I managed a convenience store. Like many convenience stores, we had an ATM for customers to use. This lady came in and went straight to the ATM, and she was one of those regulars whom I internally groaned whenever she came in because she was a massive pain to deal with.

Anyway, she’s over at the ATM for several minutes, then calls one of the associates over to help her. I can’t really hear what she was saying, but I could tell she was upset about something, so I went over to see what was going on.

She had a handful of ATM receipts and said she kept trying to get money out, but it was only giving her a receipt, but no cash. While I was standing there, she tried another transaction to get cash, and the ATM spat out another receipt. She shows it to me, at the bottom of the receipt, and all the ones in her hand it says, “transaction declined, NSF.” For anyone who may not know, NSF is insufficient funds, meaning the money wasn’t in her account to withdraw.

I explained that to her and that, unfortunately, there wasn’t anything we could do, and if she didn’t think that was right, then she needed to contact her bank. She got upset and said that was the same thing the associate had told her, and she wanted her cash. Again, I apologized and repeated that she needed to contact her bank if there was more money in there.

She insisted that she shouldn’t have to call her bank, and she just wanted her $100. I told her again that there was really nothing we could do about it, which, of course, wasn’t good enough for her.

I then made the mistake of asking her what she wanted us to do.

She insisted we take $100 out of the register to give to her since she couldn’t get it out of the ATM. I told her we couldn’t do that; if she can’t get it from the ATM, then we can’t help her. Quick note, we didn’t have a cashback option on the registers, so even if by some miracle her card went through for a sale, she still wouldn’t have been able to get cash.

After a back and forth that went on for way too long, she finally looks at me and goes, “well you really are not very helpful.” Stomped her foot like a toddler and stormed out of the store.

Of course, she threatened to call corporate on her way out. I sort of hoped she would, just because I wanted to know what they told her when she complained that we wouldn’t steal money from the register for her.

When I was in college, I dated one of two identical twins. A lot of people gave me s*** about it.

Friend: “Do you have threesomes?”

Me: “No! That’s incest, eww!”

Friend: “Well, how do you tell them apart?”

Me: “That’s quite easy: My boyfriend had a distinct, and very cute, pattern of freckles across the bridge of his nose, and his sister is cisgender.”

One of our clients bought a new house. Rather than sell the old one, he did some work and started renting it as three units. Ergo, I had to write a Homeowner’s Policy for the new house and a Dwelling Fire for the old house. I wrote both of them, listing our client as the lone policyholder of both properties. He signed off on them and assured me all I had to do was make sure nothing got pushed back.

The day before the closing:

Client: “Hi, [My Name]. I had my lawyer double-check the policies. You forgot to put my wife’s name on them.”

Me: “‘Your wife’?”

Client: “Yeah, I got married last year. Didn’t I tell you?”

This is the first I have heard of a wife. As soon as he said it, I pulled up his Automobile Policy and searched our notes. He is the only policyholder and the only driver listed. Our notes make no mention of a wife, either.

Me: “No, no one here heard that. We don’t even know her name.”

Client: “Oh, it’s [Wife].

Me: “[Wife]. Okay. So, she owns the new house, too? And I assume she’s been living with you.”

Client: “Yep. I even put her name on the old house after we were married.”

That is a huge problem. Any resident of an automobile policy holder’s home with a valid driver’s license must be listed as an operator or the company will deny coverage if the unlisted operator was the operator during an accident. Reasonable insurance companies are known to only wag a finger if policy holders do not list someone who has their own insurance, but a quick search of the state’s records confirms the wife has a valid driver’s license, but does not have a car of her own, thus does not have her own insurance. The only good news is that she has not had any accidents in the last six years.

Me: “That is something you should have told us right away. Changing the Dwelling Policies is nothing; a new Binder will cover you until the policy updates. The problem is your car. If she drives it and gets in an accident, there’s no coverage.”

Client: “What!?”

Me: “Listen, it’s okay. I’m going to email a form for you to sign. Once I send you confirmation that I got it back, it’s bound, and she will be covered. Until then, just don’t let her drive.”

Client: “Okay, thanks! Focus on the property for now, though. This is more important.”

Before I even touch the properties, I make a permanent note in our system to outline everything I just learned and what needs to be done.

Once I finish off the properties, I go to address the car. Before I get to the operator’s page, I catch the coverages.

This car is insured to the bare minimum.

These coverages are great for drivers with lots of points, a barely driven car, and no assets besides the car, but a serious liability for anyone who owns their own home or other properties.

For additional context: when someone comes to us looking for insurance, we are legally required to OFFER higher limits than this. (I stress “offer” because this minimum legal offer is not the minimum legal limits; we are legally compelled to OFFER no less than $35,000 per person up to $80,000 total of Personal Injury, but the COVERAGE can go as low as $20,000/$40,000 IF the client explicitly requests we go lower than $35,000/$80,000.)  

Furthermore, since he was driving more than 10,000 miles annually, these low limits were perceived as irresponsible and actually RAISED his premium.

After I run the quote with just his wife added, I go back and requote it with coverages that will actually protect them (you know, Collision, Comprehensive, Property Damage above the minimum that was set when a brand new car cost $5,000, etc.).

Overall, since neither had an at-fault accident or violation in the last six years, it is a single-vehicle policy, they are moving to a better area, I wrote the new policies with the insurance company that was already writing the car and qualified them for a bundle (I do not know why this was not the case initially; it was before my time), and they had responsible limits for a regularly used vehicle, the premium would be only about $250 more annually.

I include both quotes and a second form with my email explaining all of this, noting I absolutely need the driver form back, and the other form is consent to let me change the coverages to match the values in the new quote. 

Only the form to add his wife was returned with the message:

Client: “The coverages are just fine as is. Only add [Wife].”

I make the single change and make careful notes outlining the entire interaction. 

About two months later, the wife rear-ended a car she was following too closely. Guess who was furious that he had to pay out of pocket for most of the other car, the lion’s share of the medical bills, and the entirety of his own car? His lawyer hung his head in shame when my notes and emails ended any chance of a lawsuit against the agency and me.

Related:
Not Much Assurance About The Insurance, Part 24
Not Much Assurance About The Insurance, Part 23
Not Much Assurance About The Insurance, Part 22
Not Much Assurance About The Insurance, Part 21
Not Much Assurance About The Insurance, Part 20

I am strolling into the local [Pharmacy Chain Store] with a black ringer t-shirt with loud type font and black dress pants after work. I had the passing thought that someone, somewhere, was going to think I worked for said store.

I brushed it off as, naturally, I wasn’t dressed anywhere close to a red polo and khakis that most of the employees seemed to wear. I had a mission: get in and get out, with vitamins and Halloween candy. 

As I mosey down an aisle, arms full of bags (I had forgotten to grab a basket because it was “just a few things”), I politely asked a fellow customer to move. She was fiddling with a display piece of some kind, but moved to the side.

And so it began:

Customer: “I’m just trying to see if this works.”

Me: “Good idea.”

Customer: “Do you suppose if I hit the on switch, it’ll turn on?”

Me: *Distractedly browsing the Halloween décor.* “Well, you’d hope.”

Customer: “So you don’t know?”

That was when it hit me. She thought I worked there.

As I uttered a faint “no, I don’t know—” another customer – who had apparently heard all this and still made his choice – dove into frame to blurt out:

Customer #2: “Do you have any Almond Joys?”

All the quick remarks fled my brain. Clutching my arms full of candy, at the end of a long workday, blasted by fluorescent overhead lights, all I could think to say was:

Me: “I don’t… I don’t work here.”

Customer #2: “Oh…”

He stared at me until I left the area, deciding my unintentional costume of “employee” to this store wasn’t doing me any favors.

To the two customers I inadvertently tricked (I guess): Happy Halloween!

I work for an insurance agency. In the world of homeowner’s insurance and mortgages, the banks want to confirm their investment is still safe and in order every time the policy renews. Rather than call us, this one bank faxed over a form requesting the Declarations Page with a correct Mortgagee Clause be sent over. As is becoming more common, this form only directed me to a website that will take an electronic file. What made this unique was the absence of a phone number or email address for other forms of communication. Since this policy did not require a change, I sent that right over.

The following day, we got a fax from the same bank requesting the same policy, and we still only had the single method of reaching the bank. I double-checked this form against what he sent yesterday, but nothing was different. I also double checked where I sent it, and nothing I entered was wrong. Since we were doing fine with other companies on our end, I figured it was just a technical glitch on their end, and they needed me to keep trying until it worked.

The next day, the request was faxed again, once again giving us only the website. This time, there was a note attached:

Note: “All documents sent electronically must be sent in PDF format. Other formats cannot be accepted.”

This was an interesting note, since our system, by default, makes these electronic document bundles a PDF. Just to be sure I was not imagining that, I checked that my bundle is, indeed, a PDF. After confirming the note was unnecessary, I sent the bundle again. I also tried to fax it back through the number at the top of our fax printout, but it bounces back every time; evidently, this bank can only send faxes, not receive them, so I still have no other way to send the documents.

Once again, this request was faxed over with a single form of contact the next day. The note this time:

Note: “We need to confirm the policy holder, the property address, the policy duration, the Dwelling Coverage, and the Mortgagee Clause. Your PDF does not offer any of this information. Please send the correct PDF.”

At this point, I am second-guessing reality. I pull open my bundle and call over another agent to check it against the note to make sure I am not missing something.

Agent: “Are they f****** stupid?”

He had the brilliant idea to highlight the requested information in different colors and make a key for the bank. It was actually quite fortunate I involved him, since I was far less civil when planning out this cover page to explain our objections to the repeated requests.

The next day, the bank finally broke and called us.

Bank Agent: “Why do you keep sending me the wrong documents?”

Me: “We’re following your requests. What, specifically, is wrong with them?”

Bank Agent: “What is the duration of the policy?”

Me: “Is the PDF open in front of you?”

Bank Agent: “Yeah.”

You guessed it: I had to hold his hand through the entire PDF. Since I was not making a simple list of all of this information, he would have to read these documents himself and find it (you know, actually do his job). Even color coordination was too much work for him. Once we are done:

Me: “So what is the problem?”

He hung up, correctly guessing I was going to ask for a manager.

I go through the call history and autodialed back.

Automated Service: “We’re sorry, but the number you have dialed is not able to receive incoming calls.”

We do not normally do this, but after this, I helped the client refinance his mortgage with a different bank.

Related:
Taxing Faxing, Part 41
Taxing Faxing, Part 40
Taxing Faxing, Part 39
Taxing Faxing, Part 38
Taxing Faxing, Part 37