Complaints

The complaint text that is displayed might not represent all complaints filed with BBB. Some consumers may elect to not publish the details of their complaints, some complaints may not meet BBB's standards for publication, or BBB may display a portion of complaints when a high volume is received for a particular business.

• Initial Complaint

  Date:04/28/2025

  Type:Service or Repair Issues
  Status:

  AnsweredMore info

  Complaint statuses

  Resolved:

  The complainant verified the issue was resolved to their satisfaction.

  Unresolved:

  The business responded to the dispute but failed to make a good faith effort to resolve it.

  Answered:

  The business addressed the issues within the complaint, but the consumer either a) did not accept the response, OR b) did not notify BBB as to their satisfaction.

  Unanswered:

  The business failed to respond to the dispute.

  Unpursuable:

  BBB is unable to locate the business.

  On March 10, 2025, my legally parked vehicle was hit in a hit-and-run by an Amazon delivery van in **. I provided police ***ort and video proof. ******* ARC Claims identified the delivery company (Amazing Deliveries) and passed the case to their insurer, Xceedance, after the delivery company refused to cooperate.From there, the claim was mishandled at every level. -Xceedance delayed the case from the start nearly 2 weeks, with *** ****** ****** refusing to provide basic updates or timelines. -After 10 business days I demanded Another *** who resolved the issue of liability acceptance in one 25-min call vs ****** delayed with dismissive attitudes for 10 days - ****** ****** reversed that progress and restarted delays. -Their assigned adjuster then mis***resented damage, downplaying axle/CVT/rack/control arm/ impact to cosmetic scratches on body and rimignoring video from 2 angles. -Adjuster refused to speak with certified dealer, then blocked my number after being challenged. - I was pressured to use my own insurance despite clear third-party fault on several occasions. -****** ****** behaved unprofessionally and manipulatively throughoutmocking tone, dismissive ***lies, false claims, and ***eated refusal to provide complaint contacts. -When I wanted to write an official complaint on Branch, her supervisor and main line also refused five separate requests for escalation and official complaint contact information so I could submit it to the court. They just shielding her, covering up the normal practices. This case has lasted 7+ weeks, caused loss of time, peace, and spring breakand shows a pattern of systemic delay and manipulation of vulnerable claimants.I have collected all evidence of their wrongdoings, including borderline illegal behaviors of Branch on the call (recording legal in **, where accident occurred), submitted complaints to NJ Ombudsman, NAIC..I request BBB review and oversight.Sincerely,******* *****

  Business Response

  Date: 05/08/2025

  Thank you for the opportunity to respond to the above-referenced complaint matter involving ******* ******  Xceedance is the third-party administrator handling claims on behalf of ****************************** and their insured, Amazing Deliveries.  Xceedance is not an insurance company.  In a good-faith effort to resolve this complaint, Xceedance provides the following information for your records.
  
  The claim was transferred to us for handling on March *******, so we cannot speak to the claim handling prior to our involvement. After conducting our initial investigation, liability for the incident was accepted on April 9, 2025. A physical inspection was conducted by a third-party vendor on April 11, 2025 and the copy was sent to us on April 14, 2025. Based on the initial estimate, a check was issued on April 16, 2025, for damages which appeared to be related.
  Between April 16, 2025 and April 21, 2025 we had further discussions with Mr. ***** seeking additional clarification regarding the extent of repairs.  Further review of the inspection documentation was completed and based on the review, we determined not all mechanical damages being claimed appeared to be related to the current loss.
  On April ******* we requested an additional review from our vendor to remove body damage which was not associated with the incident per the direction of Mr. ****** The removal of the body damage resulted in a need for the first payment to be voided, and a second check was issued on April 30, 2025, to account for the verified necessary repairs. Additionally, according to the third-party vendors recommendation, the vehicle requires a teardown to determine if there is any additional damage which can be attributed to our insured driver.
  We discussed the supplemental process with Mr. ***** and as of the date of this letter, we currently are awaiting supplemental estimates from Mr. ****** chosen repair shop to ensure that all qualifying damages are appropriately addressed.
  Thank you again for the opportunity to address the issues between ******* ***** and Amazing Deliveries. We trust that the information provided satisfies your inquiry.  Should you have any further questions, please do not hesitate to contact the undersigned.

  Customer Answer

  Date: 05/10/2025

   
  Complaint: 23257414
  
  I am rejecting this response because:

  Thank you for the opportunity to provide a formal reply to Xceedances response.
  While Xceedance claims to have acted in good faith, the documented timeline and conduct in this case reveal a pattern of delay, deflection, misrepresentation, and obstruction designed not to resolve my claim efficiently, but to minimize their payout obligations at my expense.

  
  I respectfully submit the following corrections and clarifications to their claims:
  
  1. Delayed Liability Acknowledgment and Mishandling of Case Start
  Xceedance asserts it cannot speak to the handling prior to March 26, yet it fails to mention that ARC (Amazons 3rd-party claim handler) submitted an 80+ page file to Xceedance including police reports, videos, inspection photos, GPS and rout data and a certified $16K-$20K repair estimate. *** had conducted full investigation and concluded **** liability for the accident.
  Xceedance then stalled for 10 additional business days which could have stretched indefinitely, and only accepted liability after I called their main line to demand reassignmentnot as part of a routine process. Liability was accepted during a 20-minute call with ***** ********* on April 8, 2025. It was not an outcome of internal diligence!
  
  2. Fabrication of Cosmetic Narrative to Exclude Mechanical Damages
  The April 11 inspection included clear verbal acknowledgment by the field inspectors assistant of mechanical damage: to the rim, strut, steering rack, and subframe bushings. They completely ignored acknowledgement of broken and leaked CVT seal, CVT abnormal noises, lower control arm, and other parts related to the impact. The transfer case already began producing noises, but the estimate which include that part was submitted later.
  However, Xceedance later fabricated a cosmetic-impact narrative centered around an unrelated, pre-existing fender dent (already painted over before the accident). This misrepresentation was used to exclude major mechanical components that were directly impacted.Prior to that inspection, I personally provided the inspector with all relevant materials including videos, photos, and a full dealer estimate to ensure no misidentification of damage would occur. The video footage clearly shows the Amazon van striking the wheel area with its protruding doorstep; there was no possible contact with the fender.
  Given that these were trained professionals in the collision industry, the decision to later base the estimate on a cosmetic fender dent while excluding clear mechanical damagecannot be attributed to oversight. It was an intentional fabrication, designed to minimize liability and misrepresent the true nature of the impact.
  Internal communications accidentally disclosed to me confirm Xceedance debated whether to include CVT-related damages, showing full awareness of the scope of damage !!!

  The estimate was deliberately fabricated to appear minor and more acceptable for the insured to potentially pay out-of-pocket, when ****** ****** had been delaying its release to our party.
  

  Recent dealer visits (Feb 28, 2025, and Nov 2024) confirm there were no issues with the affected parts, going against the Xceedance narrative of impact-related damage.
  
  3. Misleading Use of Supplement Process and Shifting Burden
  Their claim that they are awaiting supplemental estimates is misleading. Xceedance has:
  Declined to acknowledge damages confirmed by both their own field inspector and a certified ****** dealer.
  Told me to start the repair and submit a supplement, despite never committing to pay those costs effectively asking me to spend thousands of dollars upfront, on trust, while simultaneously stating the damages "do not appear related; the impact wasn't that strong; and this is not due to our accident"
  Then they asked to tear-down the vehicle, and Xceedance's own representative backed away after the dealer requested payment for shop space, shifting all the burden onto me and the same day email!!!
  
  4. Retaliatory Reduction and Payment of Inadequate Estimate
  On April 21, I made clear that the body damage (fender) was unrelatedbut also that key mechanical parts were wrongfully omitted.
  After BBB had reached out, ***** instead of correcting the estimate to include the excluded but impacted parts, Xceedance IN RETALIATION removed not only fender, but the rest of mechanical items ($1,863.33) covering only a wheel removing not just the fender, but also strut assembly and tie rod, which had been present in the original estimate. No justification for removal of the mechanical items was suddenly present besides BBB reaching out, and me HAVING DENIED OUT-OF-PACKET OFFER which would allow them not to pay anyone at all.
  No legitimate estimate reflecting true mechanical damages has ever been provided, nor has any tear-down been authorized or paid for. 3rd party vendor never said to our party directly that damages are not related, only Xceedance did. He also after was asking them if they want to include CVT into adjusted estimate after escalation, to reiterate.
  
  5. Misuse of Internal Policies and Psychological Pressure
  Xceedance consistently cites undefined internal policies to deny valid mechanical claims contrary to industry norms and potentially in violation of the New Jersey Unfair Claims Settlement Practices Act.
  At multiple stages, I was told to file through my own insurance, or face total loss threats attempts to coerce me into abandoning my rights as an innocent third-party claimant.
  
  Conclusion
  I have acted in good faith throughout, providing timely documentation, formal estimates, photos, videos, and certified dealer input. In contrast, Xceedance has:
  Ignored key evidence.
  Misrepresented facts and outwardly lie all the time.
  Obstructed escalation and formal complaints.
  Exploited my transparency as a student and third-party claimant.
  Caused material harm and emotional distress.
  Their portrayal of events fails to reflect the documented pattern of bad-faith conduct. I respectfully request that the BBB and any involved authorities continue to examine this case for potential violations of claims handling standards and consumer protections.
  
  Sincerely,
  
  ******* *****