Screw Geico.

So, yesterday I was wondering how sky-high my insurance would go if I added (we'll call him) Jack to my auto policy with Geico. I went through their little online process thingy to get a quote for such an occurrence. This is the shitstorm that has followed:
(personal information has been asterisk-ed or appropriately changed)

September 24, 2009

Dear Wharf Rat:

Thank you for using GEICO's online services. My name is Kristina ****** and I am happy to assist you today.

I received your request for a quote to add Jack to your policy. Your current six-month premium is $4**.30. If you were to make this change, your six-month premium would remain $4**.30.

Your premium may vary based on the information you provide and the motor vehicle report that we would review for Jack.

Please note that this person would need to be added to your insurance policy if he has a valid driver license and resides in your household. You are obligated to advise GEICO of any licensed resident drivers. This will ensure that you are insured in the event of a loss. Please reply to this message to have Jack added to your insurance policy. I will be happy to update your account.


Reply the first:

Thank you for your prompt reply :-) Currently, Jack is not licensed and does not drive, the quote was hypothetical, but thank you for your concern.

Sincerely,
Wharf Rat

Their comeback:

September 24, 2009

Dear Wharf Rat:

Thank you for your reply. In your reply, you state that Jack is not licensed. Did she voluntarily surrender her driver's license, or is it suspended in some way? Does she live in your household?

Thank you for your patience. We appreciate your business and look forward to serving your insurance needs for years to come.

Mark ******
geico.com
Internet Agent

(I completely ignored Jack's seemingly overnight transformation into a girl, since I don't remember if I specified in the quote request wether he was male or female.)

Me again:

Jack's license is currently suspended, and yes, he lives in my household. The only reason I was looking for the quote is because I was wondering how much more my policy would cost if he paid everything off and got him his license back. Since your quote didn't include any of the numerous tickets he's gotten in the last couple years, it isn't exactly accurate. However, it doesn't matter at the moment, since the fees required to reinstate his license are much more than he'll be able to afford for a while.

Thank you for your replies.

Sincerely,
Wharf Rat

Geico again:

September 25, 2009

Dear Wharf Rat:

Thank you for your response. My name is Vanessa and I will be happy to assist you today.

Because Jack resides in your household, we are obligated to insure her on your policy. I understand that her license is suspended and you do not wish to insure her at this time.

In order for this to happen, we will need you to sign a Named Driver Exclusion form. If you decide to sign this form, you will be acknowledging that GEICO will not be liable to pay any future claims that may happen if Jack is a driver of your insured vehicles.

This form will be added to your policy and it can only be removed with the prior approval of our Underwriting Department. For your convenience, I will email the Named Driver Exclusion form to you in a separate message shortly.

(random crap excluded)

Thank you for your patience and attention to this matter. My goal is to provide you with excellent customer service. Please feel free to contact me at geico.com if you have any further questions or concerns. I will be happy to help. Thank you for using GEICO's online services and for being a GEICO policyholder. We appreciate your business.

Sincerely,
Vanessa *********
GEICO Internet Service Department

(still ignoring the Amazing Reversible Sex Change)

My third attempt:

Hello, Vanessa. You're the third person I've replied to about this, in as many e-mails. I am not married to Jack, he just lives in the same house that I do (the house that doesn't belong to either one of us). Legally, he has no real ties to me, and he doesn't drive my car, either he rides the bus or I drive him. Please explain to me how you are required to insure someone who has no legal ties to me?

Sincerely,
Wharf Rat

Them again (note how the wording is almost exactly the same as their last missive):

September 25, 2009

Dear Wharf Rat:

Thank you for using GEICO's online services.

Hello, my name is Becki and I am happy to assist you today.

I can certainly understand your concerns regarding your policy. Under the terms of your policy contract, we must insure any driver that has access to operate your vehicle. This may apply even if the driver is not a resident of your household.

We are insuring the exposure that Jack presents in the event he drives your vehicle. This is the reason that Jack was added as an insured operator.

In your messages to us, you have indicated that Jack does not own a car, or have other insurance. We must receive documentation that will ensure us we are no longer obligated to insure him as a driver. This is the reason the Named Driver Exclusion form was offered.

If this is an option that you would like to consider, please respond to this email so we can review your policy as soon as possible. My goal is to provide you with excellent customer service. Please let me know if I can be of further assistance by contacting me at geico.com.

Sincerely,
Rebecca Mercado
GEICO Internet Service Department


So this is the first one in which I think someone might have actually READ my e-mail. Unfortunately, the still misunderstood my concern. Hopefully this next and most recent reply will make it to someone with an I.Q. higher than their shoe size, or I think I might seriously shop for other insurance. I think I'd be willing to take a $50 dollar a moth hit to NOT have to deal with this shit anymore. Lucky I rooted out the deep-seated idiocy before I actually had to use their useless monetary-black-hole of a policy.

My most recent attempt:

Hello Becki,

I think I may be starting to sound a little irrtitated with this whole thing, and that's probably because I am. All I asked for was a quote. That's all I wanted. And if I read this e-mail correctly, I'd have to insure everyone on my damn block, including the 10-year-olds across the street, because they could possibly have access to my car.

It's more likely that some random person wandering through my neighborhood would steal my car and crash it, than Jack drive it at all. And I'll be damned if I put my ass on the line just in case Jack does go off his rocker one of these days, jack my car and crash it through the front window at Macy's.

So, I would really like for you to explain to me why an UNRELATED PERSON who is NOT LEGALLY ALLOWED TO DRIVE (much like my 1-year-old son and the previously mentioned 10-year-old across the street) that I was thinking of doing a favor for, now needs to be added to my policy, when the rest of the world doesn't.

Sincerely,
Wharf Rat


I swear to God if I get the same cookie-cutter bullshit back again, I'm dropping their asses like a radioactive hot potato. Fucking imbeciles.


EDIT: As of Saturday morning, they have added Jack to my policy and will not remove him unless I provide a utility bill for him elsewhere, or provide prove that he is insured by different policy. Even though he has no license, and absolutely no use for insurance because of that lack of license. Somehow I'm thinking this can't possibly be legal - they're going to charge me for services that I neither asked nor signed for. Screw this, screw them, I'm finding myself a new insurance company.

People, Geico may have fantastic prices for those of us with a couple 'oopsie's on our records, but they are run entirely by mentally deficient, butt-munching baboons. Oops, never mind - that's an insult to baboons everywhere.

Bend Over, America.

Just found this online while researching the 'sin tax' up here in Washington (the one that I didn't know much about until today). I just don't know what to say (or rather, I do, but it's a bit higher than a PG-13 rating).

Published on Sept. 8, 2009(click on the link for the full article, I'm just putting my favorite bits here)

"...The President, in an interview with Men's Health magazine released yesterday, said he thought taxing soda and other sugary drinks is worth putting on the table as Congress debates health care reform. ..."

"...Despite that debacle, congressional lawmakers have considered soda taxes as one way to cover the cost of revamping the nation's health care system, estimated to eat up much as $1 trillion over the next decade. ..."

"...Obama acknowledged that the idea could lead to charges that Uncle Sam is trying to dictate personal diets, but he hinted the trade-off may be worth it. ..."

"..."It is true, though, that if you wanted to make a big impact on people's health in this country, reducing things like soda consumption would be helpful."..." <----that last being a direct quote from Big Broth- oops, President Obama.

I think this is rather appropriate:

“First they came for the Communists, but I was not a Communist, so I said nothing. Then they came for the Social Democrats, but I was not a Social Democrat, so I did nothing. Then came the trade unionists, but I was not a trade unionist. And then they came for the Jews, but I was not a Jew, so I did little. Then when they came for me, there was no one left to stand up for me.” - Pastor Martin Niehmoller

So they've come for the smokers, and anyone who dares to enjoy a beer. Now the soda. Next the fast food. Then the motorcycle drivers and the skydivers. Until we all just go to work and come home (probably by foot, because driving is dangerous), eat bland food, watch non-inflammatory T.V. shows, get the required eight hours of sleep, and wake up and do it again. Every day. Laugh if you must, I suppose I'm slightly paranoid, but just wait; the government is going to keep pushing just that little bit further, and a little bit further, desensitizing the population every time they take just a little more freedom.

Good Morning, America. Time to bend over and take some more.

yet another wonderful thing from YouTube...

Yes indeed-y.

Oh my...

Ok, so it's the second video in one day, but I just can't resist. One of my instructors is addicted to finding machining-type videos on youtube to show the class, and today we ran across this one - he stopped it about 30 seconds in. I don't think you have to be a machinist to laugh at this, but let me know if I'm wrong...

Spiffy spiffy internetz...

This is just awesome...

I think I feel old...

Doesn't anybody remember Windows 95 anymore? I try searching for just about anything involving 95 on Google, and I get absolutely NOTHING that actually has anything to do with 95. XP? Sure. Vista? Of course, everyone wants Vista!! What the hell am I supposed to do when the hardware specs will barely support Windows 98, much less Vista???? I'm seriously starting to think that the more mainstream computers become, the less anybody knows about them.

EDIT: Oh yeah. And any laptop that you find for $35 is kind of a ripoff, even if it does technically run. And 32 mb of memory is NOT going to run AutoCAD 2009, even with a virtual machine setup.

Now I'm done. Maybe.

I Think The Graham Crackers Were Laced...

...because the only explanation for the existence of "Yo Gabba Gabba" is Jim Henson on an acid trip.