| Author |
 Topic  |
|
Ghostbuster
476 Posts |
 Posted - 03/03/2004 : 09:45:07
|
| Johnd, with the price of gasoline being what it is today, (and for no good reason either, I might add), unless we're eating his cooked brisket, we can't afford to light it up. |
 |
|
|
Redeye
2 Posts |
Posted - 03/03/2004 : 12:32:53
|
| 16.44 a day with no day off, your right I would be tired, that's why you hire people and train them. |
Edited by - Redeye on 03/03/2004 12:35:55 |
|
|
|
whatco
USA
9 Posts |
Posted - 03/09/2004 : 14:46:22
|
Seems everyone is either on one side or the other here. Republicans vs. Democrats?? My position might be Independent I guess. I know there are some legitimate mold claim out there and some not so legitimate. While many adjusters hear gossip from the insurance companies that mold is a fabricated hype and that is all they can relay to others, I have found that those adjusters to be less than intelligent. For those who say mold hurts everyone, the same applies to them as well.
Yes we have lived with mold all our lives. We have also lived with bees and wasps all our lives as well. Most people who get stung are barely affected. However, there are some who, if they get stung, must be at the hospital emergency room within 15 minutes or be dead.
Not everyone reacts the same to mold or bee stings. I have been to an allergist's office and noticed a sign on the front door that stated no one can enter this office if wearing ANY cologne. I asked the office why, and they told me how they had a patient in their office one time that was highly allergic to many things in the environment. Later, someone wearing a small amount of cologne came in and the first patient dropped dead from an allergic reaction. Therefore, each mold case should be investigated based upon its individual merits, not by stupidity.
I question the insurance problem as being the entire fault of attorneys and greedy homeowners. Yes there are many, but the insurance companies are, in my opinion, just as to blame by paying outrageous remediation fees. I once wrote remediation estimates for a remediation company and had one loss where it exceeded $40,000 with barely any mold. But I was told this is what to charge. I asked how long the insured should be out of their home and he grinned and replied, "If it takes us over 2 weeks to remediate this home, something is wrong". $20,000 a week is almost as much as independent adjusters make! I have personally walked in on some of the projects where there was only some draping done and mold sprayed over. The employees were of Mexican decent and not paid much. A logical deduction would be someone was getting financially well.
If I were in charge, I would have gotten the State to allow us to review the contractor's costs for price gouging. Recon what I would have found???? Florida set rate standards in Hurricane Andrew, for those old enough to remember, and the adjusters were required to report to the D.O.I. any contractors that appeared to be price gouging. Why not in TX with mold remediation contractors?
There are ways that would have been easy enough to control this mold delima without merely passing it on to the insureds. A way that might have weeded out the illegitimate claims.
I have also personally observed a mold situtation where the insurance carrier sent in their own contractor to repair the insured's property. Both the contractor and adjuster refused to tear out all the water damaged materials so the insured (who was provably medically sick from the mold), so the insured would not use her A.L.E. The contractor waited a week,then only returned to pick up their fans and to say they did not have enough manpower to make repairs and walked off the job. The homeowner's insurance company, knowing the situation, refused to pay the insured any money for over a month to get the damage repaired. We are talking a loss over $13,000; not the kind of funds every homeowner has lying around. That homeowner then found mold growing and the carrier told her they needed to now do a mold investigation and not to disturb anything until after they completed their investigation. (Once the mold was discovered, the carrier rushed over the check for her original damages, but it was too late for her to make repairs due to having to wait on the carrier's environmentalist to conduct his investigation.) The environmentalist refused to look at all the areas where water poured from this "covered" water loss causing saturation and the carrier had their remediation contractor make an estimate based upon the knowingly inadequate environmentalist's report. The insured went out and obtained her own environmentalist's report to get a fair assessment of her damage. She then faxed it to her company who sat on it for about 3 weeks then e-mailed her they were denying anything over their environmentalist's report because she failed to mitigate her damage. You know, if she filed a lawsuit, the company would cry "lawsuit abuse"!
That insured turned out to be one of those individuals who is highly allergic to the mold and had severe reactions to it. Her carrier is now grilling her with E.U.O.'s and basically told her to sue them. Her doctor forbid her to live in the house and the carrier told her they were refusing to pay her all her A.L.E.
It might also be noted that the adjusting company was an independent who took instructions from the carrier.
From what little I read of the Melinda Ballard (Dripping Springs, TX case), it seemed the independent adjuster was trying to work with the Ballards and just did not have all the answers as to what was causing the damage(s). Unlike the Ballard case, this insured worked with her insurance company who knowingly failed to do what was contractually right and even went as far as to find ways to deny portions of her covered claim.
I totally disagree that it is ALL the insured's fault in mold cases. Like it or not, there IS a lot of Bad Faith going on out there as we speak and I, for one, have witnessed it happening. I am even witnessed a carrier and their independents instruct the small guys to deny or pay M/C's on roofs without even climbing the roof. They told the adjusters quality did not matter, only closures. Now how is that the insured's fault???????? |
|
|
|
khromas
USA
103 Posts |
Posted - 03/09/2004 : 21:02:39
|
Mr. Whatley,
I am curious as to what line of work you are in and the background/basis of your earlier remarks. The way you have outlined everything makes it look like the proverbial "I personally know of a friend's cousin's girlfriend's neighbor who had all this happen to them"!
In regards to your questions regarding the pricing used by remediation companies, I think we (adjusters and insureds) ALL agree that those prices were outrageous. Unfortunately, a great many people made obscene amounts of money off of a situation that has been determined to not be as severe as it was originally made out to be. There is plenty of blame to go around about that and most of it DOES need to be lain at the feet of homeowners, lawyers and an un-bridled media who sought only to sensationalize the issue. There is not a single insurance carrier who MADE money due to the mold situation during that time. (I know that the issue is different now with the changes in policies without the subsequent reduction in premiums.) As to your assertion that the carriers should have stepped in to reduce remediation costs, there are serious legal issues involved there. First is the fact that it is the homeowner who has entered into a contract with the remediation company, not the carrier. It is their responsibility to deal with the pricing issues. Second, imagine the outcry that would erupt the first time a carrier forced a remediation company to reduce it's pricing and that situation eventually wound up in front of a jury. A plaintiff's attorney would salivate over just a scenerio with the accusations that the 'big, bad insurance company' endangered the lives of these poor, helpless insureds. It was a no-win situation for the carriers and they did the best they could under the circumstances. (No, I am NOT a staff adjuster for any carrier!)
I would appreciate your reply post as to my question at the on-set of these remarks. |
Kevin Hromas |
|
|
|
Ghostbuster
476 Posts |
Posted - 03/10/2004 : 08:12:29
|
Careful there, khromas, our boy whatco has the background in both contracting and adjusting that qualifies his observation. What I percieve his post to reflect is dismay and confusion over the nightmare of the mold wars. In fact, the Insured has been led down the primrose path by outside influences such as the media and outrageous contractor advertising. And, the resistance and/or over compensation by the carriers in their efforts to practice legal defensive tactics did not encourage a sense of tranquility, either.
But...the mold wars in Texas are history. I believe Whatco is trying to make sense of it all during this hangover period. |
|
|
|
trader
USA
236 Posts |
Posted - 03/10/2004 : 16:36:44
|
| Mold in Texas is not a factor in regular claims in 2004. Just cut it out and haul away in the dumpster or back of the PU. |
Edited by - trader on 03/15/2004 10:49:13 |
|
|
|
Topic |
|
|
|
More mold questions
Forum Locked
