| Author |
 Topic  |
|
LarryW
USA
126 Posts |
 Posted - 04/21/2004 : 18:56:37
|
| Kile, Larry Hardin posted some pics of it, look on the bulletin board. |
Larry Wright |
 |
|
|
alanporco
USA
112 Posts |
Posted - 04/21/2004 : 21:20:24
|
| Test squares are undoubtedly the result of lost law suits. Probably Big Red lost a case where there was no documentation of no damage in the file (other than the adjuster's notes, if any). The court probably found for the plaintiff noting the lack of documentation to support the carrier's position. Thus all future files will be properly documented. This probably holds true for every additional piece of paper added to claims files over the past 40 years. |
|
|
|
fivedaily
USA
258 Posts |
Posted - 04/21/2004 : 21:45:09
|
The mantra of any good claims adjuster should be...
"Document. Document. Document."
That is what makes a test square valuable.
Jennifer |
|
|
|
Johnd
USA
110 Posts |
Posted - 04/21/2004 : 21:54:52
|
| I agree Jennifer. I cannot remember adjusting a roof where I DID NOT complete at least one test square. Always used chalk to write the insured's last name under the center line of square along with the totals of different kinds of damage found and the elevation, id: N,S,E,W. It was a professional way to handle a claim and REMEMBER, we have file reviewers that have to understand just what transpired on the roof. These file reviewers talk to the decision making folks at the vendor's home office. This may sound "hokey" to some of you young uns, but that was, and is, the proper way to handle a roof adjustment. Maybe that was one of the reasons I always was able to stay busy. |
John Durham
sui cuique fingunt fortunam |
|
|
|
roy
10 Posts |
Posted - 04/21/2004 : 22:13:47
|
| I do hope this doesn't cause anyone any offense, but... I can't remember that guy's name in S.C. or N.C. (maybe Jim F.)any way he always uses tons of words in his posts or replys, so I thought I would ask him here; have you ever heard the word demigod? if so can you define it for me. Secondly, have you ever heard the word demigog? if so can you define it for me? I don't mean to tee-tee anyone off here now---I genuinely want to know the answer if anyone knows for sure. I'm to lazy to go to Wal-Mart to buy a dictionary. Thanks, Roy Phillips--not Cupps--Phillips, of the Texas Phillips |
Roy |
|
|
|
CCarr
Canada
1200 Posts |
Posted - 04/21/2004 : 22:20:05
|
| Can hardly wait for tomorrow now. When I'm done with the paper in the morning, it will be interesting to catch up on this thread. |
|
|
|
KileAnderson
USA
875 Posts |
Posted - 04/21/2004 : 22:20:52
|
Roy,
Main Entry: demi·god
Pronunciation: 'de-mE-"gäd
Function: noun
1 : a mythological being with more power than a mortal but less than a god
2 : a person so outstanding as to seem to approach the divine
Main Entry: 1dem·a·gogue
Variant(s): or dem·a·gog /'de-m&-"gäg/
Function: noun
Etymology: Greek dEmagOgos, from dEmos people (perhaps akin to Greek daiesthai to divide) + agOgos leading, from agein to lead -- more at TIDE, AGENT
1 : a leader who makes use of popular prejudices and false claims and promises in order to gain power
2 : a leader championing the cause of the common people in ancient times
I found these at www.m-w.com
One of the words will be used to describe your favorite political candidate, the other will be used to describe his oponent. |
Edited by - KileAnderson on 04/21/2004 22:22:11 |
|
|
|
LarryW
USA
126 Posts |
Posted - 04/21/2004 : 23:43:54
|
| If you mark a test square with no damage marked on it, what have you documented that taking a picture without a marked test square doesn't document? If you take a picture of chalk circles on a roof, what does it document except chalk marks, shouldn't the hail damage show up without a chalk circle? If you take a picture of hail damage without chalk circles, is the hail damage not documented. Point is, if you total or no-claim the roof, I see no reason for chalk marks except to give someone the ability to second guess your call. That includes plaintiff attorneys. If you have marginal damage and will figure to repair the slopes, then test squares and marks may indeed be useful. Thats how I see it. Do you all do test squares on a wind damaged roof? Circle the lifted and cracked tabs, circle the scuffed shingles, circle the missing tabs, circle the loose ones? |
Larry Wright |
|
|
|
Ghostbuster
476 Posts |
Posted - 04/22/2004 : 08:05:08
|
(OK, now I get to play the Devil's advocate.)
Then the Insured, a silver haired curmudgeon grandma, sez..."Young man, now that YOU have marked up my roof, YOU get to clean it off with out doing any more damage to it!!! And, I'm calling my agent right now!"
(Ha! Ha! Ha!) |
|
|
|
fivedaily
USA
258 Posts |
Posted - 04/22/2004 : 08:19:33
|
Larry... with thresholds for determining replacment of hail damage, instituted by the carriers, how do you tell the difference between marginal damage and damage that warrants replacement? You use a test square! It is a numbers game that we must play as adjusters. The test square is the proof that we played the game fair.
And to our ghost... it's chalk. It will wash off next time it rains. That why it burns me when know-nothing roofers use wax to circle scuff marks and nail pops.
Off to inspect my wind claims for the day... no test squares for me!
Jennifer |
|
|
|
DEMIGOD
99 Posts |
Posted - 04/22/2004 : 08:49:59
|
Looks like there's alot of differing opinions about doing a test square here. Which made me remember a couple of meetings with engineers I have had. They get up there and mark out a test square and start making everything they see. I watched as one engineer make at least 100 marks in his test square, he circled everything he saw that looked like any type of damage. Foot traffic, nail pops, blisters, etc. I suppose that he's doing this for his very technical evaluation of the roof, to cover himself, and justify why he gets paid so much for looking at a roof.
Personally I have only met with one engineer and one roofing consulant on a roof in Poolsville Maryland. The roof was denied the first time by the adjuster, we asked for the usual re-ispection at which time I met with the roof consultant. The meeting with the roof consultant lasted all of 2 minutes and didn't get more then 10 feet away from the garage roof, as he proceeded to insult me for insisting that there was damage on the roof yet he didn't take any time to look. So with much persuasion about 2 weeks later I'm back on the same roof meeting with the engineer. He simply asked me to show him what I felt was hail damage and if he dissagreed with me he'd say so right there on the spot. I showed him and he agreed, once he saw damage he did his test square and documented the damages and recommened that the insurance replace the roof without delay.
I see every one's point about why and why not do a test square. In my opinion the test square is not some magical tool that will show the damage, like it's been said it's either damaged or it's not, the test square will not make it show up. But I do feel it's a good guidline to keep you focused and it shows that you as an adjuster made a reasonable inquiry as to the validity of the damage, also to document your decision for either replacement or repair. So I guess it's a matter of perspective. Some say the test square is for rookies, perhaps that's becuase they see the test square in a differant light then those that say the test square is good for documentation and cya.
|
|
|
|
LarryW
USA
126 Posts |
Posted - 04/22/2004 : 09:22:07
|
| Jennifer: I think I have already agreed with your statement about the case of marginal damage. I question the necessity of marking a test square where there is no damage or when the roof is blasted and an obvious total loss. I have reinspected hundreds of roofs where chalk circles only proved that someone marked something. May have been bird droppings, scuff marks, heat blisters, hammer marks, or normal granular loss. Another scenario is to find that the adjuster failed to mark obvious hail damage and no claimed or repaired a roof when it should have been replaced. What did those test squares prove? Did the adjuster play fairly? If a roofer preceeded your presence on the roof and he/she marked out a test square does it prove he/she played the game fairly? Or is it only proof the adjusters play fairly? Do you count damaged shingles or damaged tabs? Someone said earlier if you have 4 hits and need 5 hits to total the roof, then do another test square. What are we testing, ones ability to count to 5? Shouldn't the test square be representative? If so, then why test the area with the most damage? Why not do one with the most and one with the least and average them (i.e. 5+0/2=2.5)? |
Larry Wright |
|
|
|
DEMIGOD
99 Posts |
Posted - 04/22/2004 : 09:50:31
|
| Am I correct in assuming that each carrier sets it's own criteria for repair/replace thresholds? One carrier may say, find 8 hits per square and another 5. So wouldn't the test square be a basis by which to verify the carriers requirements? |
|
|
|
LarryW
USA
126 Posts |
Posted - 04/22/2004 : 10:00:53
|
| No, some carriers leave it up to the adjusters to adjust the claims. |
Larry Wright |
|
|
|
DEMIGOD
99 Posts |
Posted - 04/22/2004 : 10:22:19
|
| Ah thanks so much Larry. |
|
|
|
Topic |
|
|
|
Re-Opening a can of worms
Forum Locked
