| Author |
 Topic  |
|
givemeroofs
9 Posts |
 Posted - 04/18/2004 : 17:25:34
|
| Here in Houston, we never have problems bringing contractors to losses. They will be there just as the fire department is putting out the fire. In regards to putting other names on a check, I think that we have a policy contract with the insured, not a contractor. Most of the time, regardless of the contractor, the check is made out to the insured and/or the mortgage company. Sometimes it makes the PA's mad, but out contract is with the insured. As far as I know, only an attorney representing an insured is leagally entitled to have their name on a check. Any other thoughts? |
 |
|
|
KileAnderson
USA
875 Posts |
Posted - 04/18/2004 : 17:55:40
|
| By assigning your claim to a roofer you are essentially making him responsible for handling and settling the claim. The only way I know of to do that is to give him power of attorney. Otherwise the contract is between the insured and the carrier. |
|
|
|
LarryW
USA
126 Posts |
Posted - 04/18/2004 : 18:30:51
|
| You can assign the benefits under the policy to whomever you want, but only after the fact of a loss. It is often used when an insured sells his home after a claim is reported and the closing is set prior to the time the claim can be concluded. The right to recover benefits under the policy are transferred to the buyer. It is also sometimes used to transfer the rights to collect replacement cost benefits if an insured decides to sell his home rather that repair it (typically with major damage). The reason I asked about assigning a claim to a roofer is that as Kile points out, it would force the adjuster to deal with the roofer in the settlement of the claim. I have never seen it done with a roofer but, was wandering if anyone else had. Often times contractors, roofers, and/or PAs will submit an authorization to be included as a payee, if that authorization form includes an assignnment of interest in the claim, I believe their name must be included as a payee. Failure to do so, could result in the same problems one might face if they inappropriatly left the mortgage company's name off the draft/check. |
Larry Wright |
|
|
|
JimF
USA
1014 Posts |
Posted - 04/18/2004 : 18:50:56
|
Given some of the recent comments regarding an assignment of policy benefits, need I remind adjusters of the following language which appears within the policy as follows:
SECTIONS I AND II - CONDITIONS
7. Assignment. Assignment of this policy will not be valid unless we give our written consent.
HO 00 03 04 91 |
|
|
|
alanporco
USA
112 Posts |
Posted - 04/18/2004 : 19:44:01
|
| JimF: The provision of the policy that you have quoted refers to assigning the policy to another party. This is before a covered occurrence takes place. Once there is a claim, the assignment of benefits can be made to anyone. This is not the same as attempting to assign the policy which can not be done without the insurance company's approval. The reason for this is that the company wants to be certain they are getting stuck with an insured who is a moral hazard. The original contract was between the company and the original insured, which included a cursory background check on the potential insured. |
|
|
|
JimF
USA
1014 Posts |
Posted - 04/18/2004 : 19:54:54
|
Alan,
I have seen insureds who have also tried to assign the policy to another individual AFTER a loss as well. And not always successfully I might add.
I agree that policy indeminity payments can and sometimes do include additional names on the indemnity check ALONG with that of the insured.
The insurance contract with an insured is voidable if not void absent the presence of an insured with an insurable interest at the time of loss. |
|
|
|
alanporco
USA
112 Posts |
Posted - 04/18/2004 : 20:07:28
|
| Jim: There is a difference between assigning the policy and assigning the proceeds of a claim. The ability to assign the policy is up to the discretion of the company. Once a covered event has occurred, the insured has every right to assign those benefits to anyone he chooses. The company cannot interfere with that, they do not own the benefits of a claim, the insured does. The language of the assignment must be clear that it is only for the benefits due the insured as the result of the claim. |
|
|
|
JimF
USA
1014 Posts |
Posted - 04/18/2004 : 21:37:58
|
| Alan we are now saying the same thing in understanding and agreement. |
Edited by - JimF on 04/18/2004 21:38:49 |
|
|
|
Topic |
|
ethics or kickbacks...
Forum Locked
