1 reviews | Active since Feb 2013
Discovery Insurance Lies
Discovery Insurance Lies This is the worst insurance company I’ve ever dealt with, and here’s why:
Terrible Service: I filed a claim for a roof leak, but the Assessor didn’t even bother to inspect the ceiling to identify the cause. Instead, they dismissed the claim based on the assumption that the leak was caused by rain. Despite experiencing significant rainfall before and after the incident, I’ve never had a leak before or since. The claim was rejected on the grounds of “poor maintenance” on a roof that is only three years old. The Assessor's arrogance was appalling—they didn’t check the ceiling to locate the source of the leak, took random pictures of the roof without determining if it was even the cause, and rejected the claim before leaving the premises, declaring no vendors would be assigned. To make matters worse, the Assessor caused damage to the roof by moving tiles due to their weight who pays for this?
Disputed Claim: When I disputed the rejection and provided valid reasons, I received a response stating they would “not provide feedback on my dispute but that does not mean they accept.” Really? I have a right to have every concern heard and responded to properly. So open clause we don't care but not providing adequate feedback and to substantiate why each item I listed is not founded or reason why the claim can't be reviewed. The letter also cited incorrect information which once again makes all allegations that are not fact and brings Discovery and their Assessors words into disrepute as lies.
This company’s lack of evidence to support their decisions, failure to conduct a thorough assessment, and refusal to properly address claims demonstrate nothing but unprofessional, unfounded response and reason for dispute and unprofessional behavior. Their actions are Unprofessional and would go as far as to not take Customer reasons for dispute rejection into consideration.
If I have never experienced a leak either before or after the incident in question, how can your assumption be accurate that my roof is damaged, neglected, poorly maintained, or otherwise compromised? If your claims were factual, I would still be experiencing leaks.
I will pursue this further. Discovery has failed as an insurer, seemingly prioritizing claim rejections to maximize profits and minimize payouts. The Assessor prematurely rejected my claim before leaving the premises, stating no vendors would be involved. You are not acting on behalf of Customer.
If I have never experienced a leak either before or after the incident in question, how can your assumption be accurate that my roof is damaged, neglected, poorly maintained, or otherwise compromised? If your claims were factual, I would still be experiencing leaks.
I will pursue this further. Discovery has failed as an insurer, seemingly prioritizing claim rejections to maximize profits and minimize payouts. The Assessor prematurely rejected my claim before leaving the premises, stating no vendors would be involved. You are not acting on behalf of Customer.
