Consumer complaint received 2024-10-16 00:00:00
Product: Vehicle loan or lease — Loan
Issue: Managing the loan or lease — Billing problem
Company: UNITED SERVICES AUTOMOBILE ASSOCIATION
State: CA

Complaint narrative:
USAA insurance On XXXX XXXX car was parked in a shopping center and my car was hit from behind. Normally my husband is a pretty good person at fixing cars so I didnt think much of it until I drove off and my car was not safe to drive it seem like it was on hydraulics and not a steady drive at all in addition to the bumper barely hanging on.

I filed a USAA claim and spoke to an adjuster and gave her the information. I chose the auto body of choice which Ive been with this auto body for 15 years taking all my cars there. 50 days go by and there was inconsistency with the supplemental being sent in by the auto body, so during that time, there was no follow up regarding the juster to see if the supplemental was turned in or if it was denied etc. there was a gap and no one touching my file until I had to give up the rental From there, I waited a week supplementals turned in, and my rental was extended. During that time since my auto body does not specialize in XXXX XXXX. The car was sent over to XXXX XXXX for a diagnostic and the diagnostic. It was proved that because of the impact from the back when the car gets hit from the back, it normally moves forward and upright, which can cause damage to the front part of the car, causing the car to be not steady when driving. 

There was a few more supplementals submitted through XXXX XXXX that were approved each time, during that time the adjuster Gave the file over to a local adjuster by the name of XXXX. She gave me a call and drilled me pretty bad on the information until she understood that my car was sitting under a cement block at a parking stall so when I had to reverse the bottom part of the car scraped, she stated that any impact to the back with a car like XXXX XXXX and XXXX are very finicky because of the electronic piece so she said impact the back could impact the front. 

XXXX XXXX did a series of processing of elimination until they figured out what the issue was Each time and each supplemental was had a written consent that I have a copy of from XXXX stating it was approved to move forward with the supplemental I received a call from XXXX at the legal team and she asked me the same questions. I gave her as much information as possible and her accusatory tone and her language as if I didnt speak XXXX came off very discriminatory and addition to accusatory. She accused me of having, an incident in the front before the incident XXXX because there was a scratch on XX/XX/year> that I did not disclose during my XXXX interview. I stated that I have never called in a claim for a scratch or a scuff a dent the only time claims Ive been put in is when the car is not drivable that is my interpretation of damage, she also accuse me of why I chose the auto body shop and I explained being a mechanic for 30 years. He always stated to choose XXXX auto body that knows our cars and that we trust and that does work right and work. I explained to her that being a family of a military and a first generation XXXX it seem like she was trying to assume that either word cheats or steal. 

I waited XXXX weeks before anyone contacted me. I then spoke to XXXX, and XXXX said it was determined that that the impact of the car with the front and the back were too isolated incident which then I explained to her that when I spoke to XXXX, XXXX stated there is a connection and addition to the auto body, and XXXX XXXX, both stating the impact in the front was caused because of the impact of the collision from the back and also, I stated to XXXX, lets just assume and entertain for a second that it was too isolated incident both isolated incident. The car would not have been safe to drive the way the car was unsteady. I could XXXX XXXX XXXX miles an hour would not have been drivable enough for me to get a collision in the back versus the collision in the back, the bumper was falling off. The car is not safe XXXX XXXX. There would not be much time for the impact in the front so how can it be too isolated incident with the impact of both being isolated would make the car be completely unsafe. 

XXXX XXXX receiving supplemental and we have the documentation from ABC ourselves and a XXXX XXXX. We got a call today from XXXX stating that the claim was denied. I am requesting an outside XXXX, revisit this along with the process of appeal and reporting discriminatory issues. We have been long-standing USAA customers this treatment is outright discriminatory. 

XXXX & XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX CA XXXX

Company public response: Company has responded to the consumer and the CFPB and chooses not to provide a public response
Company response to consumer: Closed with explanation