of the wind force that we have during our bad weather periods? Winds that are so extremely strong that that pull up and blow over trees, that way tons! So now u just take a min to think about what that force would do to roof shingles!! It doesn't take anyone educated or a rocket scientist to know that, pounding rains even hails, with devastating wind gusts, will surely move, break, tear, misplace, pull up, slam, etc. ANYTHING and EVERYTHING!! You know it as well as I do! So for you to have made the statement you did, saying that my roof wasn't the result of winds or rains, and wrong nailing,, sounds like you didn't even think about a what you said! My 13, year old granddaughter, wouldn't have even said something as foolish as that!! How would the shingles have gotten lifted up, if Strong WINDS OR RAINS didn't do it?? I guess you thought a group of butterflies moved the singles! Just down right ABSURD!! And I really did business with you all? Also, it's Ironic, how it was ONLY the contractors you sent out gave you those Ridiculous evaluations! You can't be too sure if they really were roofing contractors, they couldn't have been professionals. But then again, they were the people who YOU ALL sent! They could've worked at McDonalds for all I know! Also,, I know a couple of people who are/were also insured with you all,, and you did the same Ridiculous/Underhanded thing to them also! All your company does it Fraud people, take all their money with these high premiums you charge, wait a little while until you've taken enough money from them, and try to drop them praying they don't submit a claim for any repairs! And if they do, you all make it seem like it was the result of one thing, when u HONESTLY know it was not,, so you don't have to pay the claim!! The only thing Security First is doing is lying, stealing, and defrauding people, but trying to do it in a "legal" way! Sounds a little to me like embezzlement! ANYBODY,, can check your track history of a company,, you are LOW RATED,, have HORRIBLE REVIEWS,, and HAVE A GOOD AMOUT OF COMPLAINTS AGAINST YOU! So evidentially I can't be the only one you've done this to and are doing this to!! I'm sure you've already had and will have more lawsuits against you! Just do the right thing! I just need you all to give me a new roof or give me the amount for a contractor I choose to do it! Either 1 will suffice! Nothing more, Nothing Less! Business Response /* (4000, 19, 2022/07/08) */ In the claims process each claim is thoroughly investigated to confirm or deny coverage under the policy. This is completed by the Security First Field Adjuster and other vendors in our network. All of our vendors are thoroughly screened, background checks performed, and licensed and insured. All reports by these vendors are reviewed and claim decisions are made by the claim examiner assigned to the claim. If you would like to clarify any points of your coverage determination, please call your claims examiner to review the claim together. You are correct that wind can cause damage to a roof, and therefore we review the photos and reports to verify the cause of any damage to property. The cause of the loss is important and can possibly prompt coverage under the policy. Wear and Tear is not a covered cause of loss under the policy. If you still do not agree with the claim determination, we would be happy to re-open the claim to further investigate. Please provide the documentation you referenced from the other roofing reports and inspections for our review and comparison. We also provided you a pamphlet about mediation which is another option to further review your claim determination.

*Some consumers may elect to not publish the details of their complaints, some complaints may not meet BBB's standards for publication, or BBB may display a portion of complaints when a high volume is received for a particular business. ↩