Before you get an insurance quote from Hartford, STOP!!!...

[CaptBill-WO]

As many others do, I am reviewing my insurance coverage and costs, and getting a few quotes. I was about to make my decision, then read that a forum member got what he said was a very good rate on his class A, from Hartford. In fact, he said he joined AARP just to get that insurance, and with a nice AARP discount.

I decided to get a quote, as we already have AARP medicare supplemental ins. Went to the Hartford webside, and began the process for an on-line quote. 6 or so pages of forms, gathering lots of personal information. At the end, they provide a button to see the quote, and when I clicked it, a pop-up says they "cannot provide a quote based on the information provided". Hmmmm

Next morning, I called, and told the lady I am puzzled, as I completed all of the info, and know I have clean driving record, etc, etc. She said I see the problem: you don't have any other insurance with us. I said no, but they never asked that question, or stated anywhere that it was a requirement. I asked for a supervisor.

David came on the phone, and I told him I don't want my personal info to be collected by a company that had no intention of providing a quote, since I did not meet requirement of having other vehicles with them, and I want my info purged from their system. He said he would talk ti IT dept, and get back to me.

He called back, and said policy prohibits information collected from applicants being deleted, and furthermore, that information will be shared. I saidif they have a policy requiring RV applicants have auto insurance with them, that should be the first question asked on the form. To do otherwise is deceptive.

If you agree, and want Hartford to hear you, their CEO is Christopher Swift, Hartford Consumer Affairs, 1 Hartford Plaza, H01-19-3, Hartford, Ct 06115. I don't have a phone number or email address for Mr. Swift. Maybe someone here can provide it?

 

[workinrvers]

a few years ago The Hartford's long time CEO retired and new people were hired, many of them including the new CEO were hired from Progressive Insurance. The changes that were made were shameful, they "downsized" many, many departments including my wife's releasing the older tenured workers and, less than a year later, hiring "fresh from college" recruits to take their place (I guess downsizing was forgotten?). Their call centers was shipped overseas to India to maximize profit leaving a lot of hardworking Americans out of work. Needless to say Hartford which had been a well respected and well established Insurer became just another fly by night give me your money and be disappointed company.
I have always been insulted that an organization (AARP) which says they represent the concerns of us "seniors" will endorse a company that suddenly "released" so many of their dedicated senior workers. My wife had 19 years with the company and was 1 year away from earning benefits that would help her ease towards retirement when they "downsized". Needless to say they are not the company they once were.

 

[Hardroad]

I used to have AARP Hartford also, but after about 3 or 4 years, my insurance (Auto, Home, RV, Boat) went up about $400.00 (no Accidents, no tickets, etc., etc.). Of Course, I immediately called and their answer was that they did not know why - "It just did". Same answer from several other supervisors - to say the least, I cancelled everything.

 

[NYBobbo]

I dumped Hartford on Jan 1 this year. Their prices went up 30% for house and auto. When I called I was told that they needed to raise my rates because they had too many claims..... I have a clean record. I'm now very happy with Progressive! (at a lower rate than last year before their crazy rate increase) BTW I will not be renewing my AARP seems to me they are getting a cut from the Hartford pie also.

 

[LarryW-WO]

Discounts for multiple insurance lines are common. Are you sure you didn’t miss the warning early in the application process?

 

[Keldog4511]

Call AARP

I work for their Medicare coverage and AARP is very responsive to member complaints. Call and talk about your Hartford experience. They will get right on it.

 

[LarryW-WO]

Good advice, keldog.

 

[Whlsdn]

AARP is a farce....IMHO

Sorry, but since becoming a "senior" and on the lookout for organizations that had something to offer those citizens with such advanced maturity as myself (aka, old), I determined that AARP was not such an organization. Instead, it appears to me to be focused on profit, influencing my voting preferences, and pushing companies (like Hartford) that have nothing to offer me...and misrepresent themselves intentionally. The origins of this thread surprise me not at all.

 

[Hardroad]

Totally Agree! - Political Org.

 

[LarryW-WO]

I Too left AARP. My reason was the advocation of legislation of items helpful seniors but bad for America as a whole.

 

[creativepart]

Here’s some info on AARP. My daughter works there.

There are two separate companies. One is a 501(c)3 non-profit Organization that has hundreds of programs that benefit seniors. Yes, they lobby the government on senior issues as well. The are one of the largest lobbying groups in Washington and they lobby on a great many issues effecting seniors.

The other is a for profit company that sells products and partners with other companies to provide services such as insurance. They do get a cut of all the premiums etc from those 3rd party companies.

The profits made by this second company goes to the tax exempt charity.

They are totally separate companies and all employees and facilities are separate - but the nonprofit is in charge of the for profit company.

Because the for profit side just promotes the services of other companies for a kickback in fees they have limited control over those companies or their policies. And the nonprofit side has no control over the outside companies at all.

That said the larger organization is concerned about any 3rd party partner that is treating seniors poorly. But you have to understand that that concern can’t directly alter small parts of the outside company’s policies. About all they can do is cut ties with any problematic company and naturally that is for major issues not a privacy issue as described by the OP in this thread.

The problem policy lies with The Hartford. AARP is simply a marketing partner.

 

[LarryW-WO]

"The problem policy lies with The Hartford. AARP is simply a marketing partner."

So AARP isn't responsible for their PARTNER's actions? No way, no how. You pick your partners and they don't act right you dump them...unless money is...,.

 

[creativepart]

I did not say AARP was "not responsible for their marketing partner's actions" I said the policy is The Hartfords and AARP has little to no say in how The Hartford runs their day to day business.

It's the same with their Medicare Advantage plans. Those are United Healthcare plans and AARP isn't party to how those things are run either.

Picking a marketing partner has huge number of variables and you don't dump a long-term partnership because they don't ask if you have other Hartford first on a website form.

Does it make good sense that The Hartford would ask that upfront? ABSOLUTELY. But it's not AARPs business, it's the Hartfords. If it's a deal killer I'm sure AARP would simply kill the deal and find another partner - but looking at it objectively there is no way that would be a deal killer issue.

It would be best to not assume the worst of everyone - including other posters.

 

[LarryW-WO]

"They are totally separate companies and all employees and facilities are separate - but the nonprofit is in charge of the for profit company."

If the nonprofit is in charge of the for profit company, then why doesn't the nonprofit tell the for profit company to end its relationship with Hartford because of its business methods? And the reason is? MONEY for the non profit.

On a different note, I disagree with you, a site team member posting as a regular RVer. That's what makes you unhappy...I disagree with you.

 

[creativepart]

On a different note, I disagree with you, a site team member posting as a regular RVer. That's what makes you unhappy...I disagree with you.

Too bad you don't like it. I'm a regular RVer - and have been for over 18 years. I'm also a site team member working as a volunteer to keep this website a fun, informative place to be.

My role certainly is not anything but an RVer, That is unless a member is a problem and steps out of line and needs to have their participation restricted or prohibited.

You'll simply have to accept that fact and learn to live with it.

 

[NYBobbo]

Here’s some info on AARP. My daughter works there.

There are two separate companies. One is a 501(c)3 non-profit Organization that has hundreds of programs that benefit seniors. Yes, they lobby the government on senior issues as well. The are one of the largest lobbying groups in Washington and they lobby on a great many issues effecting seniors.

The other is a for profit company that sells products and partners with other companies to provide services such as insurance. They do get a cut of all the premiums etc from those 3rd party companies.

The profits made by this second company goes to the tax exempt charity.

They are totally separate companies and all employees and facilities are separate - but the nonprofit is in charge of the for profit company.

Because the for profit side just promotes the services of other companies for a kickback in fees they have limited control over those companies or their policies. And the nonprofit side has no control over the outside companies at all.

That said the larger organization is concerned about any 3rd party partner that is treating seniors poorly. But you have to understand that that concern can’t directly alter small parts of the outside company’s policies. About all they can do is cut ties with any problematic company and naturally that is for major issues not a privacy issue as described by the OP in this thread.

The problem policy lies with The Hartford. AARP is simply a marketing partner.

it all looks like a shell game the way one part of the company shields the other...
but that's what tax accountant lawyers are for. Not for profit just means they have to spend all their money (salaries, real estate, bonuses, advertisement, etc.) by the end of the year so as to not show a profit.



Everyone needs to do their own homework. My experience is that Hartford was going to raise me 30% (of which a portion of the policy is paid to AARP). The only reason I had AARP was for the Hartford insurance. My medical is covered by another party.


So.... Moving to Progressive saved my the 30%increase on a clean record plus the cost of AARP in addition the premium is lower than my previous year with Hartford!



Others have mentioned other (including Progressive) that has done something similar.


This has been my experience, I have learned to shop around when crazy increases in fees for any service hits my "in box".

 

[LarryW-WO]

Thank you for your enlightening post, NYBobbo.

 

[creativepart]

If folks think I'm making excuses for AARP, I'm not. I see this same kind of thing happening throughout many industries. Take FMCA for example - they have the same type of arrangements for Extended Warranties, Roadside Assistance and even RV Insurance. FMCA has a non-profit business setup but ties themselves to 3rd parties through marketing partnerships to provide extra services and in return they produce income to help support the organization. While at the same time adding value to the members.

All I'm saying is that it's not AARP with this policy it's The Hartford. I'm only pointing out what should be obvious with large national organizations that tie up with 3rd parties to provide other services.

It's the same if you get an Extended Warranty through FMCA. If you don't like how the warranty company does business or excludes your claim then you should know that a marketing arrangement only provides enough control to either accept the policies of the outside company or cancel the agreement. Which is not something anyone - AARP, FMCA, GoodSam, Costco, or any company can or would do lightly.

I'm 100% in agreement that The Hartford is a problem and should be avoided due to their practices. I just don't blame AARP for the issue or think it's their responsibility for the problem. You may feel otherwise, but at least you should understand the way this business model works.

 

[NYBobbo]

Great conversation here, makes me think the whole thing through for myself again.



I'm not picking on AARP or FMCA (which I'm a member) or any other for making money for their endorsement. As a consumer I take endorsements into consideration, just like any spokesman on TV selling reverse mortgages that they say they have vetted. They are all compensated in one way or another and therefore be responsible as people or entities who we "trust". It's more a breach of that trust when they endorse a sub standard product. They are the ones who are hurt the most by below satisfactory services/products by sponsored companies. Collateral damage so to speak.



That being said not for profit organizations like AARP, FMCA are different in my opinion from the Good Sam, Costco etc. For me "not for profit" groups have a higher obligation since their whole premise is to promote and be of service according to their charters. The "for profit" groups would never put up with poor service from their endorsed and compensated product/service companies.



Like I said earlier others have complained about Progressive, but they are not paying for endorsements from any groups that I belong to, at least as far as I know. Buyer beware and I'm not endorsing Progressive just saying they have been good to me so far.

 

[creativepart]

I have insurance through Safeco via FMCA's connection to their insurance partner. My policy renews next month and the renewal came through a couple of days ago with a 28% increase. $600 a year more for no reason.

I called FMCA and they have found me a policy with Progressive that's actually $200 a year less than my current policy. All in all $800 cheaper than what Safeco wanted for the renewal.