It's hard to tell as none of us were there. I've seen progressive try to mess with some of my RL friends though, so I'm a bit bias. It's just fishy that you kinda need full coverage to drive off the lot, and now progressive is saying the poster never had it. But maybe he/she never did.

I don't think anyone here is hiding our burning desire to blame progressive lol. But you could be right. Especially since the poster can't find the papers he/she needs.

In order for this to happen the financier, The insurance Company, and the poster would have had to make a mistake the day it was drove off the lot. I would like to think someone would have caught it.

We'll see how it pans out. I still recommend having a lawyer. Even if they do decide to settle out of court, the poster will get more money with a lawyer present.

I find it interesting that your bank's reaction is to wonder why Progressive would allow non-full coverage even when they know it's a loan. Seems like your bank is deflecting its own responsibility. In other words, I want to know why the bank would allow the loan to go through without full coverage. Where's their responsibility in all this? I picked up a new STi this past June. I financed it through a bank with the financing department at the dealership acting as their authorized agent. Before they'd sign off on all the paperwork and hand me the keys, they checked and double-checked that I had full coverage on behalf of the bank. I had to have the insurance company fax my coverage info to them directly the day before I went to pick up my car (which had to be ordered in). Then once I arrived to pick up my car, they called the insurance company in my presence just to verbally verify my coverage details on the fax. So my point is, if we're assigning blame, don't forget to spread some of it to the bank itself. They failed to exercise due diligence as the lien holder.

Ill give a full update once i figure out the date and time for the meeting, my sister will also be present in that session.

Again guys thanks for everyone help and support, if im wrong i want to know why i would receive a full coverage confirmation. We are going to printout comparing quotes and gather as much documentation.

The lawyer is going back to the bank to find out some more details which might explain this whole confusion. MacCool, all your question you asked me, i have been forwarding to him and actually got us to find out some of the banks errors involved in this so we are getting somewhere.

I just hope no one ever gets stuck in this predicament ever....it's a really mental stress tester right now. If honestly i didn't have the 370z involvement helping me here, i don't know how i would of handled this...thanks alot guys! =] I can only try my best to win this!

kinda easy to tell if you had full coverage or not.... how much were you paying each month? you said you have other vehicles insured by them... well how much did your policy increase when you added the Z????? if only $50ish than no you didnt have full coverage.

bottom line you cant finance a car without full coverage. trust me your bank will add insurance if they find out you dont.. and they will find out!!!!

OP, you mentioned in 1st post that you have GAP insurance... Who is that through? Do you have the paper work for that? It'd be an interesting twist if the GAP is covered through Progressive....

edit: Progressive calls their version "Loan/Lease Payoff coverage"

I looked at the charges and paper print out matches, my payments are $120 a month. Gap insurance was bought through Nissan, so i guess that would be the bank? And yes i have all the paper work from nissan which shows i purchased gap.

if pay $120 a month to insure the Z annnnnnnnd two other vehicles??? yea you dont have full coverage.

$120 a month for just the Z, yes you have full coverage.

Umm I'm in the 30's and married. I will not be paying 120 bucks a month for insurance I can promise you that. Guess I'll find out when I get one though.

$120 just for the Z.

ummmm ok.... too bad this thread isnt about you....

keep us updated OP, and good luck

I'm just throwing in my two cents. It is MY OPINION, that if he OP originally had full coverage, and at some point there was a some sort of mixup Progressive should do the right thing and cover the vehicle. If he never had full coverage to begin with the OP should have noticed and called them to correct the issue. If this were my car that's how I would feel and handle the situation.

I've never had gap before, but I would assume that part of that insurance clause is having full coverage to begin with..?

:icon17:

nope, GAP is separate

GAP pretty much just covers you if the car is valued at less than what is owed in case of it being totaled. For example if you owe 30k and it gets totaled and is valued at 25k the GAP will cover the 5k difference. At least that is how I understand it. And it isn't a mandatory thing. Just the Comprehensive and Collision is.

You are correct sir, it works in conjunction with your insurance.

I'm doing my personal side investigation on company policies on financed cars, trying to find some documentation that will give me the upper hand in this fight where i can prove buying non full coverage on that car was impossible.