ComplaintsforAccuserve Solutions, Inc.

• Initial Complaint

  08/02/2024

  Complaint Type:

  Service or Repair Issues

  Status:

  Answered

  More info

  Accuserve, formerly known as Mad Sky, has caused significant distress following a storm that damaged my late mother's home, which was insured by Liberty Mutual. After paying the insurance deductible, Mad Sky assigned a contractor to assess the roof's damage. The contractor began harassing my ailing mother, who was battling cancer, demanding payment at her door despite having my contact information. As her power of attorney, 21 hours away, I instructed him to contact Mad Sky for payment. ****** ****** and ****** ***** of Mad Sky assured me they would intervene, but the harassment continued with threats like, "Give me money now, or I will rip the roof off." I involved local authorities, instructing my mother to secure her home and await police assistance. The work was never completed, and her health deteriorated. After her passing, I informed Accuserve, but the situation worsened, with animals entering the attic due to removed soffits and fascia. Accuserve promised repairs, yet the contractors they sent caused further damage. They later reneged on their agreement, disputing needed repairs and failing to reimburse me for replaced security cameras. Years later, my home remains in disrepair, and Accuserve continues to breach their commitments. Legal counsel advised contacting the Attorney General. I have lodged complaints with the Better Business Bureau and the Attorney General's office. Accuserve's dismissive response suggests discrimination may be a factor. I am prepared to provide documentation to substantiate my claims.

  

  Business response

  08/09/2024

  *** ******************* ******** Mother) claim was processed through our program starting in March 2018. After repairs were completed in May 2018, Accuserve (formerly MadSky) was notified of the contractor's payment requests. The contractor indicated that the repairs were completed, but the deductible payment had not been received from the insured. Accuserve communicated with both the insured and the vendor to mitigate any unprofessional behavior from the vendor due to lack of payment for the deductible. Accuserve worked to collect this payment from the insured to ensure the vendor did not have any communication with the insured. Per Accuserve’s process, all claim funds are held until the insured signs a Certificate of Satisfaction. From May to August 2018, Accuserve made multiple attempts to collect this signed document, engaging in several conversations with the insured’s daughter, Ms. ******. Although Ms. ****** verbally agreed to sign the document, it was never returned.  

  
  During the five-year warranty period, Accuserve addressed Ms. ******** concerns to the best of our ability, despite difficulty in scheduling repairs with Ms. ******. The prior warranty claim on Ms. ******** home was closed due to scheduling difficulties and communication delays.  

  
  Ms. ******** recent warranty claims led to a full review of her concerns to determine which concerns fall under the terms and conditions of the Accuserve warranty. As of May 2023, the five-year warranty period has expired. Accuserve acknowledges that some repairs were not completed properly and is willing to issue payment for those items. However, our investigation found that some of Ms. ******** concerns are not covered under the warranty, as they either did not exist before or showed damage predating any repairs by Accuserve vendors. An initial refund offer was presented to Ms. ****** on August 8th, 2024, but she did not accept it. After a secondary review, no additional coverage will be provided. We tried to contact Ms. ****** to confirm the final offer but have not yet reached her. We will continue our efforts to ensure she understands the final offer and are awaiting her response.  

  Customer response

  08/11/2024

  
  Complaint: ********
  
  I am rejecting this response because: 
  As evidenced by the attached text messages and emails, the issue at hand is not a matter of communication but rather the failure of the contractors hired by your company to either commence or complete the required work. Payments were made to these contractors by both my insurance company and Accuserve, yet in every instance, the work remained incomplete. The timeline references 2018 as the starting point, but from 2020 or 2021 to the present day in 2024, the work has still not been completed, despite my continuous and persistent communication about this matter. 
  
  I have dealt with a series of individuals, including ****** *****, ****** ******, and ******* ****, keeping them informed about the contractors' failures to show up or finish the tasks assigned to them. Each of these individuals was made aware of the ongoing issues, including instances where I was left waiting all day for contractors who never arrived, all while trying to manage another property slowly going  into  disrepair due to lack of maintenance that was 21 hours away. My obligation as the estate representative legally necessitated my presence, yet the contractors failed to uphold their end of the agreement.
  
  To add insult to injury, after contractors repeatedly botched the work or failed to complete it—leading to even more extensive damage—I was eventually offered a mere $19,000 after taxes, despite an initial estimate of $60,000 by the final contractor they sent out by the name of Royal Restoration to address the issues. This amount was subsequently reduced to $30,000, only for the offer to drop further when I mentioned having a lawyer review the contracts. This behavior is not only retaliatory but punitive in the extreme, and I find it wholly unacceptable.
  
  The situation has reached a point where, after enduring four years of delay and substandard service, I am now faced with the untenable option of selling my home just to escape this nightmare. If this is indeed the case, I will have no choice but to escalate the matter to the Mayor's office in the District of Columbia, the Governor of Maryland, and other relevant authorities in the tri-state area,  as this company should not be permitted to conduct business in such a manner.
  
  Further compounding the issue, due to the contractors' neglect, my home has suffered additional damage, including raccoons nesting in the attic—leading to biohazards that were never properly addressed. When I was unable to inspect the property because my mother was battling fourth-stage cancer and could not have people in her home due to the nature of her treatment protocol, the situation was exacerbated by a worker who threatened her with physical violence. Although the company apologized and assured me that this individual would not return, the work was still never completed. 
  
  Now, to offer a meager $19,000 as a resolution to all this is utterly unacceptable. The estimate provided, and which the company refused to pay, was $60,000, with a subsequent estimate of around $30,000. Whilst they due owe me a reimbursement check for about $3,000 as they agreed to do for replacing the security cameras myself even that would not absolve them of the liability for their workers. Their sudden reluctance to address the matter once a lawyer was mentioned clearly demonstrates a punitive and retaliatory stance. The individual who extended this unacceptable offer was a woman named Kimberly, and I must firmly refuse this as an adequate solution. I expect a far more reasonable and fair offer than what has been proposed, and I will not tolerate any attempt to shift the blame onto me or my beloved mother.
  Sincerely,
  
  ********* ****** Estate Representative for ***** *******

  Customer response

  08/19/2024

  The man who threatened my mother with physical violence, and further expressed his intention to vandalize and intentionally damage the home, regrettably carried out those ominous threats. We find ourselves, years later, still entangled in the repercussions of his actions. Only Mr. Romine and I remain as witnesses to the dark threats issued by Mr. Castillo, who, in a menacing manner, intended to direct those statements towards my late mother during a phone call. He returned to execute the damage while my mother was at Georgetown Hospital undergoing a scan to monitor the progression of her cancer. 
  
  This company’s attempt to appease us with a meager offering is reminiscent of the post-Civil War treatment of freed slaves and the hollow promise of "Forty acres and a mule," which was part of Special Field Orders No. 15, proclaimed by Union General William T. Sherman on January 16, 1865. This wartime order aimed to allocate land to some freed families, only for the promise to be swiftly rescinded, leaving them in an even more dire situation. Similarly, we are now faced with an inadequate solution that does nothing to address the gravity of the situation, and indeed, it leaves us in a worse position than where we began.

  

  Business response

  08/20/2024

  Accuserve has investigated these complaints and offered a reasonable resolution based on the documentation provided, to which the homeowner has not responded.  We would be happy to discuss this matter further, directly with the homeowner.

• Initial Complaint

  07/08/2024

  Complaint Type:

  Service or Repair Issues

  Status:

  Answered

  More info

  Accuserve was hired by allstate to repair my kitchen floor the materials that were used were inferior and the floor is peeling accuserve refuses to correct this situation i have contacted accuserve and have not recieved a reply their representative ******* ******* phone number ********** told me to complain to allstate which is a not so polite way to say GET LOSS I DONT KNOW WHAT KIND OF PEOPLE THEY HIRE BUT THEY TOTALLY LACK CONCERN FOR CUSTOMERS I AM 78 YEARS OLD AND THIS IS ANOTHER EXAMPLE OF A LARGE CORPORATION TAKING ADVANTAGE OF A SENIOR CITIZEN

  

  Business response

  07/12/2024

  We received *** ********* complaint and have conducted a thorough review of his claim. Upon being notified of his concerns with his flooring, Accuserve coordinated an inspection from a vendor at no charge. This inspection confirmed that the flooring was installed correctly and revealed no workmanship concerns.  
  

  At the onset of *** ********* insurance claim, we sent a sample of the original flooring to Itel for analysis to determine the best match for like, kind, and quality. The flooring recommended from this analysis was installed. The inspection completed by the vendor showed no cause for concern with the material integrity. 
  
  When the flooring was initially installed in April 2023, the vendor provided photo documentation of the completed repairs. This documentation showed no signs of damage to the newly installed flooring. However, the inspection conducted on May 16, 2024 after the notice of concern, indicated secondary damage not related to the initial claim, workmanship, or material defects. 
  
  Regarding the concerns about our representative who communicated the inspection findings to *** *******, we reviewed the recorded call thoroughly. At no point did she instruct him to complain to Allstate. She stated "If you have any further questions, please contact Allstate." Before notifying *** ******* of the investigation results, we reviewed all findings with his carrier, who concurred with our analysis that the damage is not a warranty matter. 

• Initial Complaint

  07/01/2024

  Complaint Type:

  Service or Repair Issues

  Status:

  Answered

  More info

  Our home was damaged by hail on 06-07-2022. We called the insurance company, filed a claim and were issued a contractor by the name of **** ***** Originally we just wanted to take the check from the insurance and hire our own people to do the work but **** made it seem that she had to sign the contract that was presented to her and that we had to use his people. Once the contract was signed they did the roof first right away and did an incomplete/unprofessional job and cut a lot of corners. then they installed our siding and during that time there was a point where a hole remained exposed for almost 3 weeks because **** said they were waiting to get siding matched, as well as informing my mother in law that she had to spend a certain amount of money on our garage, that got the least of the damage, in order to complete all siding. once we got that resolved they in stalled my siding but it looks wavy and damaged. next they replaced our windows including windows that did not need replacing that are now falling apart and the screens are coming out so i cant even open my windows because bugs will get it on top of i cant close my storm windows when it rains so i then get water that comes in my window when it rains. lastly they did work on my front door but it was left in a state of horror. they took my door frame off and left it as well and filling gaps with foam. we have tried to contacted them but now the insurance says they are a different company now and because they have a warranty the insurance won't/can't help. they charged the insurance company for things that were not replaced or done and pocketed almost 7,000, Ive tried to call **** but they never get back to me or if they do they tell me that they need pictures and proof which i have sent to the numbers they give me and its a never ending circle.

  

  Business response

  07/03/2024

  Dear *** ********* 
  
  We have received the documentation and concerns of your complaint and want to assure you that we are working closely with our Client Services and Warranty teams.  We acknowledge that there is an active warranty claim for your property, and our teams have engaged the appropriate resources to review all of your concerns. 
  
  Our goal is to provide you with an appropriate resolution within an adequate time frame. We appreciate your patience as we address these concerns. If you have any questions or additional concerns prior to our follow up, please contact us at ************. 

  Customer response

  07/05/2024

  Hello i wanted to submit this inspection report I had done by a company I sought out and they wrote this report up for me to show the unprofessional work that was done and all the repairs that would need to take place. In addition I also wanted to note that the price originally submitted was not correct and I was quoted between 75,000 to 100,000 in repairs and potential damages done from the improper installation and unprofessional ism of the contractors Accuserve referred us to. there have been at least 10 heavy rains since I filed this complaint to get my house fixed and my house is just getting worst and worse. my windows all fogged up the other day and that just isn't right.

  Customer response

  07/23/2024

  The response for complaint ******** is REJECTED!
  This company refuses to honor there warranty. The contractor referred by our insurance company did more harm than good with the repairs. Only one side of my house received new siding which is wavy  and looks worse than the siding that was on the house that was at least 15 years old. 5 of 27 storm windows were broken, he removed all 27 from my house and replaced all of them with lesser quality frames, glass and screens. So essentially 22 perfectly good windows were stolen from my home. He stole trim off of my front door. They replaced the roof on my garage and sided two sides of it when nothing was supposed to be done on the garage until the house repairs were completed. He then claimed to have replaced both garage doors which were not approved to be replaced and were not replaced. When we complained to accuserve they gave us the run around. Eventually someone who was a supposed third party inspector did come and take pictures and supposedly filed a report for accuserve. Accuserve said nothing was wrong with the work but they will not provide a copy of that inspection to us stating we do not have the right to it as it is for their internal information and use only and it is there property. Now that we have filed a complaint with the BBB they are offering options to make amends. None of which are acceptable nor trustworthy. If nothing was wrong then provide the third party report. I expect a full refund of my original claims value, all damages caused by the contractor to be covered and all my windows replaced with the same quality materials.

  

  Business response

  07/26/2024

  Accuserve is in direct communication with the named insured, Ms. Tompsett-Welch, and the complainant, *** ******* ********(daughter-in-law of named insured). The complaint was not filed by the named insured and was filed by the daughter-in-law. When we spoke with the named insured after the filing of the BBB complaint, the named insured stated she had no knowledge of the complaint and that this had not been discussed with her previously. On July 10th, we provided all available options for completing the remaining repairs to the named insured. According to our conversation with the daughter-in-law on Monday July 22nd, she advised Accuserve that they have sourced their own contractor, who is scheduled to visit the property this week to provide an itemized estimate for the repairs. 
  
  The current documentation submitted to Accuserve does not reflect the extent of damages claimed by the daughter-in-law. Therefore, we have requested additional documentation. Accuserve is committed to ensuring that all claim approved repairs are completed and any verified warranty concerns are addressed. We will continue to collaborate with the named insured as all repair decisions must be made by her.   

  Customer response

  07/29/2024

  Hi ****,
  
  It was great meeting you and your kiddos!  They are so precious
  
  Okay, so here is the deal…as I mentioned to you, we can’t know what we can’t see.
  
  Feel free to send all or what is below to the insurance company or former company who installed this.
  
  We won’t know any possible damage to under siding and or windows, until we tear off siding around windows and remove wraps.
  
  Since you are getting water inside around some windows, and there is fogging happening on most windows, it sounds to me as though they were not installed correctly or sealed properly.
  
  That could be a large expense on its own.  Most installers are charging $450 – 500 for small to medium windows.  Many of the windows could be 3 across and mulled together.  I can’t tell for sure without wraps gone.  So I have to price it as individual windows.
  
  If they are 3 across but 1 unit, those would be considered large windows, so the price would be closer to $600-750 per window.  That would be removing them and reinstalling them again, making sure shims were in place, where needed, proper foam installation and sealing them up outside by using flashing at the top and butyl tape around the sides and bottom.
  
  Were these windows suppose to be full replacement windows?  Or did insurance expect pocket windows to be used?  Original installer or contractor should have provided an actual window bid to insurance company, which they almost always approve, to replace all windows down to the studs, as a full window replacement.
  
  If these are pocket windows, there will be leaking continually as they are placed inside the original window frame and will shift and allow water inside.
  
  Then the siding is installed after window and front door issue is resolved.  The front door looks horrible.  They didn’t trim down the foam around the door, so the trim should be over that and closed off to weather.
  
  I don’t think the front door requires reinstallation, however, it needs some work to finish it.  And I am unsure if flashing and tape was placed around this door as it should have before siding installed.
  
  There could be wood, drywall or other issues inside the walls if water is coming in and window area is wet inside.  I can’t know the fix or cost of that fix until siding is removed and wrap first, and quite possibly removal of window and reinstall it.
  
  I have put in a miscellaneous qty of 5 at $250 for some work to be done around windows and doors, but this amount would not cover removal and installation of any windows or doors.
  
  It is possible that a good portion of the siding could be reused and reinstalled.  However, some of it, now that it has waves/bowed in it, J channel is bowed out, may not be reusable.  Also, many pieces appear to be not locked properly, and could require new material to be purchased to cover these sections.
  
  It also appeared to me that on the back elevation and the left elevation (when facing the front of the house) the top 2 panels are very dirty, as if they are been there for many years.  It doesn’t appear that this siding was replaced.
  
  There were other areas on the gables, that also don’t appear to be replaced, and pieces are coming off.  The gables on the back elevation, the D-Rakes look bent up and not installed correctly.
  
  This presents problems.  I was told this siding, which appears to be Vytek, is no longer being made.  CertainTeed bought this out.  Unless there is a pile of this color somewhere, it wouldn’t be fair for the homeowner, the insurance paid for a full house siding replacement, to have to accept a puzzle piece siding done of her house.
  
  Original installer/contractor should verify the brand is Vytek, it is D4 clapboard, I am unsure of the strength, appears to be .040 or .042.
  
  Most areas feel as though there is no insulation behind siding.  Without seeing the paperwork for the claim, I can’t say if insurance paid for this, or if it wasn’t installed.
  
  However, all reputable installers recommend using at least ½” fanfold insulation to be installed to prevent warping, bowing and sagging of vinyl during weather changes.  This option should have been made available to homeowners before installing siding, even at their own cost.
  
  Due to the very poorly installed siding and wraps, the entire house requires at least reinstallation of the same siding, possibly with additional new siding to be used where it was not or is bowed or warped.  Also removal of all wraps and reinstall wraps around windows and doors.
  
  Removal of most, if not all gable fascia and install new fascia, check and reinstall or provide new D-rake for rear gables.
  
  Thank you!
  
  ***** ***** Office Manager/Estimator
  ******* ********** ***
  ***** ******** cell
  ***** ******** office

  This the report from the contractor we had come take a look. we provided Accuserve with the same images that were taking to document the damage and Accuserve is claiming there is no damage and telling us we can not look at the report they have regaurding the third party they had come out to inspect that stated there was no damage. im not happy
  

  Customer response

  07/29/2024

  
  Complaint: ********
  
  I am rejecting this response because:
  they are not making it right and not taking responsiblity for what they did my cointractor said this was the worst hes ever seen in his 40 year career
  Sincerely,
  
  ******* ********

  

  Business response

  08/02/2024

  Accuserve received the estimate from the contractor of choice for the named insured and her daughter in law earlier this week. Accuserve is in the process of conducting a thorough review with upper management. Once our review is completed, we will update the named insured and present an appropriate resolution plan. Accuserve is committed to reaching a resolution for the insureds and will continue to collaborate with them directly until an agreement is reached. 

• Initial Complaint

  02/26/2024

  Complaint Type:

  Service or Repair Issues

  Status:

  Answered

  More info

  On 4/1/2023 my property sustained damage from a storm and we filed a claim with our insurance company, Liberty Mutual. As recommended by LM we went with their trusted contractor: Castle Stone Homes via Accuserve. When the approved scope was provided to us, we expressed our concerns that items were missing and the fence was scoped wrong. It was the wrong type and size fence, had missing parts, etc. CSH assured us that he would get a supplement submitted to correct the errors immediately. We did not hear from CSH for 3 months. At this point we reached out to both LM with requests to have a new contractor assigned and to have the scope corrected. At that point new CSH POC was assigned to our case as the and all parties agreed the scope would be fixed by CSH immediately. This was approximately late August. We started getting pressure to sign contracts for the incorrect scope and reiterated that we would not be signing incorrect legal documents for $60-100k. We continued to requst the supplements and updates, in that time we had multiple reps from Accuserve. All promising to get the supplement done. In November with snow impending we agreed to sign the contracts, under pressure that we had a hole in our roof that we could not wait any longer to repair. Work finally began on 1/2/24. Meanwhile we were still requesting the corrected scope without any progress. Due to the issues with getting Castlestone to complete the work and submit the scope adjustment, our case was "escalated" to Payton at Accuserve who was assigned in January to ensure Castlestone completed repairs and submit the supplement on their behalf. ****** agreed to have the corrected scope adjustment submitted within a week, we gave her pictures, measurements, and lists of exact parts needed. 3-4 weeks later we received a draft of the scope and it was still completely wrong. Our requested resolution from Accuserve is to repair all damage to the shed and house (no fence).

  

  Business response

  02/28/2024

  Accuserve is actively working with *** ****** and her insurance carrier to facilitate a resolution for her claim. Our established process dictates that all supplementing procedures must be routed through the insurance carrier for final coverage determinations. Please note that Accuserve is not authorized to engage in discussions regarding coverage decisions with homeowners. The insurance carrier is responsible for all coverage conversations. We have engaged in discussions with the *********** carrier claim representative, who is currently conducting a thorough review of these items to determine if coverage can be provided. Once a decision has been rendered, carrier will discuss with *** ****** and Accuserve will then move forward with next steps.

  
  With reference to *** ******'s fence, it is noteworthy that through the supplementing process, a significant portion of the measurements and specifications were provided by the ******'s. The Accuserve team supplemented to the best of their ability based on the documentation provided. As of 2/23/2024, consensus has been reached among the ******'s, the insurance carrier, and Accuserve to exclude the fence from the repairs being completed within the program and Castlestone. Accordingly, all funds allocated for these repairs will be refunded to the ******'s to enable them to hire a local contractor of their choosing. 

  
  Regarding the outstanding work to be completed by Castlestone, they are actively working with local suppliers to acquire the remaining necessary materials. We are closely coordinating with the contractor to establish precise timelines for each remaining task. We will continue to maintain open lines of communication with both the ******* and the insurance carrier until all approved repairs have been completed. 

  
  

  Customer response

  03/03/2024

  
  Complaint: ********
  
  I am rejecting this response because:

  
  1. A refund for the fence and light post have not been issued back to Liberty Mutual on our behalf. 

  
  2. All work has not been completed on house and shed. 

  
  Once the above are complete, I will accept response/resolution and close the case. There has been significant progress since we filed this claim, so we are hopeful this will be 100% complete in the very near future. We appreciate the BBB's help is expediting this work, along with the new cooperation of CastleStone Homes, Accuserve, and Liberty Mutual. 

  
  Please note that both CastleStone Homes and Accuserve also have BBB cases open, as we understand it will take the continued cooperation of all 3 parties to close out this case. There is also a joint case open with the Maryland Attorney General. 
  
  Sincerely,
  
  ******* ******

  

  Business response

  03/08/2024

  Accuserve, CastleStone Homes, & Liberty Mutual are diligently collaborating to reach a resolution for your claim. Regarding your refund, Accuserve has completed our portion of the refund process for all excluded repairs. Check #20080 has been issued to Liberty Mutual on March 6, 2024. Should you have any further inquiries regarding payment, we kindly ask that you direct them to Liberty Mutual for clarification. 
  
  In reference to the remaining repair concerns, particularly pertaining to coverage decisions such as the shed fascia, it's important to note that Accuserve does not have authority over coverage determinations. This responsibility lies solely with Liberty Mutual.  We can help put you in contact with your adjuster, who can provide more details around this aspect to you.  We recently presented two options for repair to address the remaining matching concerns for the door trim, doors, and shutters. Pending your approval, we will proceed accordingly and provide you with the appropriate color options for your selection. Once approval is received, we will promptly schedule the necessary repairs. With your confirmation this week all other repairs set to be completed by CastleStone, per the approved scope, have been completed at this time.
  
  Accuserve will continue to work closely with CastleStone and Liberty Mutual in adherence to our company's escalation guidelines. 

  Customer response

  03/15/2024

  Hello,

  This case was closed.in error, as I responded earlier today with the following reason for rejecting the response:

  1. The siding vent needs to be replaced

  2. The shed colors (shutters/door/trim) do not match

  3. The windows on the shed need to be replaced

  And note that accuserve requested this case be closed by me without resolution. 

  Please reopen the case, as I did respond in time. 

  

  Business response

  03/27/2024

  Currently, the shed doors have been painted, and the dryer vent has been replaced. The contractor has ordered the requested shutters, with an anticipated arrival within 1-2 weeks. Upon receipt, the contractor will proceed to install them and replace the trim with the agreed-upon color to ensure consistency. This course of action is expected to address the remaining repairs effectively.
  
  Regarding the window work, it's important to note that per your insurance carrier's communication on 3/18 and 3/19, the contractor/Accuserve will not be completing the window beading repairs. As previously indicated in Accuserve's email on 3/8, the window beading was excluded from coverage. Should you disagree with the current coverage allocation, your carrier has advised sourcing a window specialists to assess the windows and provide an estimate for repair directly to the carrier. 
  
  Accuserve has not requested the closure of this complaint without resolution. We remain fully committed to collaborating closely with both the contractor and the carrier to ensure that all of your concerns are addressed in accordance with the approved scope. 

• Initial Complaint

  06/28/2023

  Complaint Type:

  Billing Issues

  Status:

  Answered

  More info

  On 4/22/23 my basement was flooded and Acuserve subcontracted COIT Restoration to remove the water from the basement. COIT did the work, but recorded it inaccurately. My insurance company called me to verify the work conducted in the amount of $6,588.80. I told the insurance agent that was an excessive amount and they thought so too. She sent me the invoice for review. Accuserve did not have COIT verify their work by scanning the fans used. I called Accuserve several times, but no response until 6/27/23 I spoke to a Supervisor and explained that COIT double charged my insurance for the work completed. I explained to them that the bill was $1331.04 more than it should be and probably more. Accuserve did not verifiy the work was completed. COIT took pictures of the fans used in the pictures, many of which were duplicates. It feels like both of these companies are not confirming their work properly. The invoice stated I had 24 fans in my basement at one time in only a 1200 sq.ft basement. I believe this company commits insurance fraud by not verifying. This is to make money off the homeowner's insurance deductible. At the beginning, COIT asked me how much my insurance would cover. Spoke to the COIT rep this morning on 6/28/23 and he noted that there were 12 fans too many. Accuserve presses my insurance company to pay the bill and this company is very unprofessional and they are scam artists. They are not having their subcontractors verify the work properly and allow these companies to charge without proper verification. The pictures sent to me verify the false pricing. I would like the invoice re-evaluated and billed properly. Need help getting a resolution.

  

  Business response

  07/07/2023

  In review of the claim file, a reduced invoice has already been completed and sent to the insurance company.  The equipment initially invoiced was within industry standards, based on the information provided by the mitigation company on site; however, upon receiving an escalation from the insurance company and insured, we asked the mitigation company for additional documentation to support their invoice.  Additional documentation was not provided, so the invoice was revised based on feedback and documentation provided by the insured.  Accuserve did not pressure the insurance company to pay the initial invoice, nor did we attempt to scam anyone in this process.  Upon receiving notification of the potential overbilling, we took the allegation seriously and began reviewing the documentation in detail.  During that time, we were communicating with the insured and insurance company.  As the invoice has been revised, this issue is resolved.  If any outstanding questions exist, the insured is welcome to contact Accuserve, and we will ensure a timely response.

  Customer response

  07/14/2023

  
  Complaint: ********
  
  I am rejecting this response because: still no resolution on this.  Called the insurer they have not heard anything back from AccuServe as 7/6. It has been over 7 work days.  
  
  Sincerely,
  
  ***** *********

  

  Business response

  10/12/2023

  Upon receiving the initial escalation, Accuserve reached out to the assigned contractor to obtain additional documentation.  Absent of any additional documentation, the invoice was revised to reflect what could be validated, based on the received information.  A reduced invoice was sent out to the contractor on 06/29/2023, finalized and sent to the insurance company on 07/03/2023.  Accuserve received a request from the insurance company on 07/17/2023, indicating that they did not receive the email on 07/03/2023, so the invoice and supporting documentation was sent again on 07/21/2023.  Accuserve then called the adjuster to confirm receipt.  The insurance company has paid the revised invoice and the Accuserve portion of the claim has been closed.  The insured will need to continue working with their insurance company for the remainder of their claim.

• Initial Complaint

  09/02/2022

  Complaint Type:

  Customer Service Issues

  Status:

  Answered

  More info

  I opened a water leak claim with Hippo insurance and they said they were going to have the "adjuster" contact me. Instead, they had Code Blue contact me and they sent an aggressive contractor who wouldn't leave for 3.5 hours and kept insisting I sign paperwork on his iPad. The paperwork was a contract agreeing to hire them to demo the damage without even stating the cost. I repeatedly said no, and should have called the police when he refused to leave for hours. Do not let them in your house!

  

  Business response

  09/28/2022

  September 19, 2022 

  
  

  Code Blue, LLC 

  ** * **** ****** 

  ************ ** ***** 

  Better Business Bureau 

  ******** ************ 

  15 West Fourth Street, Suite 300 Dayton, OH 45402 

  RE: Case #******** / *******: ******** ****** 

  HSGwas retained by Ms. ******'s insurance carrier to assist in locating a contractor to Ms. ****** in the recovery process. Code Blue provided the name of a licensed and insured contractor to determine what the damages were and offer their assistance to get ******** ******'s home back to pre-loss condition. 

  The contractor went to Ms. ******'s residence. They attempted to explain to Ms. ****** that they were there at the request of her insurance company. They further explained that before they could assist Ms. ****** with the repairs, they are required to get a signed work authorization which is standard. After numerous attempts to explain this to Ms. ******, the contractor shared that Ms. ****** did not understand or did not want to use this process. The contractor left and informed Code Blue and her insurance carrier she would not agree to signing a work authorization. The insurance carrier advised Code Blue that they would work directly with Ms. ****** to assist her with her needs and requested Code Blue to close the file. 

  Sincerely, 

  ******** ****** 

  Director of Client Services 

  
  

*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. ↩