| Author |
 Topic  |
|
KileAnderson
USA
875 Posts |
 Posted - 11/26/2003 : 09:20:09
|
Jennifer,
While I completely understand your point and agree with it for the most part the fact of the matter is you can't make everyone happy. What I was trying to point out to Statman is if the buyer in his scenario felt a little out of the loop it is because he IS out of the loop. The adjuster has no contractual obligation to communicate with him at all. In fact, depending upon the privacy laws of the state, he could be in very big trouble if he communicates any aspects of the claim with the buyer at all.
After a few years in this business it became readilly aparent to me that I can't base my own happiness and job satisfaction on making sure all of my insured's are happy with their settlement. There are some people that you can't make happy no matter what you do. I find the job is alot more satisfying if you stick to the policy, treat everyone fairly and let the chips fall where they may. That isn't to say that I don't care about my insured's or don't want them to be happy. I do, I like it alot better when they are happy, but I don't look for my job satisfaction in their happiness.
If the above claim had been assigned to me, I would have spoken to the insured and asked him how involved I can make the buyer in this process. Maybe the adjuster did just that and the seller told him to communicate directly with him and his only contact with the buyer for access to the house. We don't know what was established between adjuster and seller.
But the bottom line is in reality, buyer's happiness and seller's happiness for that matter play no part in the settlement process. I've had insured's that got everything they asked for and still weren't happy. Many people expect so many things that aren't in the policy and aren't covered. You just can't make them happy. |
 |
|
|
jlombardo
USA
212 Posts |
Posted - 11/26/2003 : 13:38:05
|
Jennifer,
You touch on some interesting points, but we are bound to adjust the loss to a conclusion based on the policy and the parameters established therein: we are not bound nor paid to adjust a loss until the insured smiles. If, through proper caims handling and proper adjustment, we can make the insured smile, then great.....but the adjustment is still governed by the policy that is enforce on the risk at the time of loss. It is wonderful to be popular, but not at the expense of a proper adjustment. Do not get blinded by "stats" of happiness.
The basic foundation of Statman's post about the "Buyer needs to be happy" has no place in the proper adjustment of the loss. |
|
|
|
StatMan
USA
9 Posts |
Posted - 11/26/2003 : 14:21:12
|
Seller's new home is not insured with SIC and Seller says he'll remove SIC from his rental property. Realtors have their commissions at risk due to SIC's customer service so will probably not recommend SIC to their clients. Nobody's unhappy with the moneys, just the service.
Kile's approach from the beginning - ask Seller if it's okay to communicate with Buyer - would have been very helpful.
I edited the original post, Question 3. Can you find a way to pay for loss of use? (In reality Realtors+Seller have agreed to pay Buyer directly.)
|
|
|
|
Topic |
|
|
|
Damage on closing day
Forum Locked
