Forums

Gale, I have no idea. With the support of NAIC and PCI, I would think it has a good shot.

We are getting some feedback from Independents saying they don't think it will become effective because of states losing licensing fees but if you look again at the Model Act draft version which is all I can find at this point, it looks to me like this act would be adopted by states and the act is clear each license is based upon the applicable fees being paid to the states so I don't think that argument will stand.

I'm curious if NAIIA -National Assn of Independent Insurance Adjusters Assn is providing any input on this to NAIC or PCI? It looks like the past talks of Independents getting together with a lobby group may be too late! This will effect us all.

I'm concerned about the 20K bond and have a State Farm agent looking into the cost, underwriting standards for such coverage and to see if the Apprentice Independents would meet underwriting guidelines. Others might check with other carriers to see what coverage is out there so Independents can be prepared to purchase such coverage if necessary.

Many other questions...will the 1 bond work for all states the adjuster has coverage for or would the provisions of a bond require they have one for each state they are licensed in? What new suits would become common place as a result of claims made against these adjuster bonds by adjusting firms or carriers for poor performance and the like(see the provision of the act regarding the intent of the bond). If claims are presented against the bond, I'd think the adjuster would lose bond insurability and have to use the line of credit letter from the banks shown in the ACT. Another great expense to adjusters? How will adjusting firms be involved in making sure the adjusters have the bonds? Would they provide coverage as some do E and O now for adjusters? This might be different since it has to do with a bond they may want to make a claim against themselves if the adjuster performs poorly. I have no idea how all these issues would be addressed but Independents may want to discuss these issues with the adjusting firms for direction.

Storage of claims for 5 years? That goes beyond the statute of limitations for property claims in many states and records destruction time frames many carriers use on files. What resources would adjusters need to store such communications and file copies for 5 years? I'm checking into the www.clickclaims.com system which is available for individuals to purchase as a private CMS system for their independent needs but what would the costs be involved for a 5 year period,etc and what other options are out there? Would this requirement deter carriers from using Independents with them not wanting to worry about additional concerns with their files being out there in hundreds of adjusters hands for 5 years ( I'm thinking of "the sisters" here and the ongoing litigation to return their file material)-here is a link to a recent news story on that at:

http://www.sunherald.com/mld/sunher...841626.htm

We need to understand this as a group and not wait to scurry around to cover our bases AFTER this becomes effective.

Here is an update on the Model Act status:

http://www.aaicp.net/pdf/AAICP_Compass_Winter07FINAL.pdf

 

Wally, has this not been the trend for a while? 

I guess I have been too busy. Being one that does not watch the news but get the headlines off of the web sites including CADO it seems the below is a different perspective for me.

 

 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q2WtS1u_b5g 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HEiCiI7r1pk

Very interesting to see these are on NANCY PELOSI's web page on you tube Gale..thanks for posting. "A small amount of interest" is a major understatement. The NFIP reform hearings last week which can now be watched live thru various links found on the web were full of comments as are many other news articles about conflicts of interest with staff adjusters handling the wind and water claims with many recommendations that the flood claims be handled by Independents.

Regarding the Model Act for licensing of Indp's- this dates back to 2003 from what I can find on internet research and is now just go through the final stages. This pre-dates Katrina and the intent appears to be to simplify licensing requirements for folks operating in multiple states although, atleast in my opinion ,there are many provisions of the Act that will make Independents licensing issues more complicated due to the records retention issues and the bonding issues,etc.

http://www.pianet.com/NewsCenter/In...-23-03.htm

Here is one of many links to recent committee hearings regarding the ongoing discussions in the various committee meetings about using Independents to handle NFIP work versus carriers:

http://www.wileyrein.com/publicatio...p;keyword=

Here's the part of the above link about this:

Investigation of Katrina-Related Flood Insurance Claims
The Democratic Task Force calls for a congressional investigation surrounding the claims-handling practices of insurance companies that contract with the NFIP. This recommendation is consistent with a congressional directive, enacted on October 3, 2006, which requires an investigation by the Homeland Security Inspector General into the Katrina-related flood insurance claims made under the NFIP.
Under the NFIP, private insurance companies contract with the federal government to handle and report flood-damage claims, pursuant to federal insurance coverage that the insurers sell and manage under contract to the federal government. Thus, claims made under the NFIP are entirely the financial responsibility of the government. The report asserts that, following the devastation of Hurricane Katrina, insurance companies attributed wind damage to damage caused by flooding so that the claims could be filed under the NFIP. The Democratic Task Force contends that insurance-company adjusters have an "obvious conflict of interest when deciding whether claims should be billed to the federal flood insurance program or to the insurance companies that employ them, train them, and advise them on the interpretation of their policies." Additionally, the report cites allegations by two former insurance adjusters who claim that, when assessing damage caused by Hurricane Katrina, their former employer instructed them to pay claims under the NFIP immediately and refuse to acknowledge the possibility of wind damage.

The Democratic Task Force calls for a full investigatory hearing surrounding the NFIP and Hurricane Katrina following the conclusion of the Inspector General's investigation in April 2007. Additionally, the report recommends that the NFIP be restructured to ensure that an independent adjuster is assigned to assess potential flood or wind damage
********

Here's another from Gene Taylor's testimony about the Rigby sisters and the Task force release of the study which is due in by April 1, 2007(today) so I imagine we are going to be hearing MUCH MORE about adjuster issues in the findings to be reported all over the news this coming week.

http://www.house.gov/genetaylor/KTF...Format.pdf

************
There are many other news stories regarding this issue Gale.

Regarding other current comments- here's one from the new Fl emergency order I previously posted about requiring ALL claims in FL be settled within 90 days. There has been alot of activity and bills introduced recently to exempt commercial claims from the 90 day emergency rule and as you will see- the latest news 3/30/07 ruled out the exemption amidst a number of consumer complaints. (Interesting the discussions on condo claims and no comments about the FL Condo mediation statutes the representative fails to mention already in place to help with FL condo assn issues)...

http://www.bradenton.com/mld/braden...997632.htm

Gale- these are HUGE issues facing adjusters, adjusting firms and carriers.We all are having to keep our ears to the news to keep up to date on the large number of issues facing our industry almost daily these days. This is going to be a tough year for adjusters to settle claims during the 2007 hurricane season in light of all of the bad publicity.

 

Debbie, thanks for summarizing a lot of what has/is going on in the property claims world. This is exciting news because a time of change brings with it opportunities not possible during times of status quo.  The future of companies in the claims handling industry are going to be impacted more perhaps by the legal/ethical/political issues facing the industry today than by the new technologies becoming available.

Debbie and Gail...

Just a little detour.....The NFIP is a disaster.....If the government wants to straighten out and streamline claims handling for flood Victims insured through the NFIP, then they should clean their own house and write a clear policy for all insured risks, regardless of zones......If it is flood damaged, it is covered...period......then go on from there to create limits of liability and parameters of coverage by exclusion......

Joe L.

I am with Joe on this one. The NFIP policy is a maze of confusion to  a policyholder and to some untrained adjusters. Too much red tape involved in adjusting NFIP claims, so that should be addressed by the politicians immediately. A simplified policy would be in order.

Gotta disagree on this one.

If all flood damage is covered regardless of zone, then the government will be paying to regularly remodel the vacation home rental businesses of the rich.

I handled around 60 flood claims on the Outer Banks this fall.  Most of these residences rent for 3000-6000 dollars a week in the summer.  In effect, this is a business for the homeowners.  Most have owned the houses for a while and, I would guess, make money on the rentals after the costs.

Some of these houses sit directly on the ocean, (and were rated in a C zone, go figure).  Guess what happens when you build right next to the ocean?  The ocean floods the house.  Just a question of when.

A better solution would be NO flood coverage in the flood zones, and total coverage in the non-hazard zones.

If you choose to build in a hazard zone, you choose to be self-insured.  This would lead to fewer, or at least smaller, houses in the high risk area.  Then we could watch the localities scream when their real estate tax base erodes, due to the lack of multi-million dollar oceanfront homes.

It's always something.

But that's just my opinion, I could be wrong

Jeff Goodman

Good Man Adjusting

Goodman Enterprises

 

It does seem Congress has/is taking some steps to improve NFIP as a result of Isabel and later storms but I have not been able to find the end results of such steps. The above video testimony before congress seems to be more related to non government private insurance sources who are accused of moving their financial and contractual obligations from their companies to that of the federal government if I understood correctly. The thread in general seems to relate to what can be done to enhance the profession of property claims handling.

 The below are some links about NFIP concerns which Joe correctly stated need to be reviewed

http://www.pianet.com/NewsCenter/Pr...9-05-3.htm

PIA Makes Recommendations to Improve National Flood Insurance Program

Testimony Filed With House, Senate Committees Holding Hearings on NFIP: Coordinate Business Interruption, Increase Coverage Limits, Avoid Buy-Backs

WASHINGTON , October 19, 2005 – The National Association of Professional Insurance Agents (PIA) filed comments this week with House and Senate committees holding hearings on the National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP), making a series of recommendations to improve it.

The recent twin natural catastrophes, Hurricanes Katrina and Rita, have prompted discussion of the best way to insure properties against damage from flooding. A hearing was held October 18 by the Senate Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs; a separate hearing is on tap before a subcommittee of the House Financial Services Committee on October 20…. 

Does anyone know if below idea was ever implemented?

http://www.heritage.org/Research/Re.../wm888.cfm

October 19, 2005

Providing Flood Insurance Coverage After the Disaster Is a Mistake

by http://www.heritage.org/about/staff...idJohn.cfm">David C. John

WebMemo #888

First to Joe...I couldn't agree with you more.

Additionally, see this late breaking news about the Trent Lott bill proposed (S1061) which not only requires the large text info for consumers on policies BUT ALSO is requesting oversight of the Homeowners policies by the Federal Trade Commission.

http://www.propertyandcasualtyinsur...OTTBILL-dp

Most importantly in this article- see that Sen Lott, Jim Hood etc will be participating in the hearing April 11, 2007 on the Katrina Claim handling issue. Do you see any major Independent organizations invited to speak at the hearing such as NAIIA or NACA? Where/when do we get to tell our side of the story while they are crucifying our claim industry in hearings? Interesting that Lott has not settled with his carrier at last week's settlement hearing and it's now scheduled to September. It does make one wonder if he is not settling with the offer made on his claim as he is well aware based on the other 5 cases that settled out of court that the terms of the settlements were confidential and I wouldn't doubt other provisions about not discussing their cases....is he not wanting to settle until he gets all of the legislation passed against carriers?To hold a position of power over his carrier for other things on the agenda of politicians there? Should they not recognize their testimony as a conflict of interest on the parts of those legislators with axes to grind against their carriers? I listened with interest to the hearing last week as one panelist after another spoke then after their testimony-one of the last questions asked by Madam Chairman of the Natural Disaster hearing was to ask what their opinion was on the conflict of interest with carrier adjusters handling claims versus Independents? It was clear that that point is of major concern in all of the hearings. Will independent adjusting firms want to take these NFIP claims at the risk of losing long established carrier relationships if they do so? Will the independent firms want to be subjected to FTC hearings and additional hearings dragging them through the mud for claim handling procedures under the worst possible of conditions for their adjusters? Will they want to be subject to "door stopping" claim manuals such as the 103 page Citizens of FL manual(as one adjusting firm owner stated a week or so ago) with all kinds of fines when they can't meet unrealistic time service demands at the onset of a major catastrophe? Will independent adjusters even be willing to work for the fee schedules some say are way too low?

It is understandable that these politicians have heard the cries of the residents in their state and they are trying to deal with the mass complaints received. I watched the hearings live last week and it does give you the perception they are trying to stand up for the people in their state. It is also very clear from the articles and hearings they have no clue regarding how the claims adjusting process works as well as very little understanding of policy language either in HO policies or Flood policies. An article quoting Trent in the past week or so quoted him as saying he had not heard from his carrier in months. Does he not even understand the basics that his carrier is required to communicate with his attorney he hired or is this just an attempt to again put negative press on his carrier?

What is very concerning to me is that I also have heard the cries of many adjusters in the first few weeks of Katrina after deploying them to handle claims. I have never heard grown men with over 20 years of adjusting experience so upset. I will never forget their calls after days of living in cars unable to find housing, as some of their wives working as their assistants threatened to leave them if they insisted on staying to work claims in such deplorable conditions,as they experienced problems for weeks trying to get phone access or high speed access so they could upload files into CMS systems. Price gouging on temporary quarters by hotels and rental units or unable to find gas.How many adjusters do all of us know that remain unpaid for their services by many adjusting firms? Where is the acknowledgement in these committee hearings of the plight of Independent adjusters and help to resolve these issues faced with each new severe catastrophe? There are many emergency catastrophe procedures that could be put in place which would allow adjusters to more timely service insureds yet we hear NOTHING in these meetings or news articles. Only the FAILURES of the policies to pay for UNCOVERED damages. I know of no employee in America who would work under the circumstances that Independents are forced to bear. Who else would work unpaid for months at a time while bearing additional living expenses while trying to support their families at home? We don't ask utility crews restoring services out of state to work unpaid yet this is the norm in adjusting if you are not staff. Why can't the government step in and work to improve conditions for adjusters through things like NAIC stepping to bat and providing CLEAR EASY READABLE provisions for adjusters to research adjusting firms and file complaints against some of the fly by night(see Vendor feedback forum on current firm being discussed as an example) firms who are not paying adjusters? Right now from what I can see, Independents are using forums and word of mouth as their sole source of information on the "vendor feedback". We can look up the complaint ratio of a carrier yet we have no where to turn to get reliable information on the complaint history on an adjusting firm. There are many things that could be done by the government such as the new Catastrophe villages being discussed in FL to provide services to adjusters. Can they do helpful things like enacting emergency provisions allowing adjusters into damaged zones earlier to inspect losses? Provide emergency gas provisions to adjusters as one very kind gas station allowed me to do with my adjuster's license in 04? Step in to get state college dorms or any other facility that can assist with housing or parking lots for adjusters in RV's such as they do for utility firms we all see taking over the parking lots of many businesses and provided other housing sources?

NFIP....do you remember the articles last year when they held up payments while they got budget approval to pay claims? Wouldn't a private carrier not be taken down if they did such a thing? I don't know of any adjuster who has worked NFIP claims that thinks that the government process is better than the claim adjusting procedures established by private carriers yet again..we are not asked for input through our major Independent organizations nor are the carriers being asked to testify at these hearings. Yes, they have organizations speaking for the carriers but who speaks for the adjusters or firms working these claims?

Getting back to the NAIC Model Act, yes it may help with some of tests being waived to obtain licensing in multiple states. This helps in the daily(non catastrophe) claims arena but adjusters being moved rapidly at the onset of storms nationwide should have a national catastrophe license for those who work as catastrophe adjusters as their primary duties. Interesting they exempt carrier adjusters in the Model Act but why not the very Independents who are here to serve the carriers?Don't staff adjusters have their basic needs taken care of when they go on cat such as housing and transportation by their carriers, yet they are exempt...how about Independents who are faced with every major basic need issue when they arrive on storm yet they must make emergency licensing in each state moved to a priority to even begin serving consumers. Many adjusters carry multiple non resident licenses and must comply with CE credit requirements for the many states licensed in thus prompting many to just comply with the Emergency adjuster licensing provisions with each cat state deployed to thus eliminating the need to keep up with CE's due in each state.

I'll post the link to listen to the April 11, 2007 Claim Handling hearing should I find it posted on the net prior to the hearing for anyone who wishes to view it live. Yes Gale- our lives are changing and we all need to keep up to date with what is going on. The subjects covered in this entire thread are only the tip of the iceburg about all of the changes taking place as we read the many insurance publications and announcements.

Gale, we were apparently both posting at the same time.

Here is the PDF document from June 2006 comparing the House and Senate reform bills. As you can see - there is not an agreement between the House and the Senate about what the exact provisions of the reform should be:

http://www.srgflood.com/pdf/2006Flo...ormAct.pdf

Here is how the House bill votes went down on the HR bill:

http://projects.washingtonpost.com/...votes/325/

Here is an article saying the bill was going to Senate for further handling:

http://joanndavis.house.gov/HoR/VA0...+House.htm




Here is a link on a 3/26/07 article on the new 2007 Flood Modernization Act saying it meets mixed reviews from different insurance organizations:

http://www.propertyandcasualtyinsur...6-FLOOD-dp


Here's Big I's news release on the 2007 Flood Reform Act with a good summary of proposed changes:

http://www.insurancenewsnet.com/art...1&id=77693



Here is a news story just out on H.R. 1682 introduced last week on FLood reform legislation:

http://www.namic.org/topnews/070328...dium=email

Gale, I don't think it's right to question adjusters motives for expressing concerns about these hearings or news articles. They lived the nightmare, they know the problems, and it is reasonable to think their opinions matter. They will have to live and provide services under any legislation passed. We just want to be sure our voice is heard and that those with the power to make decisions in these hearings truly learn the big picture..not just the voices of politicians who suffered personal losses. All adjusters empathize with the losses suffered by insureds not just in MS or LA or during Katrina. The absolutely MOST difficult thing an adjuster has to do is stand in front of any policyholder who has suffered a major loss and deny their claim according to policy terms and conditions yet it is their job. A most difficult job but they must handle claims according to carrier guidelines given as they relate to policy terms and conditions. None of us think it is right if a carrier did not properly investigate claims or if we had been told to follow improper guidelines. Adjusters should be able to speak out without "their motives" being questioned. They were there. They KNOW what happened and what they were told. Their voice should be heard. Not just the voices of 2 sisters
earning "consulting" fees for speaking out in their state of residence. They had been handling claims apparently for years. Why did they just speak out when in their home state? There is much we will never know about what happened and we are all listening to learn as much as we can.

Jeff,
Here is a post I made under Katrina Latest...."Mark,

With all due respect I disagree .......The responsibility lies squarely on the shoulders of the residents.....they are the ones that live on the coast and in harms way.....they did not need to be told that they were in a potential flood zone......You know, if you live within a mile of a main body of water and your house is only built at 10 feet above sea level, chances are you will get flooded.......and as far as the community lobbying for the lack of a flood zone declaration, whom makes up the community????

I am sorry, but if you live on the coast, you are at risk and it is the responsibility of each resident to protect themselves the best that they can.....

Senator Lott is a perfect example....house on coast....NFIP coverage for the max of $250,000...damage in excess of said policy...why did he not buy excess flood insurance from the private sector?????? I don't know about you, but momma drowned the stupid ones........
His brother in law, the famous attorney Scruggs...same deal.......

Enough said.....

Have a nice day......

Joe L.

People need to take responsibility for their own actions or lack thereof. And there is a period at the end of that sentence......"

I believe that a person gets one shot at being flooded....after that, they are on their own in the private market.......

My point is that the Flood Policy needs to be overhauled.

Joe L

Gale,

While your reading and studying, I provide these links for your review on the sisters and others involved in "the documents". This may provide some additional things for you to think about concerning politics involved in the hearings:

http://www.claimsguides.com/news/so.../76104.htm

http://www.sunherald.com/mld/sunher...932452.htm




http://www.sunherald.com/mld/sunher...934922.htm

http://www.wmcstations.com/Global/s...?S=6249686




http://www.sunherald.com/mld/sunher...937613.htm




Outcome could effect Lott's case:

http://www.sunherald.com/mld/sunher...943645.htm

Scruggs letter to Hood published on the Scruggs website:
http://www.scruggskatrinagroup.com/...-23-07.pdf

Here's the article that mentioned he hadn't heard from his carrier that I mentioned in earlier post:
http://www.insurancejournal.com/new.../78084.htm

And an article saying it was moved to Sept:
http://www3.ambest.com/frames/Frame...&AltSrc=13

Here's more related to one of the Scruggs Katrina group partners:

http://www.forbes.com/feeds/ap/2007...56661.html



http://www.businessweek.com/ap/fina...4MPCO0.htm






Gale-does this make you understand the concerns about the hearing committee members involved providing objective testimony about the real Katrina issues?

I meant to include this one with Lott's carriers explanation about the delays on his case:

http://www.propertyandcasualtyinsur...30-LOTT-dp

Thanks Debbie, this is a ton of info to review. A quick read reveals greed in all when the other party is painting the picture of its adversary. I was hoping for at least one white suit but I am forever an optimist. : )  I was impressed how the sister’s work has lead to an agreement where 35,000 denied claims will now be addressed for what ever that means. If they do in fact get jail time for their actions it may be the end of a lot of law suits. Tomorrow I go back to Nashville to get the stitches out of my knee and get an MRI of the right shoulder so I may have some reading time since I may not have to drive.

I am very interested in what happens tomorrow in Renfoe’s case against the sisters. If they fall then so will the big lawyer I take it.  Thanks again for pulling together so much info.

 

Gale -be sure to read this one
Judges and Attorney face charges in MS for squeezing an insurer:

http://www.propertyandcasualtyinsur...MISSRIP-dh