CCC Valuescope & USAA Conspiring to Defraud, Committing RICO Act Violations?

I am submitting a shopper complaint towards CCC Valuescope (CCCG) and my insurance company USAA for falsely alleging a reasonable “industry worth” of my vehicle.

My insurer USAA has breached its responsibility to exercise the utmost great religion to me its insured. By employing CCC Valuescope (a company I allege violates the U.S. federal RICO Act) USAA has deliberately presented me a lower and fraudulent valuation of my car in hopes of obtaining an unreasonable and unfair settlement.

CCC Valuescope (previously regarded as CCC Details Products and services Team Inc – CCCG) can by no means be deemed a honest and sector value of cars as CCC Valuescope works completely for insurers and as a result has an financial fascination to supply valuations that are deliberately underneath the real truthful marketplace worth of what insured vehicles are really well worth.

It is acknowledged point all over the insurance plan marketplace that CCC gathers its values from what car or truck sellers would promote a motor vehicle for at basement wholesale selling prices, not the correct “retail price of an vehicle of like type and quality prior to the incident” as mandated by FL insurance plan restrictions. Furthermore CCC Valuescope employs a mix of vehicles formerly leased, used, and abused among the wrecked autos when compiling valuations to manage their insurance coverage enterprise prospects shelling out out total losses the least expensive achievable “values” to current their insured.

Ironically, practically each individual car in CCC Valuescope’s appraisal of my automobile report consisted of motor vehicles that had above 20 information indicative of difficulties these types of as incidents and faulty autos. Amid the report, some automobiles had 28, 31, and 32 data.

Reducing costs and denying its insured “the utmost due care” traditionally can be documented from USAA beginning with the course motion lawsuit versus USAA in Washington’s King County (March 12, 1999) for persuasive vehicle mend shops to use “imitation” areas in repairs, although at the same time hiding this practice from policyholders. Outside of automobile coverage, USAA has plenty of issues filed towards it in 27 states across the place.

CCC Valuescope is not impartial in their valuations considering the fact that they are a hired gun for the insurance plan providers! On conducting a VIN lookup on the vehicles inside of the CCC report 39813905, lots of autos had over 20 documents indicative of numerous collisions, challenges with the automobile, and numerous changes of possession. By relying upon CCC’s intentionally low valuation of my automobile, USAA is breaching its fiduciary responsibility to act in superior religion in managing my claim. No reasonable and honest evaluation of my declare can be executed by CCC as it is contracted by insurers for the main goal of reducing monies paid out out by insurers to its fiduciaries. By making use of CCC Valuescope, USAA is evidently not exercising the “utmost owing treatment” in the desire of me its insured as necessary by Baxter v. Royal Indemnity.

CCC admitted alone in its SEC Filing on 3-16-2005 that “the Business sometimes pays a new client for the remaining commitment of its prior contract with 3rd functions as an incentive”. In regard to regulation, CCC mentions in the very same filing “in most states, on the other hand, there is no formal approval procedure for whole loss valuation goods”. CCC by itself confesses in the similar report “individual condition departments of insurance coverage have taken positions as to whether the use of CCC Valuescope valuations is in compliance with a states assert managing polices”.

“The Business is mindful that considering the fact that 2002 the California Section of Insurance plan has suggested some of the Company’s clients (which management estimates to be somewhere around 14% of the overall profits attained in 2004 from the Firm’s CCC Valuescope valuation solution and company) that the Department thought that their use of CCC Valuescope experienced not been in compliance with the California insurance coverage rules in result prior to October 4, 2004, with regard to specified components of the merchandise methodology. The Enterprise believes the merchandise was in compliance with the relevant California rules.”

“On April 24, 2003, the California Section of Insurance policy formally adopted new restrictions that essential the Firm to improve its methodology for computing total reduction valuations in California.” There is good motive for that reason to believe that CCC Valuescope’s valuation methodology is terribly flawed and skewed to favor its insurance business clients.

In CCC’s yearly report filed February 13, 2004 the legal proceedings and a lot of course motion lawsuits in opposition to CCC are documented in webpages 35, 42, 43, and 44 of the 53 webpage report.

On page 35, CCC Valuescope admits to environment aside $4.3 million as an estimate in the direction of opportunity settlement to “solve likely claims arising out of roughly 30% of the transaction quantity of CCC Valuescope”.

By acknowledging 30% of transaction volume getting to be prospective claims, CCC Valuescope therefore will make it general public history that it anticipates a sizeable percentage of lawsuits for unfair and fraudulent valuations. Such a large proportion of transaction volume alone attests to the flawed methodology of CCC’s report, its unscrupulous dealings, and wholehearted commitment to secure the financial interests of the insurers it serves.

Ironically, 4 of CCC Valuescope’s car insurance business prospects have designed contractual and, in some scenarios, also common regulation indemnification promises from CCC for litigation prices, attorneys’ charges, settlement payments and other expenditures allegedly incurred by them in link with litigation relating to their use of CCC’s flawed Complete Decline valuation item.

Definitely the plenty of course motion lawsuits filed across the United States from CCC Valuescape supplies even more proof about the grossly small and inaccurate valuations of autos they give the insurers they provide. Between the lots of are:

CCC Settles Class Motion Suit on Valuation of Whole Reduction Vehicles (July 15, 2005)

Chicago-based mostly statements application-maker CCC Details Products and services Inc. announced that it and 15 of its customers signed a settlement settlement with the plaintiffs in numerous class motion satisfies pending in Madison County, Ill. These consolidated suits, Scenario Nos. 01 L 157, et al., relate to the valuation of cars that have been declared full losses by insurers.

Phrases of the settlement settlement will require CCC to pay detect and administration charges and other costs involved with the settlement. The organization estimates that these expenses will full about $8 million, and which includes readily available insurance plan proceeds of $1.8 million, the firm is completely reserved for these payments. Other settlement charges, such as promises by class members, will be compensated by the insurance companies that are collaborating in the settlement.

August 23, 2000, a putative statewide class action was filed in the Circuit Courtroom for Hillsborough County, FL, from CCC and USAA Casualty Insurance plan Business (Peter Sintes et al. v. USAA Casualty Insurance policy Organization and CCC Information and facts Expert services, Inc., Circumstance No. 00-006308). Plaintiffs allege that USAA contracted with CCC to deliver valuations of “whole decline” vehicles and that CCC provided valuations that ended up deliberately down below the real truthful market place worth of the insured auto.

Iinsurance corporations “owe a responsibility to the insured to workout the utmost great religion.” Baxter v. Royal Indemnity Business, 285 So.2d 652 (Fla. 1st DCA 1973).

Provided the innumerable and ongoing course action lawsuits in opposition to CCC Valuescope there need to now be no issue that CCC Valuescope is not independent in its car valuations and is responsible of violating the U.S. federal RICO Act and National Insurance coverage Restrictions, together with quite a few of the complicit insurance plan providers these types of as USAA who willingly and knowingly use their merchandise with the intent to deceive.