Reviews

I got rear ended by a Utica customer. This car is our livelihood: it's how I bring my kids to school and get to work. Because of this I was trying to get the repairs done as soon as possible during the time between Christmas and New Year's. Despite the clear fault of the other driver, they just could not confirm the accident with their customer for weeks. Finally, when the person accepted fault Utica arranged for a rental. I did not know that they had to match the class of my vehicle, which is an SUV. Instead they arranged for an inadequate sedan, which is simply not safe to drive in the snowy climate I live in. To make things worse, because of a snow storm, the car repair shop had to push the completion date by one week. They told me they spoke to Utica and that, Utica would extend the rental. When I went to the rental company to request an SUV, it turned out that Utica never extended the rental. When I called the Utica associate, they extended the rental in three seconds while we were on the phone, which means they clearly had not done it, despite her attempt to blame the rental company. During the call, the associate also admitted that she made a mistake by not arranging for an SUV, matching the class of my car. She put in for an SUV with the rental company but they were all out of SUVs by then. When I protested, she said "we cannot go back in time" and that the current lack of SUV inventory in the rental company was not their problem. I regret that I ever got involved with this company and their incompetence, which cost me so much time and anguish.

To Whom it May Concern, Utica National received this claim on 12/21/23, contacts were made, and liability was accepted on 12/22/23. A photo inspection application was used to write an estimate of the vehicle damages and an unsuccessful contact attempt to make an offer was made on 12/29/23, finally on 1/3/24 a text message was sent providing a copy of the estimate which was acknowledged. Utica National was notified of a 1/15/24 repair appointment and a rental reservation was set up. On 1/18/24 we were notified that the shop had closed for inclement weather and needed additional time for repairs with a completion date of 1/25/24 expected. On 1/19/24 the adjuster was notified of the concerns around the size of the vehicle and at that time contacted the rental company for an update to the vehicle size. The rental vehicle was returned on 1/24/24 and the file was closed at that time. Regards, Natalie D****** Material Damage Unit Claims Specialist Utica National Insurance Group P: ************ 

I was hit by one of utica's clients in a parking lot and if I didnt get out in time he would have done a hit and run. We called the police and filled a report. He hit my Ford Shelby F150 and cracked the rear bumper and tailight. We filed a report with insurance and I feel ill to heart failure. After I was able I got the truck repaired and they are still fighting to pay me to have my truck fixed. Its the worst service and experience I have ever dealt with. I am not asking for a lot, only to have been paid for the damage nothing more. Its like I am asking for a million dollars and its only 3500. Dont ever use this insurance company they wont have your back.

We are in receipt of the complaint filed by the claimant in connection with his property damage claim. The facts of loss are not disputed as reported that the insured vehicle struck the parked claimant vehicle. The issue is that the claimant repaired his vehicle without giving us an opportunity to inspect and approve an estimate of repair. Instead, the claim was reported to us more than a year after the damage to the vehicle. The amount the claimant is seeking has not been fully supported because the body shop has failed to provide the necessary support of repair. Our review was completed, but limited to what could be supported. However, we advised the claimant that we will give consideration if any missing support can be provided. The date of loss was 10/21/2021. The loss was reported to us on 1/18/2023, nearly one year and three months post-loss, and after the claimant had already repaired his vehicle. The claimant is seeking the full reimbursement of a repair that he had completed on his truck for $3,219.33. He authorized and completed repairs without giving us an opportunity to inspect the vehicle and assess the damages. He also did not report the loss to his insurance carrier so they, too, did not inspect the damages. We requested that the Appraisal Operation team perform a desk review utilizing the photos from the scene and his estimate. We requested additional supports, but his shop provided no photos and no additional supports for the repair. We were advised by the Appraisal Operation team that their review was limited to what could be supported and returned an estimate of $2,519.00, citing that further consideration could be made if the missing supports were provided. We issued payment of the $2,519.00 and explained the difference in the estimates. We outlined what was needed for further consideration. Specifically, at issue was a minor difference in the labor rates – $49 versus $50 – and a difference in a part utilized for the repair. Since the shop wrote for a higher-priced taillight, we requested their invoice. We also requested the sensor recalibration report that would have been required to recalibrate the vehicle, to review and support for that difference. We contacted the shop and were told that they had no additional paperwork. The claimant’s agent advised he would try to secure the missing supports. We advised if the missing supports were provided, we would have the Appraisal Operation team review and revise the estimate. We requested the following: • Photos • Copies of the parts invoices • A copy of scan report which shows damaged sensors – this would have been needed with replacement of the bumper with a blind spot monitor To date, nothing further has been submitted. We have requested the missing support in order to bring this matter to an amicable resolution.