@Progressive Blog

Statement on the Fisher Case

Posted by Progressive _ on 8/14/2012 at 2:00 PM

I’d like to take this opportunity to explain Progressive’s role in this complex case. First and foremost, our deepest sympathies go out to Kaitlynn Fisher’s family.

To be very clear, Progressive did not serve as the attorney for the defendant in this case. He was defended by his insurance company, Nationwide.

There was a question as to who was at fault, and a jury decided in the Fisher family’s favor just last week. We respect the verdict and now can continue to work with the Fisher family to reach a resolution.

Chris Wolf
Claims General Manager
Progressive

Tagged with:

Comments

But were you on his side at all? Against the family of the deceased?
Posted on 8/14/2012 at 2:18 PM by Nathan
This is a very insulting statement. Good luck with your PR strategies..so fair they are a big failure.
Posted on 8/14/2012 at 2:21 PM by ann
What's not clear is Progressive's involvement with the case and what role your company played in the situation. Your PR department has failed to communicate that in a clear, concise, and responsible manner, which is much of the reason why your company is receiving the negative publicity we've seen over the past 24 hours.
Posted on 8/14/2012 at 2:22 PM by Joey Beachum
This doesn't make you seem any less heartless. In fact, I am now convinced of your callousness in this situation. Shame on you.
Posted on 8/14/2012 at 2:23 PM by Mike
This is a very insulting statement. Good luck with your PR strategies..so fair they are a big failure.
Posted on 8/14/2012 at 2:25 PM by ann
You need to "work with the Fisher family to reach a resolution"?? What the hell kind of nonsense is that? The only acceptable resolution is the obvious one. Ms Fisher had an insurance policy with your company. That policy stated you would pay in the event she was injured or killed by an under-insured driver. She was killed by an under-insured driver. Now, you pay. That's it. Period. Nothing else to discuss. The fact that you think there is some other viable solution to this issue is beyond ludicrous. It is revolting.
Posted on 8/14/2012 at 2:26 PM by Paul Lalli
Lousy response.
Posted on 8/14/2012 at 2:32 PM by Sad Flo
Did Progressive provide any sort of contribution towards the defense? Money, information, personnel, et cetera?
Posted on 8/14/2012 at 2:33 PM by Dave
The resolution is easy, you pay what you owe and without further delay. Is this not something you understand?
Posted on 8/14/2012 at 2:35 PM by David Whatley
"To be very clear, Progressive did not serve as the attorney for the defendant in this case. He was defended by his insurance company, Nationwide." BUT, Progressive's in-house attorney Jeffrey R. Moffet assisted the defense. Are you denying that?
Posted on 8/14/2012 at 2:39 PM by susan
And yet, official court documents list you as a defendant in the case. http://casesearch.courts.state.md.us/inquiry/inquiryDetail.jis?caseId=24C11002185&loc=69&detailLoc=CC
Posted on 8/14/2012 at 2:39 PM by Curious
If Nationwide defended the guy, that does change things quite a bit. Thanks for the update.
Posted on 8/14/2012 at 2:39 PM by Mason
This has to be the worst, most heartless response I've ever seen. So glad I cancelled my Progressive Policy
Posted on 8/14/2012 at 2:41 PM by Jeff
Why was he defended by Nationwide if Nationwide already paid out the claim? They had no financial interest in defending him, and if he was underinsured his policy certainly didn't include legal representation. You were the ones who would gain by him being found Not Guilty, so I believe Fisher that you defended them. I would like to see a statement from the attorneys saying you did not pay their fees.
Posted on 8/14/2012 at 2:43 PM by Jen
Chris, this statement doesn't explain your role in the case. It explains what your role was not. You did not defend the other driver. It mentions the result of the case. But that doesn't answer the question you said you'd answer at the outset: What did Progressive do? And how can we all better understand the process of resolving disputed uninsured/underinsured motorist claims?
Posted on 8/14/2012 at 2:46 PM by Michael Belisle
instead of "working with them to reach a resolution," why not just pay the claim? do the right thing. that's the only way you'll turn this fail around.
Posted on 8/14/2012 at 2:48 PM by Amy
What does "did not serve as the attorney" mean? Did Prorgessive provide other kinds of legal advice or services? Even if none was provided, the denial of the claim is inhumane and shameful. I would be embarrassed to work for this company.
Posted on 8/14/2012 at 2:48 PM by Jim
The following document: http://tinyurl.com/9zfqmzt Says the following things: Donald L. Speidel Managing Attorney Jeffrey Moffet Christine S. Britton Devon Doane ALL ATTORNEYS ARE ADMITTED IN MD AND ARE EMPLOYEES OF PROGRESSIVE CASUALTY INSURANCE COMPANY Which give us the conclusion: You are lying.
Posted on 8/14/2012 at 2:49 PM by DanB
Can you please explain the role that your attorney Jeffrey R. Moffet did play?
Posted on 8/14/2012 at 2:51 PM by Nicole
Progressive needs to do the honorable thing and pay the Fisher family what they are rightly owed, according to the terms of the insurance policy Ms. Fisher had purchased, instead of shirking their responsibility. This poor family has been through enough with the tragic loss of their daughter.
Posted on 8/14/2012 at 2:55 PM by AC
Can you please explain what role Progressive's in-house attorney Jeffrey R. Moffet had in the case? Was he paid by Nationwide?
Posted on 8/14/2012 at 2:56 PM by C.Scott
ummm, you didn't explain progressive's role at all, actually.
Posted on 8/14/2012 at 2:57 PM by orangebird
This is a laughable response. Especially after the auto-robot replies expressing that same insincere concern for the family. In fact, it reads as though this post was written by a bot. The fact that you allowed this situation to get to this point, even if there were misunderstandings of any sort by the claimants, just show how uninterested Progressive is in its paying clients. The cheerful, smiley dismissal of all concern by people around the country should be a major concern, but apparently you think that as long as you let things stretch out as long as humanly possible, trying at every step to avoid paying the money you owe the claimants, then you're doing your job. Serve the shareholders before you serve your customers. Hold onto that money like grim death. The company's behavior is inexcusable, and your impersonal, automated replies, followed by silence, followed by this poor excuse for an explanation, none of this is going unnoticed. You probably think this is a 'social media' problem, but it's an issue of behaving like a company staffed by humans instead of robots. This 'Statement' does nothing to dissuade anyone that humans are in very, very short supply at Progressive. Hope your executives enjoy their bonuses!
Posted on 8/14/2012 at 3:02 PM by Omar Pavem
I think the Fisher family's point is that you paid for the defendant's defense, not that you provided it. Though that may be legal, and in compliance with your policy, do you think it's ethical? Would you do the same to me?
Posted on 8/14/2012 at 3:03 PM by Progressive Policyholder
absolutely terrible
Posted on 8/14/2012 at 3:08 PM by RJ
"Court documents obtained by the MailOnline also show Mr Fisher's allegations are entirely true." Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2188022/Not-Progressive--Insurance-company-defends-drivers-killer-court.html#ixzz23Y7KRN2Z Hm.
Posted on 8/14/2012 at 3:12 PM by Vile Curt
"Court documents obtained by the MailOnline also show Mr Fisher's allegations are entirely true." Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2188022/Not-Progressive--Insurance-company-defends-drivers-killer-court.html#ixzz23Y7KRN2Z Hm.
Posted on 8/14/2012 at 3:12 PM by Vile Curt
"The attorney"? Were members of Progressive legal team defending the driver or not?
Posted on 8/14/2012 at 3:14 PM by James Salsman
Why is Progressive's in-house counsel, Jeffrey R. Moffet, listed on the defendant's legal team? Progressive tried to slink out of honoring a policy, which is sadly standard for insurance companies. But Progressive slipped to a hideous low by then trying to defend the driver who killed their own policy holder. And now, Mr. Wolf, you're lying about it for your company. Stop digging the hole already, there's more than enough slime in it for the company.
Posted on 8/14/2012 at 3:16 PM by Kiersy Preston
#FAIL - on so many levels.
Posted on 8/14/2012 at 3:16 PM by Scott
I would suggest putting some context around this release statement with a brief summary. . Along with a description of what Progressives's role is / was... First statement sets me up to believe there is going to be further explaination. But I only get details of what the role wasnt.
Posted on 8/14/2012 at 3:19 PM by Chad
That was a very poor job explaining your position.
Posted on 8/14/2012 at 3:21 PM by Vic
That's seriously the best you could do? That's a pretty lame explanation and does not even touch the surface for plight you people put that family through!
Posted on 8/14/2012 at 3:25 PM by Jdubb
That is a very carefully worded statement. As a followup, since I can pay for a friend's legal fees and not "serve as the attorney" for him or her did Progressive facilitate in any way the defense of the individual who killed Ms Fisher? That could include, but is not limited to, assisting in paying the defendant's legal fees, providing evidence or otherwise consulting with the defense attorney. Also, why no apology for the obnoxious (at best) auto-tweets?
Posted on 8/14/2012 at 3:25 PM by Steve
This statement feels very incomplete. OK, you may not have served as the actual attorney of record for the defendant, but what role did you play in the trial? You need to explain that please.
Posted on 8/14/2012 at 3:25 PM by Harold Sogard
"Progressive's in-house attorney Jeffrey R. Moffet assisted the defense." "Court documents obtained by the MailOnline also show Mr Fisher's allegations are entirely true." Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2188022/Not-Progressive--Insurance-company-defends-drivers-killer-court.html#ixzz23YCkJ0fV
Posted on 8/14/2012 at 3:32 PM by are you serious
"Court documents obtained by the MailOnline also show Mr Fisher's allegations are entirely true." Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2188022/Not-Progressive--Insurance-company-defends-drivers-killer-court.html#ixzz23Y7KRN2Z Hm.
Posted on 8/14/2012 at 3:32 PM by Vile Curt
If you didn't represent him, then why didn't you mention that in your TwitLonger response? Why would Nationwide protect someone if his policy had paid out in full?
Posted on 8/14/2012 at 3:34 PM by Zach
Hi. Why are you lying? From the CASE. "It is this 19th day of May, 2011, by the Circuit Court For Baltimore City, hereby ORDERED 1. That Progressive Advance Insurance Company be and is hereby allowed to intervene as a party Defendant. 2. That Progressive Insurance Company is GRANTED all rights to participate in this proceeding as if it were an original party to this case."
Posted on 8/14/2012 at 3:35 PM by Nicole
Other sources claim attorney Jeffrey Moffet assisted the defense team. He is listed as an employee. Can you confirm / deny?
Posted on 8/14/2012 at 3:42 PM by Will
Relieved customer here. Thank you.
Posted on 8/14/2012 at 3:51 PM by Michael M
That's not the claim; the claim is that Progressive financed the defense by paying for the defense attorneys. Do you deny that, or that Progressive contributed in any way - financially or otherwise - to the defense rather than the plaintiff?
Posted on 8/14/2012 at 4:03 PM by Naomi Hanvey
But you didn't explain Progressive's role in this complex case. Nationwide was the defendant's attorney, I get it. What was Progressive's role? Why were you even involved, if the case was not brought by you nor were you the Fisher's attorney? What was Progressive's role exactly?
Posted on 8/14/2012 at 4:03 PM by James Keith Pillow
I'm glad you cleared this up. There were many false facts floating around the internet discussion forums.
Posted on 8/14/2012 at 4:03 PM by Michael
Dear Mr. Wolf: Thank you for clarifying. Why are you people dragging your feet on a "resolution"? Seems to me you need to do only two things: apologize to the Fishers for dragging them through court and write them a check.
Posted on 8/14/2012 at 4:15 PM by Marcia MacInnis
I would never in a million years purchase Progressive Insurance as a direct result of this case/issue. You took someone going through a horrible experience, and made it WORSE.
Posted on 8/14/2012 at 4:17 PM by Nick
By "work with the Fisher family to reach a resolution" you mean "pay them what you owe them in full," right?
Posted on 8/14/2012 at 4:18 PM by Shawn
Doc No./Seq No.: 2/2 File Date: 05/31/2011Close Date:Decision: Document Name: Order of Court It is this 19th day of May, 2011, by the Circuit Court For Baltimore City, hereby ORDERED 1. That Progressive Advance Insurance Company be and is hereby allowed to intervene as a party Defendant. 2. That Progressive Insurance Company is GRANTED all rights to participate in this proceeding as if it were an original party to this case. (Brown,J)
Posted on 8/14/2012 at 4:24 PM by Anonymous
Chris...Did Progressive provide or pay for the Fishers' legal services in the case against Nationwide? If not, will they be reimbursed?
Posted on 8/14/2012 at 4:39 PM by Van
That's a great semantic distinction you've made. But here's the thing: Progressive filed a motion to intervene as an interested party for the defense, a motion which was allowed, so... Basically, while Progressive's legal counsel did not appear as the attorney on record for the original defendant, it appears you instead merely "stepped in front" of him and so instead TECHNICALLY (and I can't stress that enough) defended yourself instead of the person responsible for killing your policy holder, even if the end result would still be proving he was not negligent so that Progressive would not have to honor the policy.
Posted on 8/14/2012 at 4:44 PM by Doubting Thomas
Could you elaborate more? It's been years since her death, she thought she had a robust policy that protected her, and you've yet to compensate her estate. Why would anyone want a product from you if they are going to have to go through something similar???
Posted on 8/14/2012 at 4:44 PM by Jason Howlin
Chris, I have a relatively simple question for you. Leaving aside the "he said, she said" of exactly who was providing legal counsel for the defense, what exactly has been the problem here? Having read through the original posting from the surviving family member, I completely fail to see why your company has allowed this situation to escalate this far. The defendant's insurance apparently placed fault quickly enough. How can you claim that Progressive can now "continue to work with the Fisher family to reach a resolution" when by all appearances, Progressive has done everything possible to avoid said resolution? In more general terms, what is the purpose of having underinsured motorist coverage if it takes this much effort to get you to pay? I sincerely hope this comment is allowed to post, and that you and your company do a lot more to explain and justify your actions in this case. My fiancee and I have been thinking of changing insurance companies, and this incident has taken Progressive from one of my top three choices to the bottom of the list.
Posted on 8/14/2012 at 4:46 PM by Dave
Why did your attorneys file a substitution of service request?
Posted on 8/14/2012 at 4:53 PM by Flo
You do realize that news is reporting the opposite correct? "Although the defendant was "technically" defended by Nationwide, news reports indicate that Progressive's in-house attorney, Jeffrey R. Moffet, assisted in that defense." Stop lying and do the right thing, or the internet is taking you down. We've done it before.
Posted on 8/14/2012 at 5:10 PM by Kilgore Trout
You may not have paid for his lawyer, but you were part of the defense: Circuit Court for Baltimore City - Civil System Case Number: 24C11002185 Title: Joan Fisher, et al vs Ronald Kevin Hope III It is this 19th day of May, 2011, by the Circuit Court For Baltimore City, hereby ORDERED 1. That Progressive Advance Insurance Company be and is hereby allowed to intervene as a party Defendant. 2. That Progressive Insurance Company is GRANTED all rights to participate in this proceeding as if it were an original party to this case.
Posted on 8/14/2012 at 5:14 PM by will phule
But none of this really excuses the fact that Fisher's family had to go to trial in the first place because Progressive — Katie's insurance provider — refused to make good on her policy, which required the company to pay what the underinsured driver could not. Additionally, Wolf, the Progressive rep, doesn't address the fact that Progressive's in-house attorney, Jeffrey R. Moffet, reportedly assisted the defendant's lawyer, or the fact that court documents clearly state that, on May 19th of last year, Progressive was granted an allowance by the Circuit Court for Baltimore "to intervene as a party Defendant." I think we both know you'll never post this, but just so you know, I'm doing everything I can to make this viral, and to let the world know what horrible people you are. You make me sick.
Posted on 8/14/2012 at 5:18 PM by Is that right?
Seveal years ago, I purchased Progessive insurance for my motorcycle because it was very afforable compared to other options. I have since stopped riding, I removed this motorcycle and added 2 automobiles to this policy, because of the affordability. Just so that I understand the potential outcome; if I've purchased the option to cover an under-insured driver, and I (or my beneficiaries on my behalf) submit a claim based on this option, Progressive will fight to NOT pay this?? As a customer of Progessive Insurance that is disturbing, however, as much as I hate to say it... isn't that to goal of ALL insurance companies?? Their job is to take our money and pay us back the minimum amount due (or less) based on the policy "obligation"?? They are NOT here to service our every need, they exist only to make money off us. Even with that in mind, I'm going to research other options for my car insurance and I'm willing to pay more for the same coverage. Pay attention Progressive, because EVERYONE is watching AND sharing their experiences. You are in a customer service business and you need to take good care of the people who pay you for your service or they will look elsewhere for the servcies that you proved and you will be out of business. Signed: most likely, a past Progressive ciustomer.
Posted on 8/14/2012 at 5:20 PM by Wes Raspiller
... and so now Progressive is going to willing pay the full amount of Kaitlynn Fisher’s policy, right?
Posted on 8/14/2012 at 5:25 PM by Not a Progressive Customer (evar)
Wow, a technically true, but misleading and evil statement!
Posted on 8/14/2012 at 5:32 PM by John Stewart
"It is this 19th day of May, 2011, by the Circuit Court For Baltimore City, hereby ORDERED 1. That Progressive Advance Insurance Company be and is hereby allowed to intervene as a party Defendant. 2. That Progressive Insurance Company is GRANTED all rights to participate in this proceeding as if it were an original party to this case."
Posted on 8/14/2012 at 5:55 PM by jrh
I presume this "working with" process will begin and end with paying them in full, including legal fees?
Posted on 8/14/2012 at 5:58 PM by Michael
Here is Matt Fisher's response to this post. He disputes your account: http://mattfisher.tumblr.com/post/29432884849/today-in-response-to-my-blog-post-entitled-my
Posted on 8/14/2012 at 5:58 PM by Adam Conover
Care to respond to this? http://mattfisher.tumblr.com/post/29432884849/today-in-response-to-my-blog-post-entitled-my
Posted on 8/14/2012 at 6:08 PM by Asterios Kokkinos
This is either an outright lie or a disgusting half-truth. Progressive voluntarily included themselves as a defendant in the case, and hired a lawyer to against the plaintiffs (i.e. Matt Fisher's family). From the case information, available at: http://casesearch.courts.state.md.us/inquiry/inquiryDetail.jis?caseId=24C11002185&loc=69&detailLoc=CC "1. That Progressive Advance Insurance Company be and is hereby allowed to intervene as a party Defendant. 2. That Progressive Insurance Company is GRANTED all rights to participate in this proceeding as if it were an original party to this case." Chris Wolf's statement is corporate lying of the worst kind. This is as bad as (or maybe worse than) Progressive's behavior in the court case itself.
Posted on 8/14/2012 at 6:10 PM by David
How do you respond to this? http://mattfisher.tumblr.com/post/29432884849/today-in-response-to-my-blog-post-entitled-my
Posted on 8/14/2012 at 6:12 PM by Achilles
It is this 19th day of May, 2011, by the Circuit Court For Baltimore City, hereby ORDERED 1. That Progressive Advance Insurance Company be and is hereby allowed to intervene as a party Defendant. 2. That Progressive Insurance Company is GRANTED all rights to participate in this proceeding as if it were an original party to this case. Want to retool that explanation again? I sure hope you paid the full amount of Katie Fisher's policy.
Posted on 8/14/2012 at 6:12 PM by Pete Broussard
Short response, did you at any point in the case provide any defense for the defendant, or attempt to portray the killed at fault, why is the brother saying you helped the defense???
Posted on 8/14/2012 at 6:18 PM by andy
I don't understand what everyone is complaining about. Progressive clearly did everything they could, and no one else could have done a better job if they had tried. Well done, Progressive, for doing what is morally right. We all respect you very, very much.
Posted on 8/14/2012 at 6:23 PM by James McIntosh
This is interesting, considering that Mr. Matt Fisher has expanded his statement with a description of the actions taken in the courtroom by an attorney, who identified himself as an attorney for Progressive Advanced Insurance Company, who gave aid to the defendant.
Posted on 8/14/2012 at 6:30 PM by Brendan H. Banks
According to the State of Maryland's record of the case (http://casesearch.courts.state.md.us/inquiry/inquiryDetail.jis?caseId=24C11002185&detailLoc=CC), that's only correct in the narrowest technical sense. Yes, the defendant had his own lawyer, BUT Progressive petitioned the court to be considered an "interested party" on the defendant's side. Here's the court's response to Progressive's request: 1. That Progressive Advance Insurance Company be and is hereby allowed to intervene as a party Defendant. 2. That Progressive Insurance Company is GRANTED all rights to participate in this proceeding as if it were an original party to this case. In other words, Progressive DID participate as if it were a defendant in the case. It was not the defendant's attorney, that's true; it was a defendant. Mr. Wolf, is that smoke coming from your trousers?
Posted on 8/14/2012 at 6:39 PM by Jeremy Leader
The Daily Mail says court records indicate that indeed, Jeffery R. Moffett, one of Progressive's own lawyers, represented the defendant in this case. http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2188022/Not-Progressive--Insurance-company-defends-drivers-killer-court.html?ICO=most_read_module I have found numerous court documents showing Mr. Moffett representing Progressive in other cases. Those are public record, and they are quite damning. Makes me very glad that I'm not doing business with Progressive. I'll be sure to pass this story along, so others know that Progressive drags its feet in meeting its obligations, and apparently will even work against the best interests of its clients to save a buck for their bottom line. Shameful.
Posted on 8/14/2012 at 6:40 PM by CL Jahn
A resolution? How about you pay what you owe them? That'd be a nice resolution.
Posted on 8/14/2012 at 6:44 PM by Oz
To quote my friend, Mr. Fisher: "At the beginning of the trial on Monday, August 6th, an attorney identified himself as Jeffrey R. Moffat and stated that he worked for Progressive Advanced Insurance Company. He then sat next to the defendant. During the trial, both in and out of the courtroom, he conferred with the defendant. He gave an opening statement to the jury, in which he proposed the idea that the defendant should not be found negligent in the case. He cross-examined all of the plaintiff’s witnesses. On direct examination, he questioned all of the defense’s witnesses. He made objections on behalf of the defendant, and he was a party to the argument of all of the objections heard in the case. After all of the witnesses had been called, he stood before the jury and gave a closing argument, in which he argued that my sister was responsible for the accident that killed her, and that the jury should not decide that the defendant was negligent."
Posted on 8/14/2012 at 6:44 PM by Benjamin Ragheb
I am not a lawyer, but this is what I observed in the courtroom during my sister’s trial: At the beginning of the trial on Monday, August 6th, an attorney identified himself as Jeffrey R. Moffat and stated that he worked for Progressive Advanced Insurance Company. He then sat next to the defendant. During the trial, both in and out of the courtroom, he conferred with the defendant. He gave an opening statement to the jury, in which he proposed the idea that the defendant should not be found negligent in the case. He cross-examined all of the plaintiff’s witnesses. On direct examination, he questioned all of the defense’s witnesses. He made objections on behalf of the defendant, and he was a party to the argument of all of the objections heard in the case. After all of the witnesses had been called, he stood before the jury and gave a closing argument, in which he argued that my sister was responsible for the accident that killed her, and that the jury should not decide that the defendant was negligent.
Posted on 8/14/2012 at 6:46 PM by AccordingTo Matt Fisher
It is this 19th day of May, 2011, by the Circuit Court For Baltimore City, hereby ORDERED 1. That Progressive Advance Insurance Company be and is hereby allowed to intervene as a party Defendant. 2. That Progressive Insurance Company is GRANTED all rights to participate in this proceeding as if it were an original party to this case.
Posted on 8/14/2012 at 6:46 PM by casesearch.courts.state.md.us
I am not a lawyer, but this is what I observed in the courtroom during my sister’s trial: At the beginning of the trial on Monday, August 6th, an attorney identified himself as Jeffrey R. Moffat and stated that he worked for Progressive Advanced Insurance Company. He then sat next to the defendant. During the trial, both in and out of the courtroom, he conferred with the defendant. He gave an opening statement to the jury, in which he proposed the idea that the defendant should not be found negligent in the case. He cross-examined all of the plaintiff’s witnesses. On direct examination, he questioned all of the defense’s witnesses. He made objections on behalf of the defendant, and he was a party to the argument of all of the objections heard in the case. After all of the witnesses had been called, he stood before the jury and gave a closing argument, in which he argued that my sister was responsible for the accident that killed her, and that the jury should not decide that the defendant was negligent.
Posted on 8/14/2012 at 6:46 PM by AccordingTo Matt Fisher
Liars. "However, court documents clearly show that Progressive filed as an 'interested party' and was 'allowed to intervene as a party defendant' and 'granted all rights to participate in this proceeding as if it were an original party to this case.' Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2188022/Not-Progressive--Insurance-company-defends-drivers-killer-court.html#ixzz23YzrhoWE "
Posted on 8/14/2012 at 6:47 PM by Jumbo
You people are monsters.
Posted on 8/14/2012 at 6:49 PM by Ryan F
One of the attorneys assisting the defendant (and with power to act as defendant) was Jeffrey R. Moffet, who is indeed a member of the Progressive litigation team. This is available for all to see as public court records. I have little hope of this comment being approved, but it is in fact the truth.
Posted on 8/14/2012 at 6:52 PM by Kurt
To be very clear, Mr. Fisher maintains that you did indeed send a lawyer to represent the defendant. His response to your statement is here: http://mattfisher.tumblr.com/post/29432884849/today-in-response-to-my-blog-post-entitled-my
Posted on 8/14/2012 at 6:55 PM by Charlie Todd
You're unbelievable. So the attorney Jeffrey Moffat doesn't work for you? Making the switch to Allstate tomorrow.
Posted on 8/14/2012 at 6:57 PM by Jon
It shouldn't have had to gone to court in the first place. Please avoid this awful company.
Posted on 8/14/2012 at 7:07 PM by Jordan
The only acceptable resolution is to pay the value of the policy. I don't have Progressive as an insurance company. Now, it is a sure bet that I never will.
Posted on 8/14/2012 at 7:09 PM by Tim Schneider
It is this 19th day of May, 2011, by the Circuit Court For Baltimore City, hereby ORDERED 1. That Progressive Advance Insurance Company be and is hereby allowed to intervene as a party Defendant.
Posted on 8/14/2012 at 7:15 PM by Briana
Filthy and reprehensible. I'll never even consider having a policy with this company. How low some people and companies can go for the sake of blood-soaked money. How you can sleep at night is beyond me.
Posted on 8/14/2012 at 7:18 PM by James
While it may be narrowly true that Progressive "did not serve as the attorney in this case," why did the court grant an allowance to Progressive on May 19 last year to "intervene as a party defendant" and why did Progressive's in-house attorney, Jeffrey R. Moffet, assist the defendant's lawyer? You did see Matt Fisher's description of Moffet's role in the trial, did you not?
Posted on 8/14/2012 at 7:20 PM by Michael Boys
Update to original tumblr shows court data where Progressive asked and was granted privileges to act in place of defendant. Any more excuses? -- Former customer
Posted on 8/14/2012 at 7:26 PM by former customer
"To be very clear, Progressive did not serve as the attorney for the defendant in this case." No, but court records clearly show that Progressive's in-house lawyers played an active role in the defense. Blatantly lying in the internet age is a very risky proposition .. almost as risky as buying Progressive insurance.
Posted on 8/14/2012 at 7:27 PM by Lance Mannion
yeah, right.
Posted on 8/14/2012 at 7:31 PM by bob
Ronald Hope's defense was nevertheless assisted by Progressive Insurance's in-house attorney Jeffery R Moffet. http://casesearch.courts.state.md.us/inquiry/inquiryDetail.jis?caseId=24C11002185&loc=69&detailLoc=CC
Posted on 8/14/2012 at 7:38 PM by Brian
The funny part where it was an actual Progressive lawyer who represented the defendant though . . . how is that not YOU representing him?
Posted on 8/14/2012 at 7:48 PM by Shilo
If you want to work with the Fisher family and reach a resolution, pay her estate and stop fighting them on it.
Posted on 8/14/2012 at 7:50 PM by Brian Johnson
Um... http://mattfisher.tumblr.com/ The case information says the defendants attorney works for you.
Posted on 8/14/2012 at 7:58 PM by Erin Amsden
From the Case File at http://casesearch.courts.state.md.us/inquiry/inquiryDetail.jis?caseId=24C11002185&loc=69&detailLoc=CC ----- It is this 19th day of May, 2011, by the Circuit Court For Baltimore City, hereby ORDERED 1. That Progressive Advance Insurance Company be and is hereby allowed to intervene as a party Defendant. 2. That Progressive Insurance Company is GRANTED all rights to participate in this proceeding as if it were an original party to this case. ---- It certainly _looks_ like you were representing the defendant.
Posted on 8/14/2012 at 8:01 PM by Bryan Kilian
WTH is this Progressive? http://www.examiner.com/article/rather-than-pay-100k-life-insurance-policy-progressive-defends-woman-s-killer I've been with you for 14 years! Because of your actions regarding this woman & her family, I think it's time to find a new insurance company! SHAME ON YOU!!! Now you're trying to justify your decision & back-peddle, so that customers won't leave your company. I think your customers have seen the 'magician behind the curtain' so to speak! Yesterday I received a letter from 21st Century Insurance. I think I'll give them a call tomorrow! You've made a terrible mistake! I'm starting to think that you'll lose enough customers over your actions toward Kaitlynn Fisher's family that the lost $$ amount will exceed $100,000. Wanna bet?
Posted on 8/14/2012 at 8:05 PM by Savanna white
Did you compensate Nationwide in any way to facilitate the defense?
Posted on 8/14/2012 at 8:07 PM by Evan Moore
Progressive may not have served as the defendant's attorney in this case but court documents showed that you did file as an 'interested party' and were 'allowed to intervene as a party defendant' and 'granted all rights to participate in this proceeding as if it were an original party to this case.' So basically your ball was in the defendants court and did assist him. Our family will now be looking for auto coverage elsewhere.
Posted on 8/14/2012 at 8:08 PM by E. Palmer
Looks like you got caught with your pants down. Court records clearly show Progressive's attorney defended the case. How could you not know that?
Posted on 8/14/2012 at 8:16 PM by Phil Freeman
http://gawker.com/5934745/progressive-says-it-didnt-defend-man-who-killed-comedians-sister-nationwide-did?tag=progressive-insurance
Posted on 8/14/2012 at 8:18 PM by Heath Smith
From Matt Fisher's response (http://mattfisher.tumblr.com/post/29432884849/today-in-response-to-my-blog-post-entitled-my): "At the beginning of the trial on Monday, August 6th, an attorney identified himself as Jeffrey R. Moffat and stated that he worked for Progressive Advanced Insurance Company. He then sat next to the defendant. During the trial, both in and out of the courtroom, he conferred with the defendant. He gave an opening statement to the jury, in which he proposed the idea that the defendant should not be found negligent in the case. He cross-examined all of the plaintiff’s witnesses. On direct examination, he questioned all of the defense’s witnesses. He made objections on behalf of the defendant, and he was a party to the argument of all of the objections heard in the case. After all of the witnesses had been called, he stood before the jury and gave a closing argument, in which he argued that my sister was responsible for the accident that killed her, and that the jury should not decide that the defendant was negligent.  "I am comfortable characterizing this as a legal defense. "
Posted on 8/14/2012 at 8:27 PM by Lester
From the court website: Related Persons Information (Each Related person is displayed below) Party Type: Interested PartyParty No.:1 Business or Organization Name: PROGRESSIVE ADVANCED INSURANCE COMPANY Attorney(s) for the Related Persons Name: Moffet, Esq, Jeffrey R Practice Name: Law Offices Of Progressive Casualty Insurance Address: 800 Red Brook Boulevard Suite 210 City: Owings MillsState:MDZip Code:21117 Doc No./Seq No.: 2/2 File Date: 05/31/2011Close Date:Decision: Document Name: Order of Court It is this 19th day of May, 2011, by the Circuit Court For Baltimore City, hereby ORDERED 1. That Progressive Advance Insurance Company be and is hereby allowed to intervene as a party Defendant. 2. That Progressive Insurance Company is GRANTED all rights to participate in this proceeding as if it were an original party to this case. (Brown,J) Just saying, Chris,
Posted on 8/14/2012 at 8:34 PM by Mary
then who is Jeffrey R Moffet? Keep lying until this all goes away; that'll probably work. http://mattfisher.tumblr.com/post/29432884849/today-in-response-to-my-blog-post-entitled-my
Posted on 8/14/2012 at 8:37 PM by Erica
A company that would help defend a killer of one of their customers is disturbing and sickening. I'm going to give your company a few days TO FIX YOUR F* UP and pay what you owe to the Fishers if you don't fix and live up to being a decent company I'll take my business elsewhere.
Posted on 8/14/2012 at 8:38 PM by Shane W
How do you respond to the following description of the trial? "At the beginning of the trial on Monday, August 6th, an attorney identified himself as Jeffrey R. Moffat and stated that he worked for Progressive Advanced Insurance Company. He then sat next to the defendant. During the trial, both in and out of the courtroom, he conferred with the defendant. He gave an opening statement to the jury, in which he proposed the idea that the defendant should not be found negligent in the case. He cross-examined all of the plaintiff’s witnesses. On direct examination, he questioned all of the defense’s witnesses. He made objections on behalf of the defendant, and he was a party to the argument of all of the objections heard in the case. After all of the witnesses had been called, he stood before the jury and gave a closing argument, in which he argued that my sister was responsible for the accident that killed her, and that the jury should not decide that the defendant was negligent." Do you consider any part of this description inaccurate? Furthermore, if you respect the verdict, I take it then you will be paying out the full value of Ms Fisher's policy to her estate? Given the verdict reached, that is what is required, is it not?
Posted on 8/14/2012 at 8:38 PM by Michael Trimmer
This story disgusts me. Be assured that I will never be a customer.
Posted on 8/14/2012 at 8:43 PM by Meriam Good
You guys weren't his attorney, but your only telling half truths here. What you mean to say is that Progressive was not his direct attorney BUT you guys did consult and help his attorney during the trial. Shame on you for you low moral character in the face of someone being killed by a drunk driver, way to set the standard.
Posted on 8/14/2012 at 8:45 PM by troy
How do you respond to the allegations leveled against you after this statement? Their rebuttal to your letter where they give the name of the Progressive attorney appointed to the defense? The fact that you'd correct them on your own website and make this a commentable page is pretty questionable, first and foremost, but while I'm here I'll put it to use. I'm glad you respect the verdict and are finally agreeing to pay their policy, but why would you defend yourself at all against a tumblr post when a private resolution is all they ever asked for from the start? Either an attorney from Progressive did defend the driver who struck Katie's car, or he did not. If he did not, this is a pretty ridiculous allegation, one undeserving of it's own html page on your site, one that you could threaten with a libel suit if not retracted. If he did defend the driver, and I'm not sure what their motive would be to lie so publicly, you are (obviously.) the ones who are lying. So which is it? And why so eager to save face, yet keep it so hush-hush? Because it would be disgusting if they were telling the truth? Time will tell, that's all I'm saying.
Posted on 8/14/2012 at 8:46 PM by Katie
Pathetic!
Posted on 8/14/2012 at 8:50 PM by Kole Scarbrough
Order of Court It is this 19th day of May, 2011, by the Circuit Court For Baltimore City, hereby ORDERED 1. That Progressive Advance Insurance Company be and is hereby allowed to intervene as a party Defendant. 2. That Progressive Insurance Company is GRANTED all rights to participate in this proceeding as if it were an original party to this case.
Posted on 8/14/2012 at 8:53 PM by Kaylynne Harmon
That's a blatant lie. Glad you don't carry my insurance, as you obviously don't care about anyone.
Posted on 8/14/2012 at 8:54 PM by Kandi
You have upset the internet. Be warned.
Posted on 8/14/2012 at 8:57 PM by Anon
This post causes more questions than it answers. If Nationwide was defending their client, what role did Jeffrey R Moffat (reportedly a Progressive employee) have in the case?
Posted on 8/14/2012 at 9:02 PM by Chris Ransdell
Generally, explaining a role in a complex case takes more than 25 words, unless you are lying.
Posted on 8/14/2012 at 9:25 PM by Kevin s.
Are you saying the following is untrue? At the beginning of the trial on Monday, August 6th, an attorney identified himself as Jeffrey R. Moffat and stated that he worked for Progressive Advanced Insurance Company. He then sat next to the defendant. During the trial, both in and out of the courtroom, he conferred with the defendant. He gave an opening statement to the jury, in which he proposed the idea that the defendant should not be found negligent in the case. He cross-examined all of the plaintiff’s witnesses. On direct examination, he questioned all of the defense’s witnesses. He made objections on behalf of the defendant, and he was a party to the argument of all of the objections heard in the case. After all of the witnesses had been called, he stood before the jury and gave a closing argument, in which he argued that my sister was responsible for the accident that killed her, and that the jury should not decide that the defendant was negligent. http://mattfisher.tumblr.com/post/29432884849/today-in-response-to-my-blog-post-entitled-my
Posted on 8/14/2012 at 9:30 PM by manducasexta
I'm curious, why do the court records confirm that your company, did, in fact serve as legal defense on behalf of Ronald Kevin Hope III, defendant in this case. To quote said records, which are publicly available: "It is this 19th day of May, 2011, by the Circuit Court For Baltimore City, hereby ORDERED 1. That Progressive Advance Insurance Company be and is hereby allowed to intervene as a party Defendant. 2. That Progressive Insurance Company is GRANTED all rights to participate in this proceeding as if it were an original party to this case." Any comment regarding this discrepancy? Or do you plan to simply censor my comment and prevent it from being posted?
Posted on 8/14/2012 at 9:31 PM by Charlie Fleming
There are two sides to every story. Maybe you should fire a lawyer or two.
Posted on 8/14/2012 at 9:33 PM by Ken Gatanis
How wondrously gutless and mendacious of you to cleave to a notion of rhetoric as your only saving grace in this entire heartless enterprise. Progressive, you only have one way out of this mess: settle for the claim, apologize to your customers, and KNOCK THIS OFF.
Posted on 8/14/2012 at 9:38 PM by Keith Langill
Chris, The brother of the deceased has a very different account of this case -- specifically, that at the beginning of the trial "an attorney identified himself as Jeffrey R. Moffat and stated that he worked for Progressive Advanced Insurance Company." That person went on to do, according to the brother, all the things a defense attorney would do. It sounds like Progressive's attorney did act as counsel for the defendant in this case. http://mattfisher.tumblr.com/post/29432884849/today-in-response-to-my-blog-post-entitled-my If the brother has the facts wrong about this, please explain; if he is correct, Progressive has some apologizing to do and a mess to clean up. The account I read on Matt Fisher's blog is deeply disturbing. I hope Progressive will address directly and honestly the concerns he raises.
Posted on 8/14/2012 at 9:38 PM by Richard Moore
>> now can continue to work with the Fisher family to reach a resolution. This is an odd statement. Isn't the resolution simply to pay them the value owed? This post seems to imply that you still see wiggle room in the final payment. As a fellow Progressive member, this concerns me greatly as I have no control over another driver being sufficiently insured and I part of my premium with Progressive goes toward covering the difference should something happen.
Posted on 8/14/2012 at 9:41 PM by Arian K.
This statement, is a lie. No, Progressive did not represent the defendant. They did, however, voluntarily insert themselves as an additional defendant in the case in order to argue against their own policyholder to weasel out of their fiduciary obligations to her family. http://casesearch.courts.state.md.us/inquiry/inquiryDetail.jis?caseId=24C11002185&loc=69&detailLoc=CC Court record says: "It is this 19th day of May, 2011, by the Circuit Court For Baltimore City, hereby ORDERED 1. That Progressive Advance Insurance Company be and is hereby allowed to intervene as a party Defendant. 2. That Progressive Insurance Company is GRANTED all rights to participate in this proceeding as if it were an original party to this case."
Posted on 8/14/2012 at 9:44 PM by An Interested Party
I see there are no other comments here. Is that because they are all being censored?
Posted on 8/14/2012 at 9:45 PM by Ellery
Wow, you guys suck,
Posted on 8/14/2012 at 9:57 PM by Sean
Dear Mr. Wolf: The actual court documents contradict your statement. Did you fact check at all? Did you think that the fact that Nationwide also represented the defendant meant that Progressive did not do so as well? Actual court document showing that your statement is not true: http://casesearch.courts.state.md.us/inquiry/inquiryDetail.jis?caseId=24C11002185&detailLoc=CC
Posted on 8/14/2012 at 10:03 PM by William H Newman
You guys are garbage.
Posted on 8/14/2012 at 10:23 PM by Will Robertson
I am a 'diamond' progressive customer and find it sad that Progressive had to go such lengths to prevent a payout. I am very discouraged by the experience of a fellow insurer.
Posted on 8/14/2012 at 10:24 PM by Dinesh
Matt Fisher's response to this statement: http://mattfisher.tumblr.com/post/29432884849/today-in-response-to-my-blog-post-entitled-my
Posted on 8/14/2012 at 10:41 PM by Alex Khurgin
A company that treats people this way will never have my business.
Posted on 8/14/2012 at 10:44 PM by Matthew Burack
Why does Matt Fisher think you served as the attorney? Did Nationwide already settle prior to serving as his attorney? Why is that? Did you indemnify or otherwise pay the costs of the suit to Nationwide (or attorney's representing Nationwide?)
Posted on 8/14/2012 at 10:54 PM by real response please
Hmmm.. just curious as to why it has taken so long to settle, wasn't this poor girl killed over 2 years ago and the other driver admitted fault early on? And why does Maryland court records state Progressive as the defendant's attorney's employer?
Posted on 8/14/2012 at 10:55 PM by kate
Today, in response to my blog post entitled “My Sister Paid Progressive Insurance to Defend Her Killer In Court,” Progressive released a statement saying that ”Progressive did not serve as the attorney for the defendant” in my sister’s case. I am not a lawyer, but this is what I observed in the courtroom during my sister’s trial: At the beginning of the trial on Monday, August 6th, an attorney identified himself as Jeffrey R. Moffat and stated that he worked for Progressive Advanced Insurance Company. He then sat next to the defendant. During the trial, both in and out of the courtroom, he conferred with the defendant. He gave an opening statement to the jury, in which he proposed the idea that the defendant should not be found negligent in the case. He cross-examined all of the plaintiff’s witnesses. On direct examination, he questioned all of the defense’s witnesses. He made objections on behalf of the defendant, and he was a party to the argument of all of the objections heard in the case. After all of the witnesses had been called, he stood before the jury and gave a closing argument, in which he argued that my sister was responsible for the accident that killed her, and that the jury should not decide that the defendant was negligent. I am comfortable characterizing this as a legal defense. I wrote about this case on my blog because I felt that, in the wake of my sister’s death, Progressive had sought out ways to meet their strict legal obligation while still disrespecting my sister’s memory and causing my family a world of hurt. Their statement disavowing their role in this case, a case in which their attorney stood before my sister’s jury and argued on behalf of her killer, is simply infuriating.
Posted on 8/14/2012 at 10:57 PM by Charlemagne Boesh
” Progressive released a statement saying that ”Progressive did not serve as the attorney for the defendant” in my sister’s case. I am not a lawyer, but this is what I observed in the courtroom during my sister’s trial: At the beginning of the trial on Monday, August 6th, an attorney identified himself as Jeffrey R. Moffat and stated that he worked for Progressive Advanced Insurance Company. He then sat next to the defendant. During the trial, both in and out of the courtroom, he conferred with the defendant. He gave an opening statement to the jury, in which he proposed the idea that the defendant should not be found negligent in the case. He cross-examined all of the plaintiff’s witnesses. On direct examination, he questioned all of the defense’s witnesses. He made objections on behalf of the defendant, and he was a party to the argument of all of the objections heard in the case. After all of the witnesses had been called, he stood before the jury and gave a closing argument, in which he argued that my sister was responsible for the accident that killed her, and that the jury should not decide that the defendant was negligent. I am comfortable characterizing this as a legal defense. " From Ms. Fisher's family member's blog If you can be THIS low and this ugly, hopefully the spreading of this story via Social media will severely and NEGATIVELY impact Progressive's bottom line and serve as a warning to other companies that might consider such a despicable act. Shame.On. You.
Posted on 8/14/2012 at 11:00 PM by Rebecca Coomes
Why would a jury trial be needed in this case? Your company looks like blood-sucking profiteers and you, personally, look like a liar and an idiot.
Posted on 8/14/2012 at 11:03 PM by Jerry Scharf
I have always been a fan of Progressive due to Peter Lewis' commitment to social justice, but the Kaitlyn Fisher matter has clearly been mishandled and you should demonstrate corporate responsibility and own it rather than making excuses.
Posted on 8/14/2012 at 11:13 PM by Deborah Jacobs
Really? http://mattfisher.tumblr.com/post/29432884849/today-in-response-to-my-blog-post-entitled-my
Posted on 8/14/2012 at 11:17 PM by Andrew Murphy
Hi Chris, It appears that the facts differ from your statement: "To be very clear, Progressive did not serve as the attorney for the defendant in this case. He was defended by his insurance company, Nationwide." Please see: http://mattfisher.tumblr.com/post/29432884849/today-in-response-to-my-blog-post-entitled-my
Posted on 8/14/2012 at 11:34 PM by Dan McGinnis
http://mattfisher.tumblr.com/post/29432884849/today-in-response-to-my-blog-post-entitled-my
Posted on 8/14/2012 at 11:37 PM by Stacy
Mr. Wolf, "I’d like to take this opportunity to explain Progressive’s role in this complex case." Given that you didn't, in this post, explain Progressive's role in this case beyond attempting to exonerate your company of the accusations, and given that Matt Fisher, author of the post that incited this response in the first place has already responded to your explanation here (http://mattfisher.tumblr.com/post/29432884849/today-in-response-to-my-blog-post-entitled-my) do you have anything else to say? Do you maintain that you've explained Progressive's role? I'm in no way affiliated with the family in question, just curious. Even a private response to the email I submitted would be happily accepted. Please do not take this message as sarcastic or volatile. sincerely, Thomas Sabino-Benowitz
Posted on 8/14/2012 at 11:53 PM by Thomas Sabino-Benowitz
Then if you did not defend your client's killer, what exactly was your employee's role in the trial?
Posted on 8/14/2012 at 11:56 PM by Robin Deffendall
How much work does it take to pay the family what you owe them? Don't you wish you had just done that from the start?
Posted on 8/14/2012 at 11:59 PM by Wally
Chris, The brother of the deceased has a very different account of this case -- specifically, that at the beginning of the trial "an attorney identified himself as Jeffrey R. Moffat and stated that he worked for Progressive Advanced Insurance Company." That person went on to do, according to the brother, all the things a defense attorney would do. It sounds like Progressive's attorney did act as counsel for the defendant in this case. http://mattfisher.tumblr.com/post/29432884849/today-in-response-to-my-blog-post-entitled-my If the brother has the facts wrong about this, please explain; if he is correct, Progressive has some apologizing to do and a mess to clean up. The account I read on Matt Fisher's blog is deeply disturbing. I hope Progressive will address directly and honestly the concerns he raises.
Posted on 8/15/2012 at 12:02 AM by Richard Moore
you should be ashamed. i am canceling my insurance with you tomorrow morning.
Posted on 8/15/2012 at 12:03 AM by Jerry
If the jury found in their favor -- why do you need "to find a resolution"? Why not just pay the money you promised their daughter when you accepted her monthly payments?
Posted on 8/15/2012 at 12:05 AM by brett
I have coverage with Progressive via USAA and will be doing two things tomorrow: (1) Calling USAA and urging them to sever ties with Progressive, and (2) Finding a new company to insure my motorcycles.
Posted on 8/15/2012 at 12:05 AM by Jerrre Thomas
Hi, every so often we get a peek behind the mask of corporate civility. I, like so many others are disgusted by your company's actions in the face of this tragedy. And, like many others, I am re-posting Matt's story on every media site I use. Oh... and short-selling some Progressive stock. Regards, Geoffrey Gardella
Posted on 8/15/2012 at 12:07 AM by Geoffrey Gardella
Progressive didn't serve as the defendants attorney, but the lawyer who's fees you payed represented him. Sounds like your trying to use semantics do disavow your horrible actions. Personally I don't see the point of paying for insurance when that money will just go to defend whoever wrongs me. I bet your company did a cost analysis and I bet the result was "defend guilty party" was cheaper then "uphold our word and commitment" What happened to taking care of your customers instead of just taking their money. I don't care if you ever payout. I now know how you operate. I will never use your company and will be sure none of my friends or family do either. I believe companies like yours that care more about quarterly profits then the people you represent (not the stockholders) are one of the biggest reasons for America's decline.
Posted on 8/15/2012 at 12:12 AM by Tanker
So you don't pay the property damage claim against Fisher then you turn around and deny Fisger's 1 st party claim? Slimy
Posted on 8/15/2012 at 12:20 AM by Joe Public
From Matt Fisher: http://mattfisher.tumblr.com/post/29432884849/today-in-response-to-my-blog-post-entitled-my
Posted on 8/15/2012 at 1:01 AM by Jack O
Can you clarify why you petitioned the court to be considered a defendent in order to have your in house attorney Jeff Moffett, sit alongside the killer, conferring and offering advice, cross examining all witnesses, and even making a closing argument? If you weren't defending the killer, why was your attorney there and why did he tell the jury that the dead victim, whose policy you are refusing to pay,, was at fault?
Posted on 8/15/2012 at 1:06 AM by Randy Hill
Give them the money for god's sake! What is the point of this woman having an insurance policy when you won't make good on your agreement? You surely didn't hesitate to take her monthly insurance payments!
Posted on 8/15/2012 at 2:20 AM by Tanya
That's weird, public record kind of shows otherwise. http://casesearch.courts.state.md.us/inquiry/inquiryDetail.jis?caseId=24C11002185&loc=69&detailLoc=CC
Posted on 8/15/2012 at 2:38 AM by Emily
Did you straight up lie? From the court record (http://boingboing.net/2012/08/14/progressive-denies-defending-t.html#comment-619391707): "It is this 19th day of May, 2011, by the Circuit Court For Baltimore City, hereby ORDERED 1. That Progressive Advance Insurance Company be and is hereby allowed to intervene as a party Defendant. 2. That Progressive Insurance Company is GRANTED all rights to participate in this proceeding as if it were an original party to this case."
Posted on 8/15/2012 at 3:01 AM by Ted L
Would yo care to clarify on the involvement of progressive lawyer Jeffrey R. Moffat or just hide behind the fact that he was not the lawyer of record for the defense? http://mattfisher.tumblr.com/post/29432884849/today-in-response-to-my-blog-post-entitled-my
Posted on 8/15/2012 at 3:05 AM by Aaron Wagner
Would yo care to clarify on the involvement of progressive lawyer Jeffrey R. Moffat or just hide behind the fact that he was not the lawyer of record for the defense? http://mattfisher.tumblr.com/post/29432884849/today-in-response-to-my-blog-post-entitled-my
Posted on 8/15/2012 at 3:05 AM by Aaron Wagner
I have just read about the unfortunate incident concerning Matt Fischer's sister. My family has had Progressive Auto insurance for many years. I have felt guilty for most of this time knowing that my money was going to the flaming liberal chairman of Progressive Insurance Company Peter Lewis with his connections to liberal billionaire George Soros, the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) and other leftist organizations. I must say that I am not surprised to hear the a company with a name like "Progressive" would handle a claim in this manner. I have little doubt that if something were to happen to someone in my family, it would be handled the same way. However, the good news is that this case has finally made me get up off my rear end and contact another insurance company. I will be canceling my long-held policy with Progressive in the next few days. I'd like to thank Matt Fischer for sharing his experience and giving me that little motivation to do something that I should have done a long time ago.
Posted on 8/15/2012 at 3:38 AM by Joseph Luquette
I guess the question is this: Is Jeffrey R. Moffat an attorney under the employ of Progressive? If so, why was he cross examining the plaintiff's witnesses, conferring with the defendant, providing opening statements on behalf of the defendant? Finally, how can he do any of those things and NOT represent the defendant?
Posted on 8/15/2012 at 3:52 AM by Katrina
Would you care to comment on his rebuttal of your statement: http://mattfisher.tumblr.com/post/29432884849/today-in-response-to-my-blog-post-entitled-my?
Posted on 8/15/2012 at 3:54 AM by Dan Austin
Dear Chris, This from Matt Fisher's web site: "At the beginning of the trial on Monday, August 6th, an attorney identified himself as Jeffrey R. Moffat and stated that he worked for Progressive Advanced Insurance Company. He then sat next to the defendant. During the trial, both in and out of the courtroom, he conferred with the defendant. He gave an opening statement to the jury, in which he proposed the idea that the defendant should not be found negligent in the case. He cross-examined the plaintiff’s witnesses. On direct examination, he questioned all of the defense’s witnesses. He made objections on behalf of the defendant, and he was a party to the argument of all of the objections heard in the case. After all of the witnesses had been called, he stood before the jury and gave a closing argument, in which he argued that my sister was responsible for the accident that killed her, and that the jury should not decide that the defendant was negligent. " Response welcome
Posted on 8/15/2012 at 4:19 AM by andy
I hope that whatever money Progressive hoped to save by not paying what they owe the Fisher family, they suffer a thousand-fold in lost business.
Posted on 8/15/2012 at 4:41 AM by Ben
I will never buy insurance from Progressive. This is disgusting.
Posted on 8/15/2012 at 5:05 AM by Lawrence A Herman
From the official case information: t is this 19th day of May, 2011, by the Circuit Court For Baltimore City, hereby ORDERED 1. That Progressive Advance Insurance Company be and is hereby allowed to intervene as a party Defendant. 2. That Progressive Insurance Company is GRANTED all rights to participate in this proceeding as if it were an original party to this case.
Posted on 8/15/2012 at 5:13 AM by John
So is Mr. Fisher lying when he says Jeffrey Moffat identified himself as an Matterhorn for Progressive rather than Nationwide? http://mattfisher.tumblr.com/post/29432884849/today-in-response-to-my-blog-post-entitled-my
Posted on 8/15/2012 at 6:41 AM by Jeff
When will "progressives" learn that in the instant media world being sleazy and underhanded is always exposed. Lying about it just makes matters worse. Maybe you should spend less on commercials and fighting your policy holders in court and more on keeping promises to those who pay you. I may just one person. But you know what one person and the internet can do to your ad campaign. UPDATE: Matt Fisher published a Tumblr post a short while ago responding to Progressive's statement. He claims to have observed the following during his sister's trial: At the beginning of the trial on Monday, August 6th, an attorney identified himself as Jeffrey R. Moffat and stated that he worked for Progressive Advanced Insurance Company. He then sat next to the defendant. During the trial, both in and out of the courtroom, he conferred with the defendant. He gave an opening statement to the jury, in which he proposed the idea that the defendant should not be found negligent in the case. He cross-examined all of the plaintiff's witnesses. On direct examination, he questioned all of the defense's witnesses. He made objections on behalf of the defendant, and he was a party to the argument of all of the objections heard in the case. After all of the witnesses had been called, he stood before the jury and gave a closing argument, in which he argued that my sister was responsible for the accident that killed her, and that the jury should not decide that the defendant was negligent. He goes on to say that he is "comfortable characterizing this as a legal defense" and calls Progressive's "disavowing" of their role in the case "infuriating."
Posted on 8/15/2012 at 7:10 AM by Gary Oliver
Sounds like you guys are playing games. So you didn't defend him you just sent a guy to speak on his behalf, to make objections for him and offer his thoughts to the jury on his behalf. I call baloney on progressives part.
Posted on 8/15/2012 at 7:14 AM by Terry Riegel
Matt Fisher, in a post dated August 14, 2012 on his blog at mattfisher.tumbler.com, has challenged this assertion. As a Progressive customer, I am very concerned about the story Mr. Fisher has told about Progressive's behavior which, if true, is sickening.
Posted on 8/15/2012 at 7:29 AM by Matthew Champagne
Yea right. Wow you guys are a horrible company.
Posted on 8/15/2012 at 7:58 AM by Rob Krater
LIAR
Posted on 8/15/2012 at 7:59 AM by Dave Barron
Sounds like another weave and dodge. That Progressive supported the defendants in any way (to avoid payment) and not the Progressive policy holder is a clear indication of misplaced priorities. Profits over policy holders. Not a company I can trust any longer.
Posted on 8/15/2012 at 8:00 AM by Lawrence Edwards
I'm ashamed to be a customer of yours.
Posted on 8/15/2012 at 8:05 AM by Kennth
Was Progressive on the Defense side? You be the Judge: Document Name: Order of Court It is this 19th day of May, 2011, by the Circuit Court For Baltimore City, hereby ORDERED 1. That Progressive Advance Insurance Company be and is hereby allowed to intervene as a party Defendant. 2. That Progressive Insurance Company is GRANTED all rights to participate in this proceeding as if it were an original party to this case. (Brown,J) (Each Related person is displayed below) Party Type: Interested Party Party No.:1 Business or Organization Name: PROGRESSIVE ADVANCED INSURANCE COMPANY Attorney(s) for the Related Persons Name: Moffet, Esq, Jeffrey R Practice Name: Law Offices Of Progressive Casualty Insurance Address: 800 Red Brook Boulevard Suite 210 City: Owings Mills State:MD Zip Code:21117
Posted on 8/15/2012 at 8:22 AM by TruthTeller
I've been following this on Twitter, looks like it's really hitting the fan. To be honest I'm a little confused after reading Mike Fisher's reply to this statement. I really hope we can get back into people's good graces.
Posted on 8/15/2012 at 8:30 AM by Jessica
Wow. That was a very carefully worded response. Please consider telling the whole truth to your customers. You might want to show them the court documents from 5/31/2011 that read: It is this 19th day of May, 2011, by the Circuit Court For Baltimore City, hereby ORDERED 1. That Progressive Advance Insurance Company be and is hereby allowed to intervene as a party Defendant. 2. That Progressive Insurance Company is GRANTED all rights to participate in this proceeding as if it were an original party to this case. Just in case you haven't seen them, you can read those documents here: http://casesearch.courts.state.md.us/inquiry/inquiryDetail.jis?caseId=24C11002185&detailLoc=CC
Posted on 8/15/2012 at 8:51 AM by Daniel Lamb
Liars!!!!
Posted on 8/15/2012 at 8:52 AM by Dan R.
"It is this 19th day of May, 2011, by the Circuit Court For Baltimore City, hereby ORDERED 1. That Progressive Advance Insurance Company be and is hereby allowed to intervene as a party Defendant. 2. That Progressive Insurance Company is GRANTED all rights to participate in this proceeding as if it were an original party to this case." So Jeffrey R. Moffet didn't assist the defense's lawyer, you say? Interesting.
Posted on 8/15/2012 at 8:54 AM by Jim Moriarty
So Chris - seems you're a liar. Care to explain? http://mattfisher.tumblr.com/post/29432884849/today-in-response-to-my-blog-post-entitled-my Scott
Posted on 8/15/2012 at 8:58 AM by Scott Wallace
I will never use Progressive for any type of insurance.
Posted on 8/15/2012 at 8:59 AM by Jessica
HIS RESPONSE Today, in response to my blog post entitled “My Sister Paid Progressive Insurance to Defend Her Killer In Court,” Progressive released a statement saying that ”Progressive did not serve as the attorney for the defendant” in my sister’s case. I am not a lawyer, but this is what I observed in the courtroom during my sister’s trial: At the beginning of the trial on Monday, August 6th, an attorney identified himself as Jeffrey R. Moffat and stated that he worked for Progressive Advanced Insurance Company. He then sat next to the defendant. During the trial, both in and out of the courtroom, he conferred with the defendant. He gave an opening statement to the jury, in which he proposed the idea that the defendant should not be found negligent in the case. He cross-examined all of the plaintiff’s witnesses. On direct examination, he questioned all of the defense’s witnesses. He made objections on behalf of the defendant, and he was a party to the argument of all of the objections heard in the case. After all of the witnesses had been called, he stood before the jury and gave a closing argument, in which he argued that my sister was responsible for the accident that killed her, and that the jury should not decide that the defendant was negligent. I am comfortable characterizing this as a legal defense. I wrote about this case on my blog because I felt that, in the wake of my sister’s death, Progressive had sought out ways to meet their strict legal obligation while still disrespecting my sister’s memory and causing my family a world of hurt. Their statement disavowing their role in this case, a case in which their attorney stood before my sister’s jury and argued on behalf of her killer, is simply infuriating. SOUNDS LIKE YOU DEFENDED HIM TO ME, JUST SAYING.....
Posted on 8/15/2012 at 9:00 AM by Justin Fischer
AND HOW DO YOU EXPLAIN THIS? Doc No./Seq No.: 2/2 File Date: 05/31/2011Close Date:Decision: Document Name: Order of Court It is this 19th day of May, 2011, by the Circuit Court For Baltimore City, hereby ORDERED 1. That Progressive Advance Insurance Company be and is hereby allowed to intervene as a party Defendant. 2. That Progressive Insurance Company is GRANTED all rights to participate in this proceeding as if it were an original party to this case. (Brown,J) Directly from http://casesearch.courts.state.md.us/inquiry/inquiryDetail.jis?caseId=24C11002185&loc=69&detailLoc=CC
Posted on 8/15/2012 at 9:03 AM by Justin Fischer
By saying "he was defended by his insurance company" is not answering the true question as to why Jeff Moffet applied for and was granted the status of interested party for the defendant side. He may not have been the main attorney, but he was there and participated in a large extent.
Posted on 8/15/2012 at 9:25 AM by Jacob G Wycoff
Chris, In your post, you state on behalf of Progressive, "We respect the verdict and now can continue to work with the Fisher family to reach a resolution." What is there to "work" towards? If you respect the verdict, your company should pay the claim, plus all legal fees incurred by the insured as a result of your company's flawed decision-making.
Posted on 8/15/2012 at 9:25 AM by T.C. Cameron, Annapolis, Md.
Looking at the case information, this statement appears to be correct in the strictest sense--Progressive's attorney is listed as the attorney for a "Related Person", rather than as the attorney for the defendant. But then there's this: "It is this 19th day of May, 2011, by the Circuit Court For Baltimore City, hereby ORDERED 1. That Progressive Advance Insurance Company be and is hereby allowed to intervene as a party Defendant. 2. That Progressive Insurance Company is GRANTED all rights to participate in this proceeding as if it were an original party to this case." What's the difference between serving as the attorney for the defendant and intervening as a party defendant?
Posted on 8/15/2012 at 9:35 AM by David
From the court records, you despicable and dishonest person: It is this 19th day of May, 2011, by the Circuit Court For Baltimore City, hereby ORDERED 1. That Progressive Advance Insurance Company be and is hereby allowed to intervene as a party Defendant. 2. That Progressive Insurance Company is GRANTED all rights to participate in this proceeding as if it were an original party to this case.
Posted on 8/15/2012 at 9:36 AM by MN
I have to ask myself, why pay extra for Uninsured/Under insured coverage, if this is how you have to get paid in an accident? Maybe the better question is, why would I EVER pay for coverage with Progressive? A family member was injured by an under insured motorist and severally injured a few years ago. Her company paid the policy limit within one week so that she could receive the medical treatment and therapy she needed. Obviously, it wasn't Progressive.
Posted on 8/15/2012 at 10:01 AM by TOlsen
"Progressive" is more and more becoming a word that describes all things foul, disgusting and un-American.
Posted on 8/15/2012 at 10:03 AM by Gary
You idiots would have been much better off explaining that Progressive wasn't representing the defendant but representing themselves as codefendant and then explaining why. Even if the answer is as abhorrent as everyone expects at least then you'd get credit for being honest. As it is, you look like liars for making a accurate but highly misleading (and easily rebutted) claim as above. AND you lost the case. Well done, Progressive.
Posted on 8/15/2012 at 10:08 AM by Dan L.
You guys are flippin' idiots. I hope you've fired your whole PR and legal team.
Posted on 8/15/2012 at 10:11 AM by Non Progressiv
I am going to be sure to spread this story if any family/friends attempt to take out a policy with Progressive. How despicable that you will lie about this. Disgusting that you are tangling your own personal morals for your company, Mr. Wolf. Have you no shame?
Posted on 8/15/2012 at 10:13 AM by HS
As a commercial Progressive Insurance client I would like to see something done about this. This is shameful. Progressive needs to fulfill its obligations. Please make this right and stop playing semantics with this poor family. They need for the claim to be paid in full and compensated for their legal fees to make them financially whole again. I am watching this very closely. How this is handled WILL be a factor in my insurance decision making process, and I imagine the same for other customers.
Posted on 8/15/2012 at 10:22 AM by Michelle Pendenza
I will tell this story to as many people as I can. The fact that you then lied about representing the other is doubling down on stupid. I will never, ever get Progressive insurance, and I know of 3 of my friends and relatives that I will lobby to have them cancel their policies. Disgusting.
Posted on 8/15/2012 at 10:44 AM by paul haugen
The only way companies like Progressive are going to learn is if people vote with their feet. These greedy sacks of crap only understand money, so take yours elsewhere! The only 'resolution' that is acceptable is for Progressive to STFU and PAY the Fisher family what they owe them.
Posted on 8/15/2012 at 10:48 AM by Aaron C.
This incident makes it simple for me: I'll be searching out another auto insurer. Disgusting.
Posted on 8/15/2012 at 10:56 AM by Ryan
This incident makes it simple for me: I'll be searching out another auto insurer. Disgusting.
Posted on 8/15/2012 at 10:57 AM by Ryan
Definitely too many lawyers running the show over there...lying through omission is STILL LYING. A 10 year old knows this. A lawyer really should.
Posted on 8/15/2012 at 10:59 AM by Ian
Why is your company listed 7 times as the employer of the defense lawyer in the PUBLIC RECORD? Did you even bother to look into this before you typed up your little note here?
Posted on 8/15/2012 at 3:40 PM by razorsheldon
Without knowing any of the details of the case, it sounds like there was some complex liability (who is at fault), and this may have hindered resolution if there was any question, especially since all the parties weren't there to give their version. It was presented to a jury of peers to decide the final liability. Now that the verdict was rendered, resolution can move on. Why would any company, not just Progressive, pay money if their own customer may have some fault with the accident themselves. This is how the system works, like it or not.
Posted on 8/15/2012 at 4:02 PM by walsh
Cancelling my policy TODAY. You are an embarrassment to humanity.
Posted on 8/15/2012 at 4:12 PM by Gary Miller
Disgusting is the perfect word for this. I will never buy Progressive insurance and I will do my best that none of my friends, family, loved ones, or heck, even my enemies buy your insurance.
Posted on 8/15/2012 at 4:17 PM by Erika
I was shopping for insurance, but NEVER, never would I go near you liars. I've worked for insurance companies for 20 years. Doing business is one thing. Compulsively lying about it is another thing. I hope the whole board of directors is replaced, but only after they can all of senior management and the "PR" team. Shame on you.
Posted on 8/15/2012 at 5:26 PM by Never Progressive
So much emotion in this thread! I've had much experience with these complex matters, including both prosecution and defense of death cases involving auto, train, plane and boating accidents. I will offer all of you a Maryland attorney's view of the public docket sheet, which I have read, to explain what this case was about, and where it may end up (and I have never worked for or with Progressive): 1. Maryland does not allow any of us to sue our auto insurer, direclty, for damages arising from an accident. Maryland law requires that we sue the driver that hurt us. And if the judge and jury find the other driver at fault, and finds that we are not contributorily negligent, then we get a jury award in our favor. At that point, the other driver's insurance pays, and our own "underinsured" coverage kicks in. 2. In the Fisher v. Hope case, the parents sued Mr. Hope, the bad guy. In the beginning, he was the only defendant. His lawyers were likely hired by his own insurance company, Nationwide. (continued in next comment)
Posted on 8/15/2012 at 5:32 PM by Maryland Lawyer
3. Progressive, facing exposure for any judgment against Mr. Hope in excess of Mr. Hope's policy limits, and up to the limits of it's "underinsurance" coverage, made a motion to the court to "intervene." That is when a party asks to be made part of the litigation. The court then assigns the new party to one side of the case, or the other. In this case, Mr. and Mrs. Fisher consented to allow Progressive to join the case. The court assigned Progressive to the "defendant" side of the case. And so, while Progressive did not start out as a defendant, it was a defendant at the trial. That is why it's attorney partiicpated in choosing the jury, examining witnesses, and making arguments to the court and jury. 4. After a 4 day trial, the jury awarded the Fisher family $760,000. The award is listed against two defendants- Hope, and Progressive. The court docket does not disclose what level of insurance was owned by Hope, and so Progressive's exposure is not clear. 5. What's next? Well, all defendants have a right to appeal judgments to the Maryland Court of Special Appeals. That appeal can relate to many, many aspects of the trial, and does not necessarily reflect on any party's bad motives. And if one party appeals, the case does not become "final." It is during this post-trial appeal period that settlements are usually made in these cases. And settlement is almost always "confidential." That means that even if Hope's insurer and Progressive pay every single penny of the judgment, none of us, as members of the public, would ever know. And so, even if Progressive does the "right thing," (as broadly defined by the collective list of comments), it will never garner any positive public relations if the settlement is done confidentially. In fact, Mr. Fisher will not even be able to blog about it, since his parents would be barred from disclosing details, even to him. Such a shame.
Posted on 8/15/2012 at 5:33 PM by Maryland Lawyer
Did Progressive provide any sort of contribution towards the defense? Money, information, personnel, et cetera?
Posted on 8/15/2012 at 5:38 PM by George White
Bye. Give Flo my condolences. Never another cent from me!
Posted on 8/15/2012 at 5:46 PM by Hal
Chris, you are a liar and should be ashamed of yourself and your company. http://www.mediaite.com/online/progressive-insurances-response-to-the-fisher-scandal-is-a-textbook-example-of-a-pr-catastrophe/
Posted on 8/15/2012 at 5:57 PM by BN
Thanks to this, I will go out of my way to tell all of my friends and family why they should never buy Progressive insurance, and I will personally NEVER give this company a single dime of my money again. This is beyond despicable. Progressive needs to give this family the money that they OWE them.
Posted on 8/15/2012 at 6:32 PM by Hannah
Thanks to this, I will go out of my way to tell all of my friends and family why they should never buy Progressive insurance, and I will personally NEVER give this company a single dime of my money again. This is beyond despicable. Progressive needs to give this family the money that they OWE them.
Posted on 8/15/2012 at 6:43 PM by Hannah
As a company, you are disgusting.
Posted on 8/15/2012 at 7:17 PM by Rachel
Wow. This post was a terrible idea.
Posted on 8/15/2012 at 7:27 PM by Jrod
Everything points to you defending him. I am tired of pay all this money for your insurance only so you can deny a claim that is obvious. I'm sure you will pass the cost of the settlement along to the rest of your customers, but as for my family, we are cancelling our insurance with you.
Posted on 8/15/2012 at 7:42 PM by Aaron
I will not do business with a company that lies. You are blood-sucking monsters that will do anything to get out of paying a claim, then lie about it. The court records prove it.
Posted on 8/15/2012 at 7:46 PM by Alan Frisbie
I will never/ever use Progressive.
Posted on 8/15/2012 at 7:57 PM by C Record
I'll never ever purchase Progressive Insurance. I'm so tired of Corporate greed. This is disgusting. I'm glad it made it to CNN. I just watched this. Progressive, you will lose more customers, future potentials, and become less referenceable given the way you handled this that will total up to losing much more $$ than fulfilling your obligations and paying this family what they are due.
Posted on 8/15/2012 at 7:58 PM by Clint
You just gave me a reason to shop for new car insurance, I am so disappointed in your actions. To actually help the defendant in order for you to get out of paying the victim, that makes me sick to my stomach.
Posted on 8/15/2012 at 8:00 PM by Amit Gandhi
Am dropping my progressive policy today!!
Posted on 8/15/2012 at 8:02 PM by Ike
Anyone who has Progressive should switch there insurance right away. This company has no morals at all they were on the side of the Man that ran the red light and killed this young girl. Progressive inst it bad enough this family has lost a loved one now you have put them through all of this on top of it shame on you.
Posted on 8/15/2012 at 8:05 PM by Tom
Your company is PURE SCUM for treating this poor family in such a manner. Your attorney DID argue in favor of the person who caused her death and everybody knows it. I will not be renewing my policy with your company. You just lost my business along with that of thousands of others.
Posted on 8/15/2012 at 8:05 PM by Jamie Smith
Progressive is anything but...progressive, fair, honest or upright
Posted on 8/15/2012 at 8:07 PM by Chris Record
Am dropping my progressive policy today!!
Posted on 8/15/2012 at 8:15 PM by Ike
switched to geico.
Posted on 8/15/2012 at 8:34 PM by mm
I do believe, Mr. Wolfe, that you and your company have just been Blogslapped and just as the internet loves kittens and will relentlessly go after those the collective internet deems as evil, you and your company will be raked over the coals of public opinion and your deeds lain bare. Whatever money you thought you could save will be lost 1000 fold as word gets out. Might want to sell that stock soon.
Posted on 8/15/2012 at 8:42 PM by Kathmandu
you are the scum of the earth. you defend killers. and inflict pain of people. as fake as Flo's Bumpit.
Posted on 8/15/2012 at 9:26 PM by jim markim
Disgusting... this reply is not sufficient..Will never use your company
Posted on 8/15/2012 at 10:06 PM by Lynn
I will not do business with a company that lies. You are blood-sucking monsters that will do anything to get out of paying a claim, then lie about it. The court records prove it.
Posted on 8/15/2012 at 10:27 PM by Alan Frisbie
As someone who also lost a sibling in a fatal car crash, and having witnessed first hand the hoops the insurer (a different company) forced my parents to jump through in the days and weeks immediately following his death, I did not think that it was possible for an insurance company to seem even more nasty than it did in that situation. Clearly I was mistaken. I am a policyholder with your company and I fear for what my family would have to go through should something as horrible as this ever happen to me.
Posted on 8/15/2012 at 10:30 PM by Dan Hollis
I won't use your insurance services anymore
Posted on 8/15/2012 at 10:37 PM by Urin
So, you merely had an attorney in your employ sit and confer with the defendant, cross-examine plaintiff witnesses, direct question defense witnesses, object on the defendant's behalf, and give opening and closing statements for the defense. But you *technically* didn't defend him. I guess I'm *technically* not cancelling my policy with you, either.
Posted on 8/15/2012 at 10:40 PM by Stephen
II think that I will be looking for another auto insurer also. Shame on you!
Posted on 8/15/2012 at 10:41 PM by Amber
It's time to release the full story - this panty waist statement is not what was needed and the 1/2 facts provided made this situation worse. Did Marketing and Renwick know this was the 'official position of PGR'? Release a full statement please! What reason did you see to take this to court? What facts were available that made you believe challenging this in court was the correct direction? If you're 'impartial' why would you not sit back and see what happens vs. sending Mr Moffat? Come clean and this will get better - it's clear people view this statement as a 1/2 truth - the facts are out there....
Posted on 8/15/2012 at 11:05 PM by Marvin
No amount of PR spin can ever clear Progressive of their fault. Fulfill what you the Fisher's! It's that simple! Be human!
Posted on 8/15/2012 at 11:12 PM by Ako Lang
Stop with the double talk and the lies. This is bad PR! Thanks for sticking it to your own customers!
Posted on 8/15/2012 at 11:12 PM by truther
Proof you are liars provided by Baltimore County Bar Association: http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=3&ved=0CGQQFjAC&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.bcba.org%2FUserFiles%2FFile%2FBull%2520Roast2010.doc&ei=JZgqUNXtFuWYiAKT64Ag&usg=AFQjCNFtn4DfV3sOQAUvViKGo-zaFxRWfg&cad=rja
Posted on 8/15/2012 at 11:25 PM by deborah
You're not telling the entire story here Progressive...
Posted on 8/15/2012 at 11:36 PM by Garic
Whoever typed this response and all the managers/executives: How do you go home to your families/loved ones and look them in the eye, knowing this is how you make your living. Find more rewarding work. Greed is disgusting when this is the result.
Posted on 8/15/2012 at 11:57 PM by Stephen
Been with you over 10 years seemsy you would rather lose 100k worth of customers then pay a hurt familys covered insurance policy now looking to find another insurer . Grr
Posted on 8/15/2012 at 11:59 PM by Devine Family
I will not do business with a company that lies. You are blood-sucking monsters that will do anything to get out of paying a claim, then lie about it. The court records prove it.
Posted on 8/16/2012 at 12:01 AM by Alan Frisbie
This is normal with all insurance companies we pay and when it's their turn they fight it. Same reason I dropped you today progressive and switched to State Farm and saved $400 a year. You lost another driver and doin you were ripping me off too. Pay the family amd move on or it's just going to get worse for your company.
Posted on 8/16/2012 at 12:10 AM by Larry
The actions of Progressive in this case are not only completely shameful, but in this age of social media a very poor business decision. The actions of Progressive (my former car insurance company) go a long way to showing what type of company they are.
Posted on 8/16/2012 at 12:20 AM by dave
this is just lame... please fulfill your obligation to the Kaitlynn Fisher family. Pay in full all cost.
Posted on 8/16/2012 at 12:34 AM by Reco
This is so disturbing. It makes me physically sick. I would hate for my family to go through what the Fishers have should I be killed in an accident while holding a Progressive Insurance policy. I am really reconsidering my policy. I want to feel safe and I don't right now.
Posted on 8/16/2012 at 12:50 AM by Lane
The way to make this right is to realize that you are structured in such a way that creates a tremendous conflict of interest. Your owners, the shareholders, want profits to be maximized, which means minimizing claims paid out. Your policyholders want... ya know... to be insured. Come clean with how screwed up this is, fire all the people responsible for this decision (which demonstrates poor understanding of PR resulting in harm to your shareholders as well), and restructure yourselves to be a mutual insurance company who is owned by your policyholders, thus setting up the proper incentives to prevent anything like this from ever happening again.
Posted on 8/16/2012 at 1:26 AM by perfectlyGoodInk
A company being cheap is understandable, but being shamelessly deceitful is disgusting.
Posted on 8/16/2012 at 1:28 AM by Progressive is pretty lame
Liar! Here is the electronic record from the court: Doc No./Seq No.: 2/2 File Date: 05/31/2011Close Date:Decision: Document Name: Order of Court It is this 19th day of May, 2011, by the Circuit Court For Baltimore City, hereby ORDERED 1. That Progressive Advance Insurance Company be and is hereby allowed to intervene as a party Defendant. 2. That Progressive Insurance Company is GRANTED all rights to participate in this proceeding as if it were an original party to this case. (Brown,J)
Posted on 8/16/2012 at 2:07 AM by Ed Chi
You guys are disgusting and you are liars. You are listed on the official court documents as defense for the driver who killed Kaitlynn Fisher. Disgraceful. Pay up and apologize profusely.
Posted on 8/16/2012 at 2:11 AM by Daniel
I live near that area and remember when this was on the news. The reason why I remembered was because it was in the middle of a span where students attending John Hopkins were getting killed- by hit and runs and robberies. And when I heard about this I remembered thinking how sad that so many young people with great potential were getting cut down in B-more. The coverage eluded to the fact that the other driver ran the red and killed her. This was from statements from witnesses and the police department. Imagine my shock and dismay to hear that you have been dragging this poor family through this ridiculous ordeal this whole time!!! Not only do they have to grieve such a tragic loss, here you are trying desperately to fault her for her own death, just so you don't have to pay up on your end of the deal! Honoring your own policy from the get-go would've saved you more than fighting it. Now you're spending triple that on a PR campaign to save face. Shameful!
Posted on 8/16/2012 at 2:25 AM by Samantha
Forwarding this to my parents. I spy an autralian gecko coming into our lives very soon...
Posted on 8/16/2012 at 2:33 AM by AiAi
I live near that area and remember when this was on the news. The reason why I remembered was because it was in the middle of a span where students attending John Hopkins were getting killed- by hit and runs and robberies. And when I heard about this I remembered thinking how sad that so many young people with great potential were getting cut down in B-more. The coverage eluded to the fact that the other driver ran the red and killed her. This was from statements from witnesses and the police department. Imagine my shock and dismay to hear that you have been dragging this poor family through this ridiculous ordeal this whole time!!! Not only do they have to grieve such a tragic loss, here you are trying desperately to fault her for her own death, just so you don't have to pay up on your end of the deal! Honoring your own policy from the get-go would've saved you more than fighting it. Now you're spending triple that on a PR campaign to save face. Shameful!
Posted on 8/16/2012 at 2:56 AM by Samantha
As a Progressive shareholder I'm very happy with the settlement and how this case was handled. The insurance company's job is to show quarterly profit. They do that by getting your money - as much as they can - backed by fear and arbitrary laws. Free money from insurance that 90% of you will never use.. That 10% is a nuisance. Offer them as little as possible or fight them tooth and nail to avoid a high payout. THERES NOTHING YOU CAN DO BECAUSE THEY ARE ALL THE SAME HAHAHA PS You'll all have forgotten about this by the end of the month - except for the family of the dead sister that is.
Posted on 8/16/2012 at 4:03 AM by John Moneybucks
I am looking for another Insurance company at this moment and just think I got my mother to sign up too, two months ago. Glad I found this story before something happened and I needed them. Looks like the Progressive statement means they are to appeal this case for years more and not pay a dime to settle this, maybe they use FloBot to deny claims! Despite what they claim now they assisted defendant against that poor family!
Posted on 8/16/2012 at 4:08 AM by Daniel
I have been a progressive customer for many years, almost 8. I won't lie, the only thing that brought me to your company in the first place was the cheap prices on renters and auto insurance. I have only had one incident where I had to deal with you guys and honestly, it was a pretty bad experience (Although not on the magnitude of the Fishers') I stayed with your company because of the low prices. Now seeing as your company 1) doesn't stand behind the contract between yourself and clients; 2) made the family of a loved one suffer because you didn't want to do number one; and 3) extremely mislead the general population about this case. (Yeah, your dude wasn't his LAWYER, but you were on his defense team, very sly assholes) First off, I would leave your company on the basis that what your company did to the Fishers' is just completely wrong. Secondly, I don't feel comfortable keeping your insurance because if you are willing to do this to one customer, who's to say you won't try to screw me over in the future. I hope this costs your company a ton of money. I hope you have people dropping you like flies. No matter if you actually end up paying the Fishers the amount they rightfully deserve, your reputation is pretty much tarnished forever. Fuck you guys. I am going to cancel both my renters and auto insurance with you. I will not look back.
Posted on 8/16/2012 at 5:03 AM by Not that it matters
"We respect the verdict and now can continue to work with the Fisher family to reach a resolution" Why do you have to "work with the Fisher family"? Why don't you just pay them what you owe, instead of forcing them through even more pain and grief? THAT'S the only statement anybody is interested in hearing... "Progressive Insurance has reconsidered its position on this case, and is now paying the Fisher family in full, including covering all their legal costs". Until that statement is forthcoming, Progressive Insurance is off my list of insurers to ever consider.
Posted on 8/16/2012 at 5:25 AM by Tim
"We respect the verdict and now can continue to work with the Fisher family to reach a resolution" Why do you have to "work with the Fisher family"? Why don't you just pay them what you owe, instead of forcing them through even more pain and grief? THAT'S the only statement anybody is interested in hearing... "Progressive Insurance has reconsidered its position on this case, and is now paying the Fisher family in full, including covering all their legal costs". Until that statement is forthcoming, Progressive Insurance is off my list of insurers to ever consider.
Posted on 8/16/2012 at 5:35 AM by Tim
Zip Ce been with progressive for a long time. Here's something you should understand about customers. I work hard for what money I have and when I pay for insurance I want to feel like I can trust that company to have my back when I need them. I no longer trust you and will be moving on. Matt, your family is in my thoughts and thank you.
Posted on 8/16/2012 at 7:04 AM by james couch
BOOOOOOOOOOOOO! SHAME ON PROGRESSIVE. JUST PLAIN 'OLE BOOOOOOOOOOOO!
Posted on 8/16/2012 at 7:45 AM by georgia davis
This is so sad it just goes to show you that these company's are all about the dollar bill and not the right thing. This woman paid her insurance to cover herself and instead of standing by your customer you turned your back on her for the almighty dollar. If anyone keep this insurance company you are a fool i had progressive back in 2000 i had a horrible experience with them and have never been back since, my heart and prayers go out to the fisher family and i hope that progressive never turns another dollar , i would never put my family threw this we all pay into our life insurances car insurance and so on thinking it will take care of us when we do go or are in a accident and to be sent threw something like this during something so tragic this should not of been something the family should of had to deal with smdh shame on your progressive
Posted on 8/16/2012 at 7:47 AM by Nicole
Progressive should get rid of "FLO" and use a "VULTURE" as its mascot. They don't care about you, me, or anyone. They say they do but we all know the truth.
Posted on 8/16/2012 at 7:57 AM by Greg
After applying the "legalese bs filter" against Progressive's callous statement, it seems pretty cut & dry that Progressive *DID INDEED* assist with the defense. From the court documents (see section "Defendant/Respondent Information"): Business or Organization Name: PROGRESSIVE ADVANCED INSURANCE COMPANY Attorney(s) for the Related Persons Name: Moffet, Esq, Jeffrey R Practice Name: Law Offices Of Progressive Casualty Insurance Address: 800 Red Brook Boulevard, Suite 210 City: Owings Mills State:MD Zip Code:21117
Posted on 8/16/2012 at 8:23 AM by Scott
So, Progressive, how's this little debacle working out for you? Pay raises all around yes? It's shocking to think in this day and age that you thought this 'response' would suffice for the pain and suffering the Fisher family has endured.
Posted on 8/16/2012 at 8:23 AM by MikeK
I had a policy with progressive. Then I was getting repairs in my old car and using the dealership loaner. Someone hit the loaner in the mall parking lot where I worked. I told the dealership, they told me I pay my deductable. I contacted progressive, they said I do not it isn't my responsibility and my insurance was not supposed to cover it. I went back and forth with the dealership and progressive until I got the dealership to give me a copy of my loaner agreemen. Surprise surprise! I am liable and so is my insurance under the uninsured motorist clause. I called and cancelled with progressive right away. They lie to force you to be a dishonest person. I had to pay 1000 to the dealership for their deductable because progressive was such a bunch of aholes. Now I have USAA a wonderful company who takes good care of my car. Already I have had to file 2 claims his year (hail and another uninsured motorist claim) and no objections from them on doing their actual job. Thanks for effing me over, Progressive, so I could move on.
Posted on 8/16/2012 at 8:42 AM by ceg
So nice to know how my monthly premium is being spent. Excuse me while I go shop for a new insurance provider.
Posted on 8/16/2012 at 8:50 AM by Shawn
How completely unethical and underhanded - you apparently assist the defense as much as possible but then post a statement saying 'oh but hey the OFFICIAL attorney was this other guy'... What a sorry excuse for a company... I will never say anything positive about Progressive.
Posted on 8/16/2012 at 9:56 AM by Julie
Lying is not helping your position.
Posted on 8/16/2012 at 10:26 AM by -Courtney Campbell
Adding your company to the no-go list with BP Petrol. People don't forget these things....
Posted on 8/16/2012 at 10:33 AM by Sam Miller
I will not do business with a company that lies. You are blood-sucking monsters that will do anything to get out of paying a claim, then lie about it. The court records prove it.
Posted on 8/16/2012 at 10:39 AM by Alan Frisbie
Shame on you Progressive! What a bunch of double-talk.
Posted on 8/16/2012 at 10:41 AM by Michael
You people are pathetic....so sad that you can behave in this manner...,it's all abbout the money with you people right? Well eat this, my policy is cancelled as of -5minutes from now. You people make me sick. Crooks
Posted on 8/16/2012 at 10:45 AM by michael dullinger
You people are pathetic....so sad that you can behave in this manner...,it's all abbout the money with you people right? Well eat this, my policy is cancelled as of -5minutes from now. You people make me sick. Crooks
Posted on 8/16/2012 at 10:46 AM by michael dullinger
Progressive, you lost me as a policy holder. And I will always remember this when it comes to influencing anyone, on who to use as an insurer. I will expect my refund to be mailed to me within 5 business days
Posted on 8/16/2012 at 10:50 AM by Douglas Iosbaker
This is just awful. Honestly Progressive. Do you really think this was the best route to take? Was this really in the customer's best interest? This is just awful and there is no way Flo is going to fix this.
Posted on 8/16/2012 at 11:15 AM by Me
I will be discussing this with my wife today and decide if we will be seeking insurance with another company. Maybe NATIONWIDE since you are stating that they represented their client.
Posted on 8/16/2012 at 11:20 AM by Joe Rodriguez
Buying my first car right now - guess which company I will never, ever, for the rest of my driving career, use for insurance. Guess which company I will advise every single person who asks never ever to use. I hope your shareholders are white with fear. I hope your executives are sick with anguish. You are not just liars, but pitifully amateurish business people.
Posted on 8/16/2012 at 11:23 AM by cameron
Court System: Circuit Court for Baltimore City - Civil System Case Number: 24C11002185 Title: Joan Fisher, et al vs Ronald Kevin Hope III Case Type: Motor Tort Filing Date:03/29/2011 05/31/2011 Order of Court It is this 19th day of May, 2011, by the Circuit Court For Baltimore City, hereby ORDERED 1. That Progressive Advance Insurance Company be and is hereby allowed to intervene as a party Defendant. 2. That Progressive Insurance Company is GRANTED all rights to participate in this proceeding as if it were an original party to this case. (Brown,J)
Posted on 8/16/2012 at 11:35 AM by teletype
WOW! I'm so sick of companies like this! What ever happened to just doing the right thing! Companies like this just take and take and take always looking for a loop hole to screw over there customers and probably there employees too!
Posted on 8/16/2012 at 11:36 AM by Phil Anderson
Scummy behavior. To think, I was considering your firm only yesterday. No danger of that now!
Posted on 8/16/2012 at 11:39 AM by Jim
We are currently insured by Progressive, have been for years. Tomorrow I will be contacting my insurance agent and instruct her to find us another, more honest and reputable insurer. Progressive has lost our business due to their handling of this case. How can we feel confident that they will stand with us if we ever need them in our corner? Using Maryland legal code as an excuse is no excuse and their real motivation is all too transparent. We also have a daughter named Caitlin...our prayers go to Kaitlin Fisher's family
Posted on 8/16/2012 at 11:40 AM by Cynthia Holt
You know, Katie Fisher was my best friend in college, and I even dated her for a while. I know and care about her family quite a lot and know exactly what they went through when she died. I heard Matt's eulogy and saw the looks on her parents' faces as they carried their own daughter's casket out of her church. I cannot relate the kind of pain and grief I saw her family go through in the wake of this tragedy, which dwarfed my own. For you to add all of this torment onto an already grieving family for the sake of a few thousand dollars is unforgivable. For you to then defend yourself in this morally, ethically, and legally reprehensible act, in a really quite pathetic attempt to save face, is both disgusting and idiotic. Regardless of how you attempt to spin this story you've already exposed yourselves to be the heartless greedy monsters that everyone jokes that insurance providers and corporate lawyers are. Well done. If you really want to give your company a chance to recover any sort of dignity or customer loyalty admit that you did what everyone already knows you did, fulfill your contractual obligation to the Fisher family immediately along with some monetary compensation for the additional misery you've put them through, and never put another one of your customers through this kind of hell again. Now that would be progressive.
Posted on 8/16/2012 at 11:42 AM by Dann
To anyone still believing Progressive is innocent in this, they've said two things: * They were not the attorney. This is correct, they were not the defendants attorney, we get it. However, they did *at the very least* help the defense as listed above by *many* people as can be seen by the many links to the official court documents; they may have helped further, e.g. financially supporting the defense, this detail is not currently available, it may take a separate court case to obtain that information. * The state's laws do apparently allow for the insurance company to *not* pay the deceased's family, this is a separate issue but one which everyone should be aware of. You see, for several years (decades?) large corporations, like Progressive, have paid for lobbyists and paid off state regulators to push for laws changes that favor the insurance company and/or provide them ways to screw over their clients. You think you're paying for insurance coverage only to discover that claims are denied because they were filed two days late, or there was a small correction that needed to be made and the updated claim was late.. I've personally experienced this kind of shenanigans in Florida and it's all within the current laws, though completely sleazy. What we need to do is push to fix the laws, and that's an uphill battle against the millions that are poured into lobbyists.
Posted on 8/16/2012 at 11:44 AM by Damien McKenna
Absolutely revolting and disgusting. You guys should be ashamed.
Posted on 8/16/2012 at 11:44 AM by Julien
You know, Katie Fisher was my best friend in college, and I even dated her for a while. I know and care about her family quite a lot and know exactly what they went through when she died. I heard Matt's eulogy and saw the looks on her parents' faces as they carried their own daughter's casket out of her church. I cannot relate the kind of pain and grief I saw her family go through in the wake of this tragedy, which dwarfed my own. For you to add all of this torment onto an already grieving family for the sake of a few thousand dollars is unforgivable. For you to then defend yourself in this morally, ethically, and legally reprehensible act, in a really quite pathetic attempt to save face, is both disgusting and idiotic. Regardless of how you attempt to spin this story you've already exposed yourselves to be the heartless greedy monsters that everyone jokes that insurance providers and corporate lawyers are. Well done. If you really want to give your company a chance to recover any sort of dignity or customer loyalty admit that you did what everyone already knows you did, fulfill your contractual obligation to the Fisher family immediately along with some monetary compensation for the additional misery you've put them through, and never put another one of your customers through this kind of hell again. Now that would be progressive.
Posted on 8/16/2012 at 11:45 AM by Dann
Progressive is getting about a million dollars worth of free advertising. Shame on Progressive "Insurance". I feel dirty just being on their website.
Posted on 8/16/2012 at 11:54 AM by Rob
So sad. Can't be part of this. Canceling my progressive policy immediately.
Posted on 8/16/2012 at 11:54 AM by Andrey
I will not do business with a company that lies. You are blood-sucking monsters that will do anything to get out of paying a claim, then lie about it. The court records prove it.
Posted on 8/16/2012 at 12:10 PM by Alan Frisbie
It is a clearly proven fact that you acted in defense of the driver responsible for Kaitlynn Fisher's death. This is a reprehensible act of pure greed. The very fact that you would involve yourself in the legal defense of a driver (who does not even have Progressive insurance, mind you) who killed a person that held a policy with your company is frankly sickening. You would rather defend this man in court than to pay out the remainder of the claim you were Supposed to pay? Unbelievable. This is shocking, even by insurance company standards. I expect multinational corporations to be callous and profit driven, but this sets a new low. I, like many others, will be taking my business elsewhere. Everyone involved in this atrocity should be ashamed of themselves.
Posted on 8/16/2012 at 12:31 PM by Chuck
What a scumbag company. You must be proud Mr. Wolf.
Posted on 8/16/2012 at 12:33 PM by JR
Pathetic that these decisions are being made with the wallet instead of the heart.
Posted on 8/16/2012 at 1:16 PM by Austin
If Progressive did not provide an attorney for the defendant, then why is Jeffery R. Moffet of the Law Offices Of Progressive Casualty Insurance listed as an "Attorney for the Related Persons" on the official Maryland Judiciary Case Search platform of publicly available records. (http://casesearch.courts.state.md.us/inquiry/inquiry-index.jsp) Also, Matt Fisher's response to this post: http://mattfisher.tumblr.com/post/29432884849/today-in-response-to-my-blog-post-entitled-my
Posted on 8/16/2012 at 1:29 PM by E
Definitely looking for a new insurance company to cover my cars/house/boat. This is so sad...
Posted on 8/16/2012 at 1:56 PM by Jaime
The company response is a big, fat lie. They didn't want to pay the family money so they worked for the defense. This should be a lesson to present policy holders and any who are considering the company. Run as fast as you can to a reputable insurance company. Don't sacrifice quality for a few bucks.
Posted on 8/16/2012 at 2:04 PM by dick
I STRONGLY ENCOURAGE ANYONE READING THIS TO *DROP* YOUR POLICY WITH PROGRESSIVE INSURANCE.
Posted on 8/16/2012 at 2:04 PM by C.Calls
What crap.... especially for a PR department. Guess all lies or half truths are crap. I will never buy any coverage by this NON progressive company. Why am I surprised. Guess you just pull the batteries on anything your insurance company doesn't want to pay for; just like you commercials with the robot whose battery is taken out by a progressive employee. Truth in advertising is what I see. We do what we want and take your money. The $$$ are the most important part. Progressive won't give money to insured people. Shame. Shame. Shame on all of progressive which is nonprogressive. Your name won't fool those who think of purchasing your FAKE insurance.
Posted on 8/16/2012 at 2:52 PM by Jean
Insurance companies pull slimy stunts like this every day. The only difference here is that someone successfully used the internet to put it in a spotlight. But, the more spotlight the better. The only way things will ever change is if they continue to be held accountable for nasty business practices.
Posted on 8/16/2012 at 2:56 PM by LOLLING HARD
I saw the story on Fox News. How do you people look at yourself in the mirror. To put that family through a trial is beyond comprehension.
Posted on 8/16/2012 at 2:57 PM by B Brisard
I STRONGLY ENCOURAGE ANYONE READING THIS TO *DROP* YOUR POLICY WITH PROGRESSIVE INSURANCE. ASAP this is not right please go out of business it sucks its a USA company
Posted on 8/16/2012 at 3:10 PM by Charles C
Very lame response. Policy holders should shop other companies.
Posted on 8/16/2012 at 3:14 PM by RFile
Progressive = Disgraceful Company I heard this story this morning at a very busy hair salon - everyone was talking about it! You might as well pull your TV commercials and pay your insured victim's family the money you owe them!!! Everyone I spoke with said they would never buy insurance from your company. You couldn't buy the publicity you are getting from this - all bad!
Posted on 8/16/2012 at 3:21 PM by Jen T
i have just heard about this, i along with my family have "progressive" coverage. I will be canceling all policies with this company and will email blast those in my circle to do the same. what a scam of a company. may your company and scumbag tactics go down in flames for this.
Posted on 8/16/2012 at 3:38 PM by German Rodriguez
This publicity will no doubt cost Progress much more than if they would have ponied up and paid the claim !!!
Posted on 8/16/2012 at 3:46 PM by Rick
I'm a veteran 12 consecutive year Progressive customer. Pending a public apology, along with a hefty monetary reward to the victims this week, I'm moving my policy, even if it means a higher rate. -HorrifiedCustomer
Posted on 8/16/2012 at 4:06 PM by Parker
Good read....I mean the deceased woman's brothers blog, not your contrived statement. I'll file Progessive Insurance in the "never ever buy insurance with this company" bin
Posted on 8/16/2012 at 4:09 PM by Nee
Should not be suprising. Lousy way to handle something like this. You've lost yourself a good number of customers over this.
Posted on 8/16/2012 at 4:32 PM by elizabeth p.
It's kind of sad to see so many "experts" commenting with so little knowledge of the facts. Just one more trial in the Media. Based on the comments in here, Progressive should just receive a claim and then pay it. No investigation, no questions ... just pay the claim. I'm also sure that all the people who are outraged and will be just "canceling all my policies " know exactly how this would have been handled by the company they're planning to sign up with. Good luck with that.
Posted on 8/16/2012 at 4:54 PM by Gerry K
Since you clearly won't pay up on a claim, and will do your level best to avoid paying even to the point of providing counsel against your own clients, I will not be doing business with you ever. Nor will my children, and hopefully not my friends when I share the story with them. If you don't pay your claims, then you have no purpose.
Posted on 8/16/2012 at 4:55 PM by shockwave
It's kind of sad to see so many "experts" commenting with so little knowledge of the facts. Just one more trial in the Media. Based on the comments in here, Progressive should just receive a claim and then pay it. No investigation, no questions ... just pay the claim. I'm also sure that all the people who are outraged and will be just "canceling all my policies " know exactly how this would have been handled by the company they're planning to sign up with. Good luck with that.
Posted on 8/16/2012 at 4:55 PM by Gerry K
I have been a Progressive Customer for over eight years. After reading the newspaper and the letter from Chris Wolf, I am going to find a new insurnace provider. To quote Mr. Trump... "YOUR FIRED!"
Posted on 8/16/2012 at 4:59 PM by JMB
Progressive should fire Chris Wolf for his statement displaying Progressive's culture and ethics. He stated above, "There was a question as to who was at fault, and a jury decided in the Fisher family’s favor just last week. We respect the verdict and now can continue to work with the Fisher family to reach a resolution". In other words they are not respecting the jurors decision and want to negotiate with the Fisher family for a alternate resolution. It is one thing to think it but its another to announce it over the Internet. Not only is it blatant stupidity, but it underscores the morality and mentality of the company. Chris Wolf Claims General Manager
Posted on 8/16/2012 at 5:13 PM by Roger Steele
Shame on you, I will not be renewing and will be seeking insurance from a more trustworthy company. I hope this was worth it.
Posted on 8/16/2012 at 5:20 PM by Kris
I will be cancelling my policy ASAP. This pathetic attempt to explain your involvement is disgusting! What worse are the pond scum lawyers who make a living doing this.
Posted on 8/16/2012 at 5:43 PM by No longer a customer
Am dropping my progressive policy today!!
Posted on 8/16/2012 at 6:00 PM by Ike
this is a pathetic and insulting "response." progressive is a disgusting company which actively tries to evade its obligations, even in horrible clear cases like this one. have you no shame? have you no shame?
Posted on 8/17/2012 at 5:31 AM by collective soul
I will be dropping my progressive policy later today - and encouraging my father and my sister to do the same!!
Posted on 8/17/2012 at 7:15 AM by former progressive customer
I handled property & casualty claims for approx 10 years on the behalf of the MD State Govt. I heard about this case and had been following it. I have to say I would've made the same decision to defend, but would've considered a mitigated offer to avoid trying this case due to the negative media attention. While you defense of the case was proper, you have to remember claims are grey, not black & white. Juries have no understanding of the law and often ignore contributory negligence. People need to understand you have the right to defend a case just as much as they had the right to sue, but you need to not have tunnel vision when defending claims and look at the big picture.
Posted on 8/17/2012 at 7:16 AM by j
I will be shopping for other motorcycle insurance today...if someone kills me or worse....I don't want my family having to fight with my insurance company.
Posted on 8/17/2012 at 7:39 AM by paul
As a third-party with no affiliation with progressive, I've tried to explain the procedure here: https://www.facebook.com/progressivecommercial/posts/10151093090064246?notif_t=feed_comment For what it's worth, in one of the article posted in this feed above, the Fisher's attorney concedes Progressive's statement is accurate. Even though the Progressive attorney defended the case, they defended their own interests. Like it or not, that's how UIM policies work for any insurance company in the nation. If you don't believe me, then ask your insurance agent about UIM coverage and how it works if there's an argument that you were partially at fault for the cause of an accident.
Posted on 8/17/2012 at 7:52 AM by Stuart Miller
http://casesearch.courts.state.md.us/inquiry/inquiryDetail.jis?caseId=24C11002185&loc=69&detailLoc=CC Your company defended the person that killed your policy holder. It is a matter of public record. Lying about it only makes you look worse.
Posted on 8/17/2012 at 7:55 AM by Travis H
No words. I'm switching to State Farm tomorrow. And for everyone else look up the insurance satisfaction ratings on JD Power, State Farm beats Progressive anyway!
Posted on 8/17/2012 at 8:00 AM by Leaving you
1. Semantics cannot obscure your intent. 2. Was the $75k really worth this kind of bad PR? 3. Chris, you probably need to be looking for a job. Somebody's going to take the fall for this. Want to guess who? 4. Pay the money, PLUS the Fishers' attorney fees, and extra for the terrible experience you've put them through. 5. Have the CEO apologize PUBLICLY and announce a thorough review of policies regarding under-insurance payments. You are welcome for the free advice. Keith
Posted on 8/17/2012 at 8:01 AM by Keith
Shame on you Progressive. Just shows how greed has overwhelmed common decency. Stick to your guns, go out of business and do society a favour.
Posted on 8/17/2012 at 8:11 AM by Martins
Policy dropped. Will never do business with this company again.
Posted on 8/17/2012 at 8:30 AM by sean
Progressive Insurance will never get my business. I have been with All-State now for over 15 years. Every time I have filed a claim they have taken care of it. They have not tried to weasel out or settle for anything less than what I have been insured for. I have been quoted less by Progressive and others for the "same" coverage, but seems to me that the "same" coverage is really not the "same" is it?
Posted on 8/17/2012 at 8:39 AM by Wayne
I just switched insurance, and am getting a better deal. No guilty conscience for supporting an unethical company + more money in my pocket = a HAPPY FORMER CUSTOMER!
Posted on 8/17/2012 at 8:47 AM by ND
As a current auto insurance customer, the statement "work with the Fisher family to reach a resolution" really worries me about what could happen if I actually NEED my coverage some day. Just pay the claims! There's nothing to "work with". That's why we pay premiums, so you can just pay the claims when something goes wrong. I'll be looking for alternatives before our next renewal period. Low cost won't do me much good if you don't actually pay the claims.
Posted on 8/17/2012 at 8:50 AM by Miles K
Freakin' idiots run your company. Even Flo cannot handle this one. It is so sad in this country that for corporations it is all about money. I understand you have to be profitable however it is THE PEOPLE who make you profitable and they deserve to be treated as people. God forbid your CEO might have to lose some of his multi million dollar salary. Got news for you. He probably will now and deserves to
Posted on 8/17/2012 at 9:06 AM by Pat Norris
i do not plan on using progressive... ever.
Posted on 8/17/2012 at 9:08 AM by jasontoheal
Glad I will never have a policy with you guys. Always happy to take our money but never willing to let it go to help the people who need it.
Posted on 8/17/2012 at 9:11 AM by Tyler Wiod
Certainly proud to NOT be a Progressive customer. Seth Godin is spot on - read and pass along: http://sethgodin.typepad.com/
Posted on 8/17/2012 at 9:12 AM by Drew Lidkea
So glad I cancelled my Progressive policy about a year ago but wish I could sue to get all of my money I paid in back from the monsters who run this company.
Posted on 8/17/2012 at 9:14 AM by War
Wow, living in the state of Fla with extremely high insurance rates I can understand protecting your company, clients and rates for all, but common sense, prudence and honesty must always be first. You failed in all of the above...
Posted on 8/17/2012 at 9:31 AM by Daniel Callahan
Regardless of the facts, your handling of this situation (via this message) is enough to know that I will proceed to use my double edged consumer sword (I will never conduct business with progressive, and I will speak poorly of progressive around those I encounter) in response to Progressive.
Posted on 8/17/2012 at 9:40 AM by T. V.
I hope that the amount of money this case has cost Progressive in terms of lawyers' fees and lost customers dwarfs what Progressive would've spent by doing the right thing and paying the claim right off the bat. Glad I have a different insurance company.
Posted on 8/17/2012 at 9:42 AM by Derrick
Good luck on the new alchemy project. I don't think you'll ever be able to SPIN this in your favor, but people have been trying to turn lead into to gold for centuries. Asking for mercy and admitting your horrible misguided error in this matter might be a better option, or perhaps just ignore it and everyone will just go away.
Posted on 8/17/2012 at 9:42 AM by Lee Smith
Your relationship with any vendor is about trust but this is particularly important in terms of insurance. It's when it comes time to pay claims that an insurance company's value to the customer is measured. Apparently putting your trust in Progressive is useless as when you need them they will abandon you in favor of the shareholder. From the Progressive core values, apparently only this one is real. The rest are PR. Profit We seek to earn a profit by offering consumers products and services they want. Profit is how the free-enterprise system motivates investment and rewards companies that consistently create value.
Posted on 8/17/2012 at 9:51 AM by Robert Kovacs
I will never ever be a Progressive customer.
Posted on 8/17/2012 at 9:52 AM by Steven
Are you calling your deceased customer's family liars when they say that a man describing himself as an employee of your company made an opening statement for the defendant, cross examined witnesses for the defendant, sat with the defendant, and made a closing statement for the defendant? If so, please come on out and say it, so that people will know the Progressive's side of the story.
Posted on 8/17/2012 at 9:57 AM by Brent
Shame on you Progressive!!! Shame on you Chris Wolf, Claims General Manager. You need to protect your clients, not abuse them!!
Posted on 8/17/2012 at 10:05 AM by Robert
Seems to me like you're lying, Progressive: http://mattfisher.tumblr.com/post/29432884849/today-in-response-to-my-blog-post-entitled-my
Posted on 8/17/2012 at 10:06 AM by Jeff
Add my name to the list of many that think you did a horrible action and I will ensure that I don't buy any Progressive insurance.
Posted on 8/17/2012 at 10:07 AM by Craig
Shame on you Progressive!!! Shame on you Chris Wolf, Claims General Manager. You need to protect your clients, not abuse them!!
Posted on 8/17/2012 at 10:08 AM by Robert
I'm going to tell all my friends about you folks. You folks obviously have no sense about what is right and wrong.
Posted on 8/17/2012 at 10:09 AM by Maurice McIver
Liar. I'm informing everyone on my Facebook about the truth, and encouraging them to drop you.
Posted on 8/17/2012 at 10:13 AM by Ted
Joining those who are disgusted by your actions and attitude--this one event has the power to undo your years of light-hearted, altruistic advertising.
Posted on 8/17/2012 at 10:14 AM by D. Fulks
"There was a question as to who was at fault, and a jury decided in the Fisher family’s favor just last week. " True or False: The only eyewitness to the accident said that Ms. Fisher had the green light? If true, then there should have been NO QUESTION as to fault.
Posted on 8/17/2012 at 10:19 AM by Dan
I'm going to tell all my friends about you folks. You folks obviously have no sense about what is right and wrong.
Posted on 8/17/2012 at 10:20 AM by Maurice McIver
Progressive: If you take responsibility for your actions, communicate the impact on the family to have their own insurance company not pay them what is owed, and promise to never conduct yourselves in that way again, you have a shot at saving some face. As of now, you have lost me, and many other customers for life.
Posted on 8/17/2012 at 10:23 AM by MikeGeorge
Shame on you!
Posted on 8/17/2012 at 10:25 AM by Disgusted customer
I will never buy a product again from this company and every time I see one of their advertisements, I will remember their disloyalty to their customer. Everytime one of my friends or acquaintances tells me they are doing business with Progressive, I will tell them this story as a cautionary tale. Shame on you Progressive.
Posted on 8/17/2012 at 10:28 AM by P. Owens-Scott
Guess I know who I won't be using as an insurer. Not even Flo can make this look good.
Posted on 8/17/2012 at 10:39 AM by Robert Morwell
You did more damage to your company's goodwill with this one case than your cutesy, quirky commercials will ever be able to recover. Bankruptcy is at your door. Shame on you!
Posted on 8/17/2012 at 11:41 AM by Concerned Mom of 5
II am disgusted by "progressive" non-insurance. I have your non-insurance on my motorcycle, and I am canceling it today. How shameful of you. How shameful.
Posted on 8/17/2012 at 11:42 AM by Don
This company's conduct demonstrates the reason I only insure with Chubb. They pay claims. What we see here is both appalling commercial practice and amoral conduct. Progressive shows the bad but true face of short term managers.
Posted on 8/17/2012 at 11:45 AM by covell Brown
So between the trial, the customer drop and all the damage to your PR, was it really worth it to go the route you did? And thankfully, you still ended up paying what you fought to pay to begin with. Never again Progressive. Shame.
Posted on 8/19/2012 at 7:31 AM by Jonathan
Does the contract say you will not pay if the death of the insured is his/her own fault? I am a bit confused here.
Posted on 8/19/2012 at 10:56 AM by victoria barmak
Order of Court It is this 19th day of May, 2011, by the Circuit Court For Baltimore City, hereby ORDERED 1. That Progressive Advance Insurance Company be and is hereby allowed to intervene as a party Defendant. 2. That Progressive Insurance Company is GRANTED all rights to participate in this proceeding as if it were an original party to this case.
Posted on 8/19/2012 at 12:16 PM by ThatsOddBecause
Well that was a rather pathetic PR statement. It's only 'complex' because you tried to slime your way out of your financial obligations. Scumbag company of the decade?
Posted on 8/19/2012 at 12:50 PM by ICancedMyProgressiveAcct
We all know this is a lie now. Care to come clean on others?
Posted on 8/19/2012 at 2:23 PM by Paul
Shame on Progressive.
Posted on 8/19/2012 at 3:50 PM by Steve
You guys have just trashed your own brand, this post and the original post are going on my Facebook page to warn potential customers in Australia about your shonky practices. You deserve to go out of business if this is how you behave. I urge all other commentators and bloggers to get the word out that Progressive cannot be trusted to fulfill their insurance contracts to their customers.
Posted on 8/19/2012 at 6:55 PM by Andrew
Lost my business with this stupidity. Sorry. Done.
Posted on 8/19/2012 at 8:16 PM by Steve Merritt
Read about how you treated Kaitlynn Fisher’s family. You really are despicable. I will never use your insurance and will encourage others to not do so also. Your behavior typifies all that is wrong with American corporations and their stranglehold on Congress.
Posted on 8/19/2012 at 8:46 PM by Joel L
Disgusting. I have read the story and I'm relieved that I don't, and never will, use Progressive Insurance.
Posted on 8/19/2012 at 10:07 PM by Concerned
Note to self. Don't shop at progressive for insurance.
Posted on 8/19/2012 at 11:26 PM by Douglas
I understand that the insurance business is a complex and competitive industry, but this is absolutely despicable. You have lost me as a potential customer for life. No matter how much money you could potentially save me on car insurance, and no matter how many sports you ruin with your terrible advertisements, this will stick with me and my family forever.
Posted on 8/20/2012 at 10:01 AM by Patrick Haas
Disgusting.
Posted on 8/20/2012 at 11:27 AM by Lucy
What is it about "Maximize shareholder value" do not people understand. They tried to maximize and did not have social media in the equation. We all want "Maximize shareholder value with ethics". Afraid we are not there yet.
Posted on 8/20/2012 at 12:51 PM by david
you will never get a penny of my or any one of my friends and/or families money.
Posted on 8/20/2012 at 4:20 PM by Loni Harris
The Progressive Bundler: We'll bundle your policy with a claim denial and an attorney to fight against you... now THAT's Progressive.
Posted on 8/20/2012 at 4:42 PM by J Seas
Progressive... You are morally bankrupt crooks. I'll be canceling my policy with you immediately.
Posted on 8/20/2012 at 5:36 PM by Current Progressive customer
I feel so helpless ... it's mandatory to hold an insurance policy, yet the last thing insurance policy providers want to do is help you when you need it. Why is it legal?
Posted on 8/20/2012 at 5:48 PM by Christopher
Huh. Having second thoughts about renewing my Progressive insurance. I'm sure a lot of people are. (I know, this behavior is not new, nor is it isolated to Progressive. Finding insurance is really a matter of discovering the "least bad" company...)
Posted on 8/20/2012 at 6:01 PM by landondyer
The accusation against Progressive is that the defendant’s defense, provided by Nationwide, was aided by a Progressive employee or attorney: ‘he sat at the defendant’s table, cross examined witnesses, and helped with closing arguments.’ (Fisher family comments) Progressive’s statement does not address the accusation but deceptively attempts to divert attention away from the issue to deny something that was never in doubt: of course the defendant’s actual attorney was from Nationwide. The fact that Progressive’s response to the media was that they were ‘…in negotiations to settle with the Fisher family…’ is disappointing by itself. It is not a coincidence that the negotiations were only settled after the story broke in the media. It really looks like Progressive attempted to buy the Fisher families silence only after public outrage. I’m of the opinion that the first time Progressive “got caught” was probably not the first time Progressive engaged in this type of practice. I will be calling my broker and dropping Progressive.
Posted on 8/20/2012 at 8:28 PM by Eric Herold
That's disgusting. You should be ashamed of yourself. I would NEVER get insurance with Progressive
Posted on 8/20/2012 at 9:51 PM by Jason Wallis
and you just lost a paying customer. well done.
Posted on 8/21/2012 at 9:09 AM by T
Shameful behavior. If Progressive is interested in retaining any of their customers, they should really show some respect, pay the bereaved family and close the case. The longer they drag it on, the more pain they inflict on the family - a family that Progressive has clearly wronged. Absolutely disgusting.
Posted on 8/21/2012 at 11:20 AM by David Duchin
Progressive, you stink BIG TIME! You and your stupid, non-stop "Flo" commercials make me sick.
Posted on 8/21/2012 at 1:56 PM by Meg
I had AT&T screw me over once. I've done a very good job at never giving them any of my business. Now Progressive is on the list. Everytime I see your commercials I will tell this story. I will make it extra terrible too.
Posted on 8/21/2012 at 2:01 PM by Jason
You people are miserable liars and thieves. I will cancel my policies and take by business elsewhere.
Posted on 8/21/2012 at 3:19 PM by shame on you
Lost another customer. This is completely disgusting. If someone paid for an under insured policy you fulfill the policy. You people take advantage of the laws in different states, and still offer coverage that doesn't apply in those states. My sister also had complete full coverage on a car a few years ago. Luckily she was OK in the end unlike Kaitlynn, but she did lose her car because the insurance company wouldn't pay the remainder of her loan as Indiana is a no fault state and the other driver was under insured.
Posted on 8/21/2012 at 5:26 PM by Sarah Buckley
The only shameful behavior here is on the part of the jury. The police report, Katie's passenger, and other eyewitnesses all claim Katie ran the red light. This means she was at fault. It was her own doing that got her killed. The jury also went as far as making the settlement $760,000. Nationwide just paid out the $25,000 and Progressive their $75,000, but now an innocent man is stuck with the other $660,000! You want something to bark about! JURY COMMITS INSURANCE FRAUD BECAUSE PEOPLE CAN'T TAKE RESPONSIBILITY FOR THEIR OWN ACTIONS!!! Fact is the Fisher family should have never gotten a dime. The other driver is the one who should have recieved money if anyone. He was the innocent party!
Posted on 8/22/2012 at 11:02 AM by Bret
I fully agree with Paul's Comment, Posted on 8/17/2012 at 7:39 AM by Paul. Progressive did the right thing, and claim was handled appropriately. I am saying this because, I took time to understand what is included under Uninsured/Underinsured Motorist coverage and how it works.
Posted on 8/22/2012 at 12:16 PM by Jay
Absolutely misleading statement! The facts are being made public. The Fisher family claims are being proven correct. I enjoyed being a customer. Cancelled my policy after years of loyalty. 1 claim in over 12 years. I would never want my family put thru this if it had been me!
Posted on 8/22/2012 at 3:20 PM by Albert Vitale
IS PROGRESSIVE FOR REAL? CANCEL MY POLICY
Posted on 8/22/2012 at 10:19 PM by JAMES JONES POLICY HOLDER
Wow - you have no idea how insulting this statement is.
Posted on 8/23/2012 at 9:45 AM by Michael
Because you have not explained Progressive's role and because court documents show that Progressive representative's took the defendant's side, I'm going to assume your company is telling the truth in a selective way with the intent to deceive. This is known to non-legal folks as lying. I will never buy Progressive insurance again (and I'm considering buying a second car, so this was an option - you guys are cheap), and I will encourage all my friends not to. Note that it's not the original action that's repellent, so much as this attempt to cover-up. I encourage you, the Progressive employee reading this comment, to start looking for another job.
Posted on 8/23/2012 at 2:59 PM by E Kite
Note to self: Never buy insurance from Progressive...
Posted on 8/24/2012 at 3:01 PM by Ambuj Saxena
Just heard about this story. Shame on you Progressive Insurance Co. Your behavior shows that your own bottom line is all you care about. All you needed to do is wait and see what the legal process determined and then act accordingly. Instead you tried to avoid paying a claim by injecting ourselves into the proceeding. Shameful behavior. I will never buy insurance from you, ever!
Posted on 8/25/2012 at 10:07 AM by Simon Paddock
Dear Mr Wolf, You have had 380 comments on your statement, most of which are asking you questions to clarify your/Progressive's involvement in this case. When are you intending to answer these? If you are issuing another statement elsewhere please direct us to its location. Regards L Sowden
Posted on 8/29/2012 at 4:44 PM by Liz Sowden
I will not do business with a company that lies. You are blood-sucking monsters that will do anything to get out of paying a claim, then lie about it. The court records prove it.
Posted on 8/29/2012 at 11:54 PM by Alan Frisbie
After our treatment after our head on collision last week, and hearing this, I hope everyone sees how this company is not interested in its customers. Only how to make $ at the expense of its policy holders.
Posted on 9/2/2012 at 9:58 AM by Amorine
If I was progressive and there were conflicting reports about who was at fault in the accident, I wouldn't pay either. There are so many people out there trying to fraud the insurance companies. I'm not saying the fishers were trying to cheat Progressive in any way shape or form, but Progressive at least had to do their homework before paying out the claim, wouldn't you think? In the end, I think the Fisher's got a fair settlement and Progressive did the right thing.
Posted on 9/2/2012 at 9:11 PM by James K Shaffer
Does the contract say you will not pay if the death of the insured is his/her own fault? I am a bit confused here.
Posted on 9/3/2012 at 9:45 PM by Adam Davey
Will not be doing business with Progressive, ever.
Posted on 9/6/2012 at 12:43 PM by Dan
I just switched to Geico due to Progressive's abhorrent business practices and baldfaced lies. For those interested in the reality of the situation: http://www.prdaily.com/socialmediaEU/Articles/Progressives_PR_crisis_Victims_brother_and_insurer_12408.aspx
Posted on 9/6/2012 at 1:56 PM by Steven Shults
I am about to begin comparing insurance companies to possibly change my auto insurance, but now I know one thing for certain: I will NOT consider Progressive. First you defended a driver who killed one of your policyholders, then you lied about it. Despicable, Progressive. May you go bankrupt soon.
Posted on 9/13/2012 at 12:59 AM by Eric
As a long time Progressive customer (13+ yrs), this worries me. I thought perhaps that the sister was being dramatic or greedy until I read your statement. Progressive has done well by us when we had had accidents and I was more than saddened to read your statement. I would hope that if something awful should happen to me, even if I were partly to blame, you would still pay reasonable death benefits to my family. That's what insurance is for, accidents--unless you really believe there was premeditation, PAY already.
Posted on 9/22/2012 at 8:03 PM by S Piscatelli
After reading Fishers story, I contacted an insurance broker and found a home and auto insurance which was $400 cheaper, so cancelled Sept 1, 2012. ATV insurance will be cancelled next. So much for their claim that they operate with only a 10% profit margin - now I see where the "expense" went; Flo commercials and lawyers to fight every case.
Posted on 9/28/2012 at 12:21 PM by Shawn
Why is your company called 'Progressive'. More to the (scary) point- with companies like you out there, what kind of a world are we 'progressing' towards?
Posted on 10/12/2012 at 11:53 AM by Jeff
Unfortunately, this is not exclusive to Progressive. The U-Coverage policies by the majority of U-carriers contain language, usually pursuant to statute, that provide if a Underinsurance claim is made, the carrier is entitled to notice and entitled to all pleadings, defenses, and rights as if they were a party defendant in the underlying action. There are several reasons for this and it becomes especially complicated when involving two different jurisdictions, which is then governed by conflict of laws principles. However, it really boils down to this: parties are free to contract and are typically bound to said contract and the provisions thereof. The contract provided something to the effect of the above, that they can defend as though a party to the underlying action. The reason, although seemingly ridiculous, is that they need to ensure that the claims are meritorious and that they will not have to pay more than necessary - they are really defending their own interests and the appearance of representing the underlying defendant is simply a secondary effect. The real reason for everyone to keep in mind is that insurance companies do everything they can to avoid paying out on policies. The issue really extends to the legislature that provides the laws that these policies are written in conformance with. Something MUST be done because such policy provisions should be deemed void as against public policy. After all, you pay for the coverage and expect it will be there when tragedy strikes. Read you policies carefully... this case could have been even worse, for example, if the plaintiffs failed to put the U-Carrier on notice of the underlying claim or secured a judgment or settled the underlying claim without putting the carrier on notice, then they would likely be completely barred from any recovery on the underinsurance policy altogether.
Posted on 11/7/2012 at 4:17 PM by J. Doe
"To be very clear, Progressive did not serve as the attorney for the defendant in this case. He was defended by his insurance company, Nationwide." -- This may be true in some technical sense (which you have not specified), but the documented trial participation of your attorney puts the lie to this statement. Progressive clearly participated extensively in defending the driver who caused its own insured's death. Lying about it after the fact does not assist you in the court of public opinion. It's really too bad--I liked watching the Flo commercials, but I won't enjoy them any more.
Posted on 11/21/2012 at 11:22 PM by Beth Gray
Dear Progressive, Your intent and actions on Matt Fishers case is clearly an unethical, immoral, corrupt and terrible thing to do. The world would clearly be better without you. Anonymous is Legion, we do not forgive, we do not forget. Expect us. -Anon
Posted on 11/26/2012 at 2:17 AM by Guy Fawks
Progressive - as immoral and corrupt as everyone else in this industry. We pay ever-increasing premiums to these insurance companies and all they are concerned about is "not having to settle a claim". I wish there was a way the customers could get away with not paying the premiums and still getting the cover.
Posted on 1/2/2013 at 11:29 AM by Tanmay
Progressive is the worst insurance company there is! I had 3 policys with them & our rv was totalled in hurricane sandy we had full coverage on it & progressive found another way not to pay another claim. The supervisor that set us up with our coverage gave us a stated policy of $1000 on a rv worth $10,000 with a $2,500 deuctable which means if something happened to the rv we would owe them $1,500 & they would never have to pay any claim.after calling them for two months & them telling me they are waiting for the tapes, they finally said they will only pay the stated amount of $1,000 & waive the deductable! Gee thanks why would i pay them for our rv?? How slick is that! & a supervisor set us up with that policy. I agree they will find anyway to not pay there claims.I too will tell everyone i know these disgusting stories about an insurance company that is only in buisness because of us consumers paying the premiums & they wiggle out of paying out there claims & screw innocent people. I think we should all get together & put out a commercial letting the public really know who progressive is.
Posted on 1/8/2013 at 8:00 PM by Erica
Wow - glad I stumbled onto this site. I was just trying pull up Progressive's website to renew my policies and I saw this link and then found Matt Fisher's site. On the plus side, I now have an entertaining blog to follow (Fishers) but on the down side I now have to find a new insurance company for my cars. I guess its a fair trade.....so long Progressive!
Posted on 2/15/2013 at 6:36 PM by Dave
Will never use Progressive. Scumbags.
Posted on 3/12/2013 at 10:52 AM by Mike
Hey there! I know this is kinda off topic but I was wondering if you knew where I could locate a captcha plugin for my comment form? I'm using the same blog platform as yours and I'm having difficulty finding one? Thanks a lot!
Posted on 4/6/2013 at 8:55 PM by website

Post a Comment