| Author |
 Topic  |
|
CCarr
Canada
1200 Posts |
 Posted - 10/19/2003 : 09:54:57
|
Lonnie, welcome back to our shack.
In regards to your "list of 10", as you know your #9 "as far as owing to match ....", was well bounced about last year in another thread; without any conclusive direction being achieved. However, since then, I direct you to the Coverage Forum and the "Like, Kind & Quality ...." thread, where once again that issue surfaced. But, I think you will be pleasantly surprised to see that there are two court cases mentioned and summarized, that do in fact support your contention to varying degrees.
Now, to the topic at hand, in exchange for that friendly offering, can you throw some popcorn or candy our way, and I beg Kile's indulgence with the impending class action you elude to. I would be quite interested in hearing anything more you could tell us of the alleged faults in the "previously settled roof claims".
Fair is fair, lets exchange tidbits.
For those that aren't aware, or familiar with old threads from last year, Lonnie walked into our playground and there was quite a scuffle; but in the end we all went back into the clubhouse after recess, shoulder to shoulder. Lonnie is miles ahead of his student brethern, the Todd boy. |
|
|
CatDaddy
USA
310 Posts |
Posted - 10/19/2003 : 12:18:45
|
Everyone sit back and watch this one. It should be good. Kinda like watching the vultures coming to feed on the Discovery Channel.
Lonnie will tell us all about how he is an integral part of the next big class action and we should all take a knee in his present. Another important roofer with a limo about to take the world by storm with his original idea. His ex-brother-in-law the attorney said he'd do all the paperwork for free and they'd split it all right down the middle. 70/30.(That's roofer math) With their PA buddy in tow, they will be unstoppable! You see these kinda guys on MTV Cribs all the time!
|
 |
|
|
KileAnderson
USA
875 Posts |
Posted - 10/19/2003 : 14:34:53
|
Lon, I'm not sure where all this "living wage" business comes from. Being a staunch Republican I don't believe anyone is "entitled" to a living wage. You should earn it. If you can't earn it in your chosen profession then maybe you should either choose another profession or become better at what you do so that your services are of a higher value to those whom you service. (I notice that you seem to have changed professions.)
I'm not bragging but over the last 5 years my income has gone up every year, significantly I might add. Adjusters do earn a living wage. A very good wage at that. The ones who don't are the ones who either don't get out and hustle or just bitch and moan so much that the carriers or vendors send them on their way because they aren't worth the headache. I've seen many experienced adjusters get left in the dust because they have been doing it the same way for 20 years and there have been so many changes in the industry that they have become dinosaurs.
The rule you have to live by is the only constant is change. Be flexible, do what is asked of you and get the job done. I wish I had a dollar for everytime I've heard "This manager doesn't know what he's doing, that isn't the way we did it in (Denver, Dallas, Omaha, Cleveland, Philly, you pick one)". I'd have my new pickup paid for by now if I did.
I think Brooks said it best when he stated "I ride for the brand". If the manager says do it this way, that's the way it gets done because he is the one who approves the invoice from which your paycheck is derived.
All that being said, please elaborate on this crass, um, class action suit you have mentioned earlier. |
|
|
|
ALANJ
USA
159 Posts |
Posted - 10/19/2003 : 15:31:34
|
| How can you have a class action lawsuit, if the damages of each potential plaintiff are different? |
|
|
|
Lon Sterling
68 Posts |
Posted - 10/19/2003 : 15:58:58
|
Kile: You're preaching to the choir about making a way in the world for yourself. You won't be though as YOUR fee schedules continue to decrease. As you grow less able and less willing to up production at the expense of quality and health, you'll find out there are people who will work more cheaply than you. When the insurer's motivation is the bottom line, then he will eventually find someone who will thump that roof for him cheaper than you are willing to do it.
In 15 years, they may have high-definition satellites doing your roof inspections! LOL!
ALANJ,
I know you must now have your very own Doctor of Jurisprudence sheepskin. However, please don't tell me your question wasn't a typo.
I assume from your comment that the Class Action settlement against James Hardie Building Products (Hardie Shake/Slate) for roof failures must not be valid because those damages varied for each plaintiff along with the product's type, extent of damage and size of affected area. Sorta like a roof claim. No, not sorta like. It WAS a roof claim.
You might check http://www.hardieroofingclaims.com and let me know if you can get the settlement overturned. I'm sure they would pay the big bucks.
That is not the case I'm working on and I'm not at liberty to discuss that case at this point but I will let you know as soon as that information can be divulged.
Kindest regards, |
Lon |
|
|
|
CatDaddy
USA
310 Posts |
Posted - 10/19/2003 : 15:59:03
|
Good words Kile. The ones who complain are the ones that want their living handed to them. They work a couple of tough files and they want special treatment. The ones who have a good work ethic are doing fine. $100K is a drop in the bucket. I know several already in the $170s for the year. Ofcourse these are IA working for the Big 5 vendors. I cant speak for any others.
Well Lon, you still didnt tell us about your big money maker. Also, what are you? You talked bad about roofers and adjusters. Where does that leave you? Please say you're a PA. I need a good laugh. |
|
|
|
KileAnderson
USA
875 Posts |
Posted - 10/19/2003 : 16:17:07
|
CatDaddy, thanks for the kind word. Everyone I know and work with is doing very well this year. It doesn't matter what the fee schedule is, if you aren't working you still get paid the same.
AJ, I think you struck onto something here. If it is a class action suit, all the members of the class must have something in common. What could that be? If Lon is posting here, it must have something to do with insurance, specifically claims. Since this is a site mostly for adjusters it must be in our area of endeavour, claims handling, possibly a bad faith issue?
Lon, am I getting warm? |
|
|
|
Lon Sterling
68 Posts |
Posted - 10/19/2003 : 16:32:42
|
| Kile: Dumb is warmer and there's a lot of that in both the roofing and claims business. I guess cuz cheaper is better or that's what people think. Can you guys not click on links? |
Lon |
Edited by - Lon Sterling on 10/19/2003 16:33:52 |
|
|
|
KileAnderson
USA
875 Posts |
Posted - 10/19/2003 : 16:45:36
|
| Lon, I have no idea what that last post of yours means. I clicked on the link, so what? You said you are working on another class action suit. |
|
|
|
Ghostbuster
476 Posts |
Posted - 10/19/2003 : 16:57:18
|
| Lon, if you must be abrasive, please leave. If you can remain civil and, perhaps witty, please stay. |
|
|
|
Lon Sterling
68 Posts |
Posted - 10/19/2003 : 17:57:41
|
With all due respect, Ghost,
This is witty and non-abrasive?
Catdaddy:
"Well Lon, you still didnt tell us about your big money maker. Also, what are you? You talked bad about roofers and adjusters. Where does that leave you? Please say you're a PA. I need a good laugh."
|
Lon |
|
|
|
CatDaddy
USA
310 Posts |
Posted - 10/19/2003 : 19:02:34
|
| Witty-abrasive maybe? You get it like you give it Lonnie. Like you said, if my post intimidate you.....take the train. |
|
|
|
ALANJ
USA
159 Posts |
Posted - 10/19/2003 : 20:10:11
|
Lon:
Please, tell us the required elements to certify a class? |
|
|
|
Lon Sterling
68 Posts |
Posted - 10/19/2003 : 20:51:32
|
Alan,
Simplified, the elements would be:
Numbers - an adequate number of plaintiffs, Commonality - common damages and legal issues, Typicality - each class member's claim must come from the same event, and must make the same legal argument, Adequacy of Representation - the representative plaintiff will adequately protect and represent the interest of the class, Viability of Defendant - although it is not a requirement of the court, it is reasonable to assume that if the accused does not have the means to compensate for the alleged damages and legal costs, it would be difficult to entice a law firm to represent the class.
Alan, I'm really not at liberty to discuss the case I'm on. I brought up the Hardie one because it dealt with roof claims. You might even check on another where a class was certified to "go after" insurance policy money in force during the time the damage occurred but still AFTER the company had filed bankruptcy and the policy was cancelled. Check Firefreeclaims.
Or was your post some sort of test? |
Lon |
|
|
|
ALANJ
USA
159 Posts |
Posted - 10/20/2003 : 06:19:45
|
Lon:
Why hasn't toxic mold claims been classed? The class actions you refer to involve products. I think you are talking about attempting to class some kind of (negligent adjusting thing). It's very difficult to class a (service or act) class. If they win, we win. Because all the claims will have to be reopened and readjusted, More money for the masses. |
|
|
|
pilot48
USA
78 Posts |
Posted - 10/20/2003 : 07:56:40
|
Alan
Why is his "case" such a big secret? If it's truly a filed matter, is it not a public record? Other then maybe his particular involvment pre testimony, is not all filings and the like a public matter which can be viewed at the Clerk of Courts in the jurisdiction which said matter was filed?
|
|
|
|
Topic |
|
|
|
Class Action - Roofs - Closed Claims??
Forum Locked
