Farmers Insurance Pricing Policy Favors New Customers Only?

By Christina Davis – February 9, 2017

Auto insurance company Farmers faces a putative class action lawsuit alleging it discriminates against longtime customers by offering preferential pricing to new customers while raising rates on its current customers.

Lead plaintiffs Charles Grigson and Robert Vale allege in their class action lawsuit that Farmers Texas County Mutual Insurance Company “betrayed” their policy holders through “illegal and discriminatory” policy regimes in early 2016.

The plaintiffs claim that when Farmers rolled out its policy pricing, it unfairly offered new customers lower rates and did not inform current customers about them. Further, argue the plaintiffs, Farmers raised rates on current policy holders.

Grigson alleges that he has been a Farmers Texas auto policyholder since 1981. He says that in January of 2016 he was insured by two Farmers auto policies, but was never informed about the available lower premium rates.

In early May, Grigson says became aware of the lower rates and attempted to apply, but was told he was ineligible because he was not a new customer.

Similarly, Vale alleges in the class action that he’s held a Farmers auto policy since 1997. He says his policy expired in May of 2016, but he was not made aware of the preferential pricing policy at the time of renewal and paid a higher rate.

Both plaintiffs were eventually allowed to apply for the lower policy rates, according to the complaint.

“In nearly all cases,” allege the plaintiffs in the class action, “the premium rate that an existing [Farmers] policyholder pays is higher than the premium rate a new customer would pay under FSPA for identical or virtually identical coverage.”

“The rate difference between FSPA and FA2 can be as high as 20-40%, or even higher,” continue the plaintiffs. “In some cases, individuals and/or families may save more than $1,000 for every six (6) month policy period by switching to FSPA.”

According to the class action lawsuit, the pricing regime that favors new customers violates Texas State Law. Additionally, the plaintiffs allege that there was no “actuarial basis” for the preferential pricing for new customers.

The plaintiffs say that they, and other existing Farmers policy holders, have suffered “significant economic damages” as a result of the pricing regime. “Existing [Farmers] policyholders have paid, and continue to pay, higher premiums than they should. Through its unfair discrimination, FGI is forcing Farmers Texas’s most loyal, existing FA2 policyholders to effectively subsidize the lower FSPA rates offered only to new Farmers Texas customers.”

According to the class action lawsuit, Farmers intimidated its insurance agents into concealing the better rates from existing policy holders. This will erode the trust between the policy holders and their agents, say the plaintiffs.

The plaintiffs are seeking an injunction against Farmers to stop the preferential pricing regime. Additionally, they are seeking damages and/or restitution, pre- and post- judgment interest and attorney’s fees and costs.

The plaintiffs seek to represent a Class of Texas Farmers auto policy holders affected by the preferential policy regime initiated on Jan. 4, 2016.

The plaintiffs are represented by Michael L. Slack, John R. Davis, and Paula Knippa of Slack & Davis LLP, Joe K. Longley of the Law Offices of Joe K. Longley, and Roger N. Heller and Jonathan D. Selbin of Lieff Cabraser Heimann & Bernstein LLP.

The Farmers Preferential Auto Insurance Pricing Class Action Lawsuit is Grigson, et al. v. Farmers Group Inc., Case No. 1:17-cv-00088-LY, in the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Texas, Austin Division.

Source: topclassactions.com

Farmers failed to pay for “diminished value,”

$48.5 Million Settlement Approved in Diminished Value Class Action Lawsuit Against Farmers Insurance Company of Washington

February 4, 2014, Tacoma, WA — Class Counsel for Plaintiffs; Reich and Binstock, LLP, the Law Office of Stephen M. Hansen, the Law Office of Scott P. Nealey, Susman Godfrey LLP, and Lieff Cabraser announced today that Judge Vicki L. Hogan of the Pierce County Superior Court entered a final judgment approving the settlement and dismissing all claims in the action with prejudice in the diminished value class action lawsuit Moeller v. Farmers Ins. Co. of Washington, Case No. 99-2-07850-6 (Pierce County, WA).Plaintiffs alleged that Farmers failed to pay for “diminished value,” which is the loss in value suffered by certain vehicles after they are repaired, in adjusting and settling certain types of collision and comprehensive losses with its insureds. Plaintiffs alleged that Farmers’ failure to pay for diminished value was a breach of contract and a violation of Washington’s Consumer Protection Act. During the litigation, the Washington Supreme Court interpreted the contract to cover diminished value under the collision and comprehensive portions of the policy, as written, and the case was set for trial on August 19, 2013 when it was ultimately resolved. Farmers denies any liability.The settlement resolves all the Class Members Claims against Farmers Ins. Co of Washington (“Farmers”) in exchange for the payment by Farmers of up to $48.5 million. Certain Farmers insureds who were members of the Class and timely submitted valid claims will be entitled to monetary compensation from the settlement.The settlement covered individuals who met the following requirements: (1) they had an automobile insurance policy with Farmers Ins. Co. of Washington, (2) they received payment between May 30, 1993 to September 13, 2002 for an accident involving structural (frame) damage and/or deformed sheet metal and/or where body or paint work was needed, (3) they did not receive payment for diminished value, (4) the repair estimate was at least $1,000, (5) the vehicle was at most six years old, and (6) the vehicle had less than 90,000 miles on it.

Counsel for named plaintiffs and class members are Debra Brewer Hayes of Reich & Binstock, LLP; Stephen M. Hansen of the Law Offices of Stephen M. Hansen, P.S.; Scott P. Nealey of the Law Offices of Scott P. Nealey, Terry Oxford of Susman Godfrey LLP and Michael W. Sobol of Lieff Cabraser.

http://www.lieffcabraser.com/Media-Center/Farmers-Insurance-Class-Action-Settlement-Approved.shtml

  • This site is published as a public service to warn consumers of the business practices of Farmers Insurance Group. This site is in no way affiliated, connected with, or sponsored by Farmers Insurance Group or any of its subsidiaries. All content and information on this site is my opinion or the opinion of those referenced. This site is for educational purposes. The information in the Forums or from other people, blogs or web sites are provided at face value, we have not confirmed any of these stories/opinions. Copyrighted material has been used for non-commercial purposes only. By accessing this site you agree to immediately contact us to report any incorrect data or misrepresentations of facts. We are not responsible for accuracy in story content. Individuals, news organizations, companies or government agencies referenced on this web site do not endorse this web site and are not affiliated with it (copyrighted materials used without permission). Links to any other sites are for informational purposes only and should not be considered an endorsement of the site. Copyright 2015 - FarmersInsuranceGroupSucks.com - All Rights Reserved