Posts Tagged ‘state farm’


How Does State Farm Insurance Handle Windshield Replacements?

Monday, November 9th, 2015

Auto Glass InsuranceA large number of motorists opt for State Farm Insurance for coverage. Of course, the company’s auto insurance provides coverage that’s comparable to most insurers. Each insurance provider tends to differ on auto glass and windshield replacements, though. Policyholders might be confused as to whether State Farm covers these replacements and when.

Does State Farm cover auto glass and windshield damage?

For the most part, the company does cover repairs and replacements for auto glass. Coverage is automatic for certain situations, and claims must be filed for others. A deductible is required based upon a policyholder’s plan. However, no deductible is charged for certain incidents. State laws can then have an impact on this entire situation, too.

Collision and Comprehensive Coverage Claims

If a motorist is involved in an accident, then he or she may file a claim under collision coverage. In this case, that policyholder will pay the deductible. All covered damage to the vehicle, including damaged auto glass and windshields, will then be repaired. The average deductible for policyholders under collision coverage is $500 at the moment.

Under comprehensive coverage, auto glass is sometimes covered with no deductible required. Policyholders will have to refer to the specifics of their own plan. Laws exist in some states that make auto glass repairs and replacements free.

Filing A Separate Claim For Auto Glass And Windshields

Many State Farm insurance policies allow policyholders to submit claims for damages to auto glass. For instance, damage occurring outside of an accident, like an errant rock, is covered under these separate claims. The deductible sometimes exceeds the cost of repairs, so motorists should consider paying for repairs or replacements out-of-pocket in that case.

State Farm Insurance: More Coverage Than The Competition

When it comes to auto glass repairs and replacements, State Farm offers more coverage than many insurance providers. In the end, policyholders need to read the fine print on their coverage plans to avoid problems. Each policy covers windshield replacement under some circumstances, but not all situations are covered in the most cost-effective manner possible.

Antitrust Cases Dismissed By American District Court Judge

Wednesday, September 9th, 2015

auto insurance repair trustIn Florida, an American district court judge has approved the findings of a magistrate judge, which ruled that numerous antitrust complaints – made by windshield repair firms throughout the country against several insurance providers — should be thrown out. Nonetheless, the judge allowed leeway for lawyers to submit modified complaints. Auto glass repair stores from twelve federal district courts claimed that multiple insurance firms had fixed prices. These cases were dealt with together by the district court judge in Florida. The judge remarked that the complaint made against State Farm by Louisiana was awaiting approval to be contested in Louisiana state.

Twenty-First Century Centennial Insurance Company Versus A&E Auto Body Incorporated seems to have ignited the court proceedings. Here, a few Florida windshield repair stores filed a case against State Farm (along with many other insurance firms) claiming that the insurers illegally depressed rates, via their direct repair packages. Allegedly, if the stores failed to play ball, customers were sent elsewhere.

In the context of this court battle, other similar complaints were made in Michigan, Arizona, California, Pennsylvania, Alabama, New Jersey, Illinois, Washington, Oregon and other states. In December 2014, the American JPML (Judicial Multidistrict Litigation Panel) sent these complaints to the American District Court in Florida. Due to the sheer number of cases and states involved, the presiding American district court judge requested assistance from the American magistrate judge, to facilitate case research and provide advice. Defendants and plaintiffs had the chance to submit rebuttal statements.

During their statements, the plaintiffs made claims about the behavior of defendants collectively. Initially, the legitimacy of collective pleading was called into question, but eventually it was given the OK. Nonetheless, Judge Smith concluded that plaintiffs should, at least, provide enough evidence related to each specific defendant – or enough facts pertaining to each corporate group of defendants – to link the defendants to the alleged illegality.

After the antitrust complaints from the fourteen cases were reviewed, the magistrate judge said that the group boycott and price fixing allegations were no different to those that were made in Florida. Therefore, the judge ruled that the complaints should be thrown out on the same basis that the Florida complaints were rejected. Furthermore, the magistrate judge ruled that the antitrust complaints made in New Jersey, Michigan, Virginia and Washington should be thrown out, due to insufficient evidence of a contract between the defendants. This ruling was approved by the American district court judge.

State Farm To Face Litigation In Louisiana

Monday, September 7th, 2015
Insurance policy Windshield Replacement

Insurance policy Windshield Replacement

When State Farm, the insurance and financial services company, was sued by the state of Louisiana, the move opened a floodgate of allegations. State Farm was sued for engaging in auto repair services that were both “unsafe and deceptive”. The major complaint against the firm was that it had used it influence and power in an unfair manner. State Farm holds a huge share of all auto insurance policies in the state of Louisiana. In 2012, alone, this company received over $1 billion in premiums and wrote about 66.6% of all automobile insurance policies in the state.

State Farm is accused of steering customers and policy holders to its preferred repair shops. This can be interpreted as abuse of office and unfair use of influence. To make matters worse, some of these “preferred shops” did not use original spare parts recommended by the manufacturer. Some of the parts used in these shops were described as “after-market”, “junkyard” and “knock-off” parts.

It has been established that State Farm has contractual relationships with the preferred shops. It was also discovered that the shops agreed to carry out repairs cheaply and quickly. In addition, an owner of a body shop admitted that State Farm was putting pressure on him to use after-market parts on cars he repairs for policy holders. This means that safety and standards were sacrificed for profit and convenience. According to the Louisiana suit, State Farm broke state laws by influencing the consumer in an unfair manner. It is also clear State Farm has contravened the laws that regulate monopolies and unfair trade practices.

State Farm responded to these allegations by stating that they are advocates of reasonable repair costs. They also added that customers have a right to choose repair shops and do not have to patronize shops recommended by State Farm.