| Author |
 Topic  |
|
Cecelia
USA
25 Posts |
 Posted - 01/04/2003 : 17:35:14
|
I was wrong. I just booted up my DDS and it says it will stop operating in 12 days and I must get an upgrade from DDS.
Was anyone going to send me an email about this? I'm not writing estimates using this program right now. Wonder what would happen if I booted the program up on February 1? |
 |
|
|
Gale
USA
231 Posts |
Posted - 01/04/2003 : 18:23:54
|
Clayton I have read what you, Linda and others have posted. I just cannot believe MSB will actually do this. A locked database would not even be practical for use with just one carrier. Everyone changes prices to get agreed to prices. Simsol has a haggle feature and we have a feature called Global Price Change as well so if you have to bump up the price of painting, roofing or whatever across the estimate to close the claim you can. Are all contractors and PA’s that disagree with the MSB price now to be shot dead? It the past differences have been settled with firearms. :(
Folks someone at MSB has to be confused on this issue. Maybe Scott will post a to clear up this misunderstanding. Scott is a straight shooter.
|
|
|
|
Gale
USA
231 Posts |
Posted - 01/04/2003 : 18:36:29
|
| Well I now see the thread was growing while I was typing. I decided not to post the long one (but it is saved)I have written to see if Scott can clear up what is going on plus my Internet at the house is down and kids are with me and at the age of 5 do not sit still very long. It was to be a short stop at the office to handle a support issue until I checked CADO. :) Later. |
|
|
|
ChuckDeaton
USA
373 Posts |
Posted - 01/04/2003 : 19:14:25
|
My friends at GAB tell me that they cannot alter the DDS/Integra database. I don't if that means they don't know how or if the database is locked. However, conversation leads me to beleive that the data base is locked. I have the same fears as Linda and Tom. I created custom databases and if I can't use them or add that 61/2 inch crown that Cecellia talks about then I need a new estimating program.
Just a note Cecellia, Home Depot will give you their ProBook on CD ROM (way cool) and you can download the Craftsman National Estimator for about $20.00. Both excellent rescources. Trim moulding, crown, cove, casing, base and chair rails are common in the new houses |
|
|
|
Cecelia
USA
25 Posts |
Posted - 01/04/2003 : 20:18:24
|
Chuck,
You are such a great source of information. Thank you. That could come in very handy. Unfortunately, we might not be able to add that into our databases. But at least we can get an accurate (or at least a ballpark) figure.
I have been on many storms where the prices were set by the carrier and we changed the prices in the data base to use for the claims in that area (and the prices were not necessarily lower, some were higher, than those listed in the database for the area). If we use a locked system we will have to hand change every single line item in every single claim. Pain in the ***. I will not pay for a system that forces me to do extra work when it is not necessary. |
|
|
|
CCarr
Canada
1200 Posts |
Posted - 01/04/2003 : 22:29:08
|
This follows my comments in the "Coverage forum - 'Lump Sum' thread. I urge you to review that commentary and the link regarding the MS/B blurp. This is basically an addendum to what I suggested was coming to your street corner via MS/B, which unfortunately seems to be a looming reality.
A few months ago a 'conference' took place up here called, "2002 Property Claims Summit", a white shirt and VP level type event; hosted by MS/B - Canada.
A lot of talk regarding claims types and indemnity costs. A SVP from Chubb was quoted as saying, ".... 2001 marked the first time in Chubb's history (Canada) that we paid out more in water damage claims than fire ....". The increased water damage claims are coming from the following categories; freezing, sewer back up, leaky roofs, water ingress and mold.
Now back to the host of the event, MS/B - Canada. Jonathan Kost, from MS/B, pointed out to the gathering that the control of loss depends on two critical factors; front line claims handling skills, and data analysis.
Mr. Kost was reported as saying, ".... having a strong front line on the claims handling side is critical, although the true effectiveness of this to the bottom line depends on data collection and analysis. Only through data collection can you determine best practices, and whats happening out there, and how it is impacting on your bottom line. "Analytics" application in the USA has cut about 5 percentage points of the combined ratio of some insurance companies. Canadian insurers could expect the same." (*Source: Canadian Underwriter, Vol 69, No. 11, Pg 43, November 2002 *)
I hope you see how my harp on the carrier's need for "control" is really emphasized and pushed by those comments. In my opinion, Mr. Kost via MS/B is shifting the importance of the adjuster, and making the adjuster function secondary to the primary issue he is selling - data collection and analysis.
What Mr. Kost of MS/B was doing, was selling to the captive audience at the conference, the MS/B solution to shave 5% off ratios.
Remember when, long time ago, Price-Waterhouse was just a good accounting firm to the corporate world? Then they got into 'this and that', and now through another name, they are God's gift to whatever ails any company. Hey, they probably doubled, tripled or more, their gross revenue from sticking all their fingers in everyone's pie.
Lets look at 'the' lowly software vendor, way back 5 years ago or less. They had a product, they tried to make it the best; and those with a good versatile product and good service grabbed some marketshare. But there is only so many of 'us' to consume this product supplied by 3 or 5 competing software vendors. The 'us' even expanded to contractors and insurers, still has a defined capacity.
So, you gotta grow to survive, what do you do? Convince carriers they have a need - "analytics", define the need with the intangible parameters of human behavior; and sell a solution.
The solution is what will follow the warning signs now showing on your current MS/B software. The study of "analytics" and its application will chew up a lot of carrier 'IT' dollars, and undoubtedly show the fralities of an adjuster who previously did or didn't know how to utilize flexibility and judgement - in the adjustment process.
The wheel will turn and "analytics" will rule the day.
I'm sure you will hear all kinds of nice and conciliatory things from the MS/B people who may address this issue with you.
However, 'we / us' are insignificant peons relative to MS/B's venture into "analytics" and the revenue they will derive from it, as they take the carriers down the trail. |
|
|
|
Linda
USA
127 Posts |
Posted - 01/05/2003 : 08:11:53
|
I have Xactimate 2002 and am not unhappy with it. It works! and I don't have a bizillion windows to fill in information. As for the amount of paper it uses to print, just click the single spacing feature and it saves a lot of paper. Some carriers want the double spacing because it is easier for them to review and no other reason I have ever heard.
When I first got MS/B, I thought it would be great because so many of my "loosely associated adjusters" praised it. Well, learning by the seat of your pants (I always do things the hard way) entails many phone calls to these same adjusters with a "how do I?" message. I got some "oh, that's easy--go to..." answers only to learn that the "go to" didn't exist on my newer version. Then a couple of phone calls later, one for 34 minutes, to MS/B, I learned that feature was being phased out and they were going back to the original "B" formats. Well, if I had wanted "B" then I would have ordered it! Then I learn that you can't incorporate the valuation in the report package feature. You have to print it out separately. What a pain in the kister! So much for the report bundling!
I suppose it is time we acknowledged that they don't design the programs for the little guy's use, they design them for the "biggies" and we end up with a take it or leave it choice. Had I not needed to add a supplement to an estimate I had created in MS/B, I would not have re-newed for 3 more months. Let's see...that supplement cost me $89 for 3 months. Then while working on the supplement I needed to do an interior diagram. I had already completed the roof and exterior diagrams. Then I learn you can't have 3 diagrams in the same estimate. So the solution seemed to be to have to create another estimate, do the interior diagram and then print that diagram out separately. What a pain! not to mention the aggravation. What do you do with you have damage to all 3? If someone knows of another way, please, email me! Just don't tell me you can do it on your version and I can't on mine!
Some things can still be done faster and easier with a #2 pencil--remember those?
I had always believed "DDS" was easier but it seems their new owners have decided to make it more difficult, less user friendly, and could care less how the end user has to manipulate it in order to apply it correctly to the loss. Remember the loss?? well, it got lost somewhere in all the windows...gee, now which one holds the key???
Scott, where are you???? basking in the Florida sun while I am looking at 6 inches of new snow?
|
|
|
|
JimF
USA
1014 Posts |
Posted - 01/05/2003 : 09:48:23
|
I want to jump into this discussion, by first saying that I have always thought that DDS (MS/B) was a 'great reporting' software program and a LOUSY estimating program. Sorry, but I just don't need pictures to point at in order to write an estimate.
Further, I agree with everyone here that an estimating program with a 'locked' database is virtually worthless to a competent adjuster. If what is being reported here is true, and I have no reason to doubt the veracity of the reports, then the days of MS/B as an 'elective' software for cat adjusters are fast drawing to a close.
I have said it before that Xactimate 5.8 was (and to me still is) the best estimating software ever written, with Simsol a very close second.
Having said those things, I would like to comment on some of the things which Clayton has said, and perhaps 'piggyback' on his warnings to us.
Clayton has hit the nail on the head in his observations that the carriers are looking for, and demanding, 'control' in the claims process. While he explains the 'why' to some extent, I am not sure he goes far enough in his explanations; although I have no doubt he easily could.
Insurance is first of all, a workable 'concept' who's existence depends on statistics and statistical analysis of large numbers of risks and large numbers of loss events (measured in the realm of frequency and severity). Thus, we are told and hear repeatedly, that insurance is founded on the principle of "the laws of large numbers."
It is no secret that insurance companies have been undergoing serious transitions due to underperforming financial markets, unanticipated loss exposures/claims (mold and terrorism), and differentials in expense inflation relative to income inflation. Unlike most industries, insurance carriers cannot just raise prices at whim when 'costs' go up.
A recent CBS News report, outlined how many insurance companies suffered significant stock market losses from the fraud and failures of World Com, Enron and other corporate misfits. Some of the larger carriers such as State Farm, Farmers, Allstate, etc., lost Tens of Millions of dollars in each of these failed investments, and cumulatively, in the hundreds of millions of dollars.
That same CBS News report, went on to report what and how some carriers are doing to compensate for such recent reduced investment income from the financial markets.
One example for instance, was a greater reliance by carriers, on the C.L.U.E. (Comprehensive Loss Underwriting Exchange) system for risk selection and risk underwriting.
In California, CBS showed, the example of a homeowner who reported a 'water loss' to his carrier, which was paid by the carrier. However, this same carrier then non-renewed this homeowner's policy. The HO shopped and was then denied coverage by 47 standard carriers before he was finally able to find 'non-standard' coverage from an out of state surplus lines carrier. The cost of his homeowner's premium went from $750.00 per year to around $3,400.00 per year. The California homeowner related to the CBS reporter how local Realtors now tell him his house is non-saleable and virtually worthless, due to an inability to insure.
90% of the nation's carriers are now using the C.L.U.E. system for risk selection and risk underwriting, and those risks with a mold 'history' can expect their heads to be on the chopping blocks next.
One need look no further than the almost instant response of the insurance industry to bring government into the insurance and/or reinsurance picture, after 9-11, to see how insurers are and have moved to limit if not eliminate terror exposures.
Why are all of these things important? Because they are negatively impacting combined ratios of carriers or an insurance industry response to such, with events sending them to dangerous record breaking levels. Simply, when things are stretched far enough, something has to 'give' somewhere.
So, how does that effect us? How do these things filter or trickle down to the cat adjuster in the field?
Lots of ways but I want to examine only a couple of reasons.
With the "Analytics' approach Clayton discusses, carriers are, as he says, concentrating on the two critical factors which can be utilized to contain costs: front line claims handling skills and data analysis. To me, the later is being or will be used to measure the first.
A carrier by the very nature of being privy to data from a significantly large amount of claims data, can and does derive 'information' from a statistical analysis of such data. Information which a cat adjuster or vendor likely may not be aware of nor have access to.
ABC Insurance Company may have a loss experience over a 10 year claim history of 100,000 wind claims a year (or cumulative of 1 million in an analysis period). In actuality, the largess of the real numbers could well be even much higher.
Through the statistical analysis of those 1 million claim events, ABC can determine statistics of loss frequency and loss severity.
Loss severity analysis can provide ABC with 'mean' 'median' and 'mode' rankings of historical as well as projected claim exposure in the future.
This affects cat adjusters in that ABC has a pretty good idea of what any 'particular' claim is 'worth' whether measured by location, policy type, peril or catastrophe event.
ABC now knows and understands, for instance, that a 'typical' wind claim in a typical or particular location SHOULD fall into a ranked category of cost within a range of values. Especially as underwriting and reporting data techniques improves, so does the 'precision' of this data, as well as the ability of ABC to manipulate this data to provide meaningful and effective ways to improve the carrier bottom line by searching for and eliminating those reasons which reflect some statistical aberration from a historical average or median.
In other words, with the proper data available from each and every cat adjuster (or staff adjuster, or adjuster), ABC could quickly by way of IT technology 'spot' those adjusters who 'seem' to be either overpaying or underpaying a claim, based on a comparison with ABC's database of historical losses and indemnity payouts.
I suggest, that with the advent of electronic estimates, carriers have been moving toward the use of these readily available tools to measure and control the claims process. But even more so, to measure and control the front line claims handling skills, as Clayton has observed.
An incompetent adjuster is going to be 'spotted' much more quickly by "Analytics" than by some human observer for the simple reason that an electronic statistical measurement can do in nanoseconds what, in the old days, might have taken several weeks for a busy or overwhelmed claims manager or supervisor to do: Spot the incompetent adjusters and send them home.
Talk with any adjuster who has worked 'clean up' for a storm, and you will hear story after story of adjuster incompetence. And when we, as a profession, fail to 'police our own', it is only a matter of time, before it is done for us. Hence, that is why and where we as cat adjusters are now.
Let's face it, in the past, vendors have been more concerned about getting files closed (and hence getting their profits quickly) and less concerned with 'quality control'. Those days are fast drawing to a close, whether the adjusters or vendors know it or not.
It is interesting to me to read the MS/B 'case study' entitled Company Measures Trends in Adjuster Performance. No where in that study as I read it, do they take any responsibility for some of the problems which they outline.
This past summer (2002), I worked as an insurance consultant (not as an adjuster nor as a public adjuster), for a smaller area hail storm, wherein I was able to examine both sides of the claims process; seeing both the adjuster estimates and the final cost invoices paid to the roofing contractors. (For information, all of the adjusters were staff or staff cat adjusters, and all adjusters used one of the 4 major estimating programs, including MS/B).
In each and every instance, the adjusters wrote the estimate, reported to their carrier, and closed the claim file, with all prices based on the software estimating program databases. Costs for roof components and allowances were generally comparable and within a fairly narrow range of pricing.
Interestingly, after the adjusters had written checks and gone home; after the insureds received their indemnity payments, and the roofs were replaced, each of these insureds had a new roof, no out of pocket deductible expense, and almost every one of them put anywhere between One Thousand ($1,000.00) and as much as Three Thousand ($3,000.00) dollars into their pockets.
Now multiplied by hundreds of storms and millions of claims each year in this country, these overpayments of individual indemnity claims due to faulty software and/or carrier database pricing, I contend, are costing carriers hundreds of millions of dollars in unexpected, unwise, underfunded and unfair excess costs. Incompetent and/or dishonest adjusters add hundreds of millions more in excess as well.
Honest adjusters using inaccurate cost databases: Who's fault is that?
Incompetent or dishonest cat adjusters being sent out to work storm assignments: Who's fault is that?
So, if you really want to know what MS/B is doing and why, I suggest that some of the reasons, at carrier direction and with their complicity, are contained herein within this post.
The bottom line is that things are changing, and some are not for the best.
I do suggest each and every cat adjuster is not only being watched, but measured and statistically compared with historical data through electronic observation, to determine whether you know what you are doing, and then doing it correctly. That trend will only gain momentum with greater intensity and precision in the days immediately ahead.
And I do further suggest, for the reasons outlined above, that Clayton has been and is right: cat adjusting as we have known it will never be the same again, and I wanted to share what I think are some of the reasons why.
Sorry for such a long post. But I do hope it will help frame the larger discussion of the future which is long overdue. |
Edited by - JimF on 01/05/2003 10:31:10 |
|
|
|
tomgriffin56
USA
88 Posts |
Posted - 01/05/2003 : 10:57:46
|
Great post Jim.
Everything I've read on this site in the Forum which touched on the various aspects of this situation lead me to agree wholeheartedly with you and Mr Carr.
The only thing I can come up with as a workable solution is to better myself to the point that I can shine like a new dime. I don't see a change being brought about from within our own ranks (other than the individual betterment sought by and encouraged by our more prolific posters), and I don't think that a change is forthcoming from the individual state DOIs. I believe that it will be a change across the board from the carriers themselves.
Let me know what you think
Tom |
Edited by - tomgriffin56 on 01/05/2003 10:59:15 |
|
|
|
JimF
USA
1014 Posts |
Posted - 01/05/2003 : 11:23:50
|
Tom, Thanks for your comments, and I especially agree that self improvement is going to be the cornerstone for those cat adjusters and adjusters who want not only to survive, but flourish.
I agree as well, that individual state DOI's will largely be unimportant in this process of change, and that change will largely be driven by the carriers.
The implications of claim statistical analysis and readily available electronic risk, loss and claim data, as outlined in my earlier post, goes much further and in so many more directions than what I could share in one post. Those other implications demand exploration and discussion as well.
As an example, it is that very same statistical data (historical and projected) which allows a carrier to utilize inside telephone call centers with great statistical confidence in the reliability and precision of the telephone claims handling process. The same is no doubt true as well for utilizing 'preferred contractors' in the claims process, as statistical comparisons and measurement of individual 'performance' by such contractors allows a carrier to quickly (again in nanoseconds once a 'history' is developed) to spot and remove those who are performing outside of very narrow statistical cost ranges.
Thus the more immediate applications of "Analytics" has helped to incubate and fertilize the growth of alternative claims handling techniques. Growing use of the internet by consumers will quicken the day when the Internet will play a large role in claims resolution to the detriment of the field adjuster; simply because of the amazing precision of historical and projected loss data readily available.
The implications to adjusters and cat adjusters are much greater than I have outlined. Time and expense billing and fee schedule billing analysis immediately comes to mind as one more tool which can be used by a carrier to spot statistical aberrations in narrow range 'expected' billings, to refute or refuse payment for excessive vendor or adjuster billings.
The 'turn and burn' cat adjusters who are not concerned with 'holdbacks' and hence, not reporting comprehensive and complete loss damages, will be spotted and quickly sent home, and in nanoseconds, thanks to electronic technology.
Similarly, the cat adjusters who are writing their estimates consistently just over the next pricing 'breakpoint' in the fee schedule (to increase their billing income), will soon and rather quickly find themselves in the unemployment line.
The implications to each of us are here, whether we elect to see them or not.
In posts ahead, I will share some additional thoughts of what adjusters can and should do to protect themselves from some, though not all, of these forthcoming implications, including implications of greater risk exposures from an E&O standpoint.
As only one example, an adjuster handling commercial or larger than average claims, or any adjuster handling an unusual claim, will find it productive as well as protective, to document the file more fully to explain what statistical data read alone cannot: those losses and claims which fall outside of projected boundaries as measured by narrow range expectations.
Now, let's hear from more of you. |
Edited by - JimF on 01/05/2003 11:57:07 |
|
|
|
Ghostbuster
476 Posts |
Posted - 01/05/2003 : 11:55:35
|
We probaly should set up a new thread for this VERY IMPORTANT topic, but let me add something here.
A few years ago I was in the palatial office of one of the larger crooked contractors here. He showed me a package on his desk from one of the El Biggo computer estimating firms. It was a thick survey requesting unit costs from him. He said that the only way it would completed would be by the estimator trainee in his spare time and since their was no money to be made, it had a low status as project to be done. The information provided by the trainee was all wild guess and pie-in-the-sky at best. I saw it being done.
Folks, this survey info along with other surveys goes back to the software company and out pops the latest price list. Sure, the carrier pricing specialist may tweak it to his/her delight, but the basic premise of accurate info from the source is flawed. That is why so often when we come around, the 'experienced' Insureds are glad to see us and drag out the ice tea and apple pie. We're like Santa Claus in July, whether we know it or not! Super adjuster or Trash adjuster, it doesn't matter because we are using the company provided prices. After we and the storm office are gone to the next storm, these fine Insureds quietly get the repairs done and pocket the change. Happy days all around!
And now...the software boys are trotting out the next greatest and latest scheme, Analytics, to foist on the suckers in the Underwriting and Actuarial departments. I say, sure, why not? Go ahead and reinvent the wheel, be sure to chrome plate it and add the racing stripes and fuzzy dice and, just for fun, build in a self destruct date for when the next new version is due out.
I get a big kick out of watching a con job evolve... |
|
|
|
Linda
USA
127 Posts |
Posted - 01/05/2003 : 12:09:08
|
Jim, can you expand a bit on just how the insureds were overpaid by those vast amounts and why they had no out of pocket deductible expense? If all the adjusters were using different estimating programs how could this happen? and why?
Another interesting thread might be how the insureds are avoiding deductibles. I have always found it amusing when they tell me their contractor is going to accept the insurance check as full payment without any participation on the part of the insured. I have a canned spiel regarding insurance fraud as I am sure you all do.
I suppose all this is bringing us full circle to what our roll in the entire scope of insurance really is becoming. Do they really want a loss adjusted accurately? Yes, I know, they have to make a profit but at what cost? and to whom?
I fully understand the governing pots of $$--reserves and indemnity v. expense and since we, as adjusters get paid out of the latter and not the former pot the payment of our services is not likely to rise. However, the cost of providing that service to the carriers is ever on the rise to the detriment of the adjuster.
Thanks Jim and Clayton for making this an informative and interesting thread! Keep it coming! |
|
|
|
TomToll
USA
87 Posts |
Posted - 01/06/2003 : 12:13:23
|
I am posting the response recieved from Scott. As you know, Janice and I both have been advising adjusters to understand their estimating system prior to going on duty. A major storm or estimate deserves that you understand your estimating system prior to departure. In your off time, learn your system and learn it well. Don't depend on others when you don't know what you are doing. Learn it and then use it. Now isn't that simple.
Here is the response from Scott. He gave me permission to share it.
Thanks for the e-mail. I am constantly reminded of the power of rumors and misinformation Tom. I have not had the time to surf CADO as I am extremely busy with upgrades and working with our clients. Let me tell you the truth about what is happening with the database.
Currently IntegriClaim users are broken down into two individual groups: Those that use IC with the Boeckh databases and those that use IC with the Craftsman database. With the Craftsman database, you can add items to it, you can delete items from it, you can pretty much do whatever you wish with it. We have no lock downs on the "Add to DB".
The Boeckh databases (these are different in that their are individual databases per region) has the limitation that the adjuster cannot add an item to the database. This was at the request of the many companies that use the Boeckh data as they do not want an adjuster to put in a price in the database and the insurance company not be able to track where that cost comes from. Now, with these Boeckh databases there is a work around that allows an adjuster to go into the System Files and create a new database by using one of the existing databases on his or her system as a starting point. So, if someone wanted to, they could create a new database using one of the Boeckh databases but in the settings for that database allow a user to "Add Items To Database" so the adjuster could use the "Add To DB" button on the Estimate Detail screen.
Now, the new MSB Cost Database that is going to be released at the end of the month is different in that it does not allow either adding items to the Database or making a copy of it. Initially, this may seem to be a problem BUT, we are going to be working with individual companies and if they require this MSB Cost Database to have the ability for adjusters to add items to it, etc. we can provide them with that option. Also, MSB works with companies (such as CL) to build storm databases which they can send out to their adjusters on a storm to make sure they are all using the same database. We even go as far as to teach our clients how they can build, modify, and maintain their own databases if necessary.
I hope this helps explain how the Databases work in IntegriClaim.
|
Tom Toll |
|
|
|
JimF
USA
1014 Posts |
Posted - 01/06/2003 : 12:35:34
|
So Tom, how does anything contained within Scott's email to you differ from what has previously been posted under this thread? It seems to me he is confirming what most of the posters have been saying.
Am I missing something in the reading Tom? |
|
|
|
CCarr
Canada
1200 Posts |
Posted - 01/06/2003 : 12:39:37
|
Rumor, misinformation?
How does that response illustrate or define any misinformation? Is the 'rumor' not now a fact?
15 lines for MSB to rehash what, ".... currently IntegriClaim ....".
9 lines for, ".... now the new MSB .... is different .... does not allow ....".
What is the "BUT" going to do for you? MSB is saying, ".... we are going to be working with INDIVIDUAL COMPANIES and if they require ....".
I did say you would hear all kinds of nice and conciliatory things from the MSB people, and I say again 'we/us' are insignificant peons relative to MSB's venture with the carriers. |
|
|
|
Topic |
|
|
|
Integra Estimating Software
Forum Locked
