Ms. Bigby Argumentative Essay
Previous Occurrences/Prior Claims: Ms. Bigby was questioned if she had any prior claims she may have filed for any other losses. Ms. Bigby went on to say that she did not recall as she had discussed this information with her adjuster in this case. As the investigator attempted to refresh her memory by asking if the claim was through Travelers Insurance, Ms. Bigby stated that she does not believe that she had to disclose this information to this investigator and thought that this interview was about her current claim. She then proceeded to say that that the complaint occurred approximately six months ago when she was using a rental car when it was broken into. She argued that many items were stolen from within the car and could not provide any details of the articles taken and the amount of the loss that included where and when the theft occurred. She said she did not have that information, and the Pasadena Police Department took a police report.
…show more content…
Ms.
Bigby complained that she thought this investigation was about her current claim and was told by the adjuster that a representative was to go over the items that were stolen from her vehicle, at which time she asked the name of the Supervisor in this case. She said she had not had any other previous occurrences of prior thefts of vandalism where she had made any other insurance claims. Ms. Bigby stated she did not have any history or debt and claimed she never filed for bankruptcy. Detail list of Stolen property. During the meeting with Ms. Bigby, the investigator went over to the list of items which were reportedly stolen from her vehicle on the DOL. A numerated list was provided to this investigation that insured stated that belonged to her. She said most of the items on the list incorporated within this research were purchased through the method of cash. She said most of the items were new and used but were in excellent condition, including the vintage fur
coats. The insured claimed she did not have her Verizon account and claimed she sent the adjuster a copy of the receipts she had for the iPhones in this case. The only receipt Bigby had was a Verizon receipt showing dated 5/19/2016 for an iPhone 6sPlus for $849.99 which was purchased on the insured's payment plan. The receipt did not show any other form of payment for this particular cell phone. Though the insured claimed she bought most of the items listed in this claim, she had placed some receipts from other purchases that were not combined with this loss, which she failed to show the receipts for the acquisition of the items stolen in question. The only clear receipt she provided was a Macy’s receipt for a pair of Giuseppe women’s shoes that estimated at 693.24 which she placed on her Macy’s charge card. According to the receipt, the investigator noted that the insured used a gift card and only paid $93.24 for the purchase of these women’s shoes. Investigation: The insured showed the two parking spaces which are assigned to her. Photos were taken. The insured was uncertain in allowing the investigator to check the entire rest of her apartment and allotted for the investigator viewed the interior of the Insured's residence by obtaining photographs of the closeted spaces within the home. The investigator took note of a Louis Vuitton suitcase in the hallway closet (Insured is claiming two Gucci luggage bags). This would indicate that the Insured does own/purchase the types of items being requested. Departed: 12:40 pm.
Ms.
Bigby complained that she thought this investigation was about her current claim and was told by the adjuster that a representative was to go over the items that were stolen from her vehicle, at which time she asked the name of the Supervisor in this case. She said she had not had any other previous occurrences of prior thefts of vandalism where she had made any other insurance claims. Ms. Bigby stated she did not have any history or debt and claimed she never filed for bankruptcy. Detail list of Stolen property. During the meeting with Ms. Bigby, the investigator went over to the list of items which were reportedly stolen from her vehicle on the DOL. A numerated list was provided to this investigation that insured stated that belonged to her. She said most of the items on the list incorporated within this research were purchased through the method of cash. She said most of the items were new and used but were in excellent condition, including the vintage fur
coats. The insured claimed she did not have her Verizon account and claimed she sent the adjuster a copy of the receipts she had for the iPhones in this case. The only receipt Bigby had was a Verizon receipt showing dated 5/19/2016 for an iPhone 6sPlus for $849.99 which was purchased on the insured's payment plan. The receipt did not show any other form of payment for this particular cell phone. Though the insured claimed she bought most of the items listed in this claim, she had placed some receipts from other purchases that were not combined with this loss, which she failed to show the receipts for the acquisition of the items stolen in question. The only clear receipt she provided was a Macy’s receipt for a pair of Giuseppe women’s shoes that estimated at 693.24 which she placed on her Macy’s charge card. According to the receipt, the investigator noted that the insured used a gift card and only paid $93.24 for the purchase of these women’s shoes. Investigation: The insured showed the two parking spaces which are assigned to her. Photos were taken. The insured was uncertain in allowing the investigator to check the entire rest of her apartment and allotted for the investigator viewed the interior of the Insured's residence by obtaining photographs of the closeted spaces within the home. The investigator took note of a Louis Vuitton suitcase in the hallway closet (Insured is claiming two Gucci luggage bags). This would indicate that the Insured does own/purchase the types of items being requested. Departed: 12:40 pm.