GEICO, Consumer Group Settle Lawsuit Over Discount Policy

April 6, 2006

Californians who purchased auto policies from GEICO and were denied a discount for not having proof of prior insurance will receive refunds as part of a settlement between the company and a consumer advocate group.

Government Employees Insurance Co., also known as GEICO, will pay $63 to California customers denied the discount, according to the Foundation for Taxpayer and Consumer Rights.

The Santa Monica-based consumer group sued GEICO in 2002. On Monday, the group declined to say how many GEICO customers might be eligible for a refund, citing a confidentiality agreement. The group estimated GEICO would be making payouts to about 4 percent of its current and former California customers.

Calls to GEICO were not immediately returned Monday.

Under the terms of the settlement, GEICO did not admit wrongdoing. The company ceased offering the discounts that prompted the lawsuit in April 2003.

The consumer group also sued the Auto Club of Southern California and Safeco Corp.’s insurance arm. Both lawsuits were pending.

The lawsuits against GEICO and the other insurers contend their discount policies favoring California drivers with proof of prior insurance violated Proposition 103, an insurance regulation initiative adopted by voters in 1988.

A provision of the initiative established that absence of prior insurance coverage could not be used as a factor in setting rates and granting discounts.

Subscribe Like this article?
Subscribe to our free email newsletter.

Latest Comments

  • April 7, 2006 at 11:12 am
    Glad not to be Californian says:
    This would only happen in the Land of Fruit & Nuts! Proposition 103 is a prime example of what happens when an ignorant electorate is allowed to make decisions about things t... read more
  • April 6, 2006 at 1:54 am
    God forbid,,,, says:
    Goodness no we should not give a discount to the few that show responsiblity of carrying auto liability insurance! Why should the others who are not responsible get the same r... read more
See all comments

Add a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

*

More News
More News Features