Forums

North Carolina probably also licenses contractors.

Contractors can legally write estimates for building repairs.

Insurance companies can certainly use experts, including contractors.

If a contractor is asked by a carrier to write a building repair estimate, would that be "adjusting"?

Let's break down the law you quoted, like sentence diagramming in English class. I will label some parts and analyze them below.

If any person

shall assume to act either as

(A) principal, agent, broker, limited representative, adjuster

(B) or motor vehicle damage appraiser

without license as is required by law or,

pretending to be a principal, agent, broker, limited representative, adjuster or licensed motor vehicle damage appraiser,

(C) shall solicit, examine or inspect any risk, or shall examine into, adjust, or aid in adjusting any loss, investigate or advise relative to the nature and amount of damages to motor vehicles or the amount necessary to effect repairs thereto, or shall receive, collect, or transmit any premium of insurance, or shall do any other act in the soliciting, making or executing any contract of insurance of any kind otherwise than the law permits, or as principal or agent shall violate any provision of law contained in Articles 1 through 64 of this Chapter, the punishment for which is not elsewhere provided for,

he shall be deemed guilty of a Class 1 misdemeanor

To analyze this section of law let's refer to (A) and (B) as the roles or positions that a person could have. Any person with such a role or position (or who pretends they have such a position), who doesn't have a license in those cases where a license is required, is committing a small crime (a misdemeanor) if they do the activities listed in (C).

So here are some examples

IF:

[pick any one of these 4]

1) An executive of an insurance company [a principal]
2) An owner of an insurance company [a principal]
3) The guy who sells the policy [an agent]
4) The guy who inspects the loss and analyzes coverage [the adjuster]

DOESN'T HAVE A LICENSE THAT THE LAW SAYS HE IS SUPPOSED TO HAVE... AND

[pick any one of these 4]

1) inspects the loss
2) investigates the loss
3) picks up the premium check
4) convinces a customer to buy insurance

THEN THAT PERSON HAS COMMITTED A MISDEAMENOR.

So a contractor who is NOT a principal, NOT an agent, NOT an adjuster, and doesn't need a license to look at damaged buildings can provide an estimate to the insurance company without breaking the law.

Here's some more examples of people who are not violating the North Carolina law in my opinion:

A CPA goes to the burned house and makes a list of the burned personal property. He is investigating the loss for the insured.

An attorney speaks to the ex-husband, thinking the ex burned the house down.

A detective walks through the burned house, looking for evidence.

The restoration contractor looks up the previous roofer and gets a copy of the old bid, to help him write an estimate for the roof on a burned house.

And the one you asked about-

A contractor writes an estimate for an insurance company.

In contrast here's two examples where a contractor might be violating the law:

* The contractor is an employee (agent) of the carrier and adjusts the claim.

* The contractor does more than just write an estimate- he makes the decision whether the claim is covered under the policy.

I don't think it is usually going to be a violation for the carrier to have a contractor write an estimate. HOWEVER there may be OTHER VIOLATIONS that happen if the carrier neglects some of the carrier's duties:

If the carrier avoids doing a good faith adjustment (investigation; coverage analysis) because they rely on the contractor, that MIGHT be a violation of some other rule or possibly bad faith.

Just my opinion.

And I'm not saying I agree with carriers using contractors instead of field adjusters- I'm just saying that using the contractor may not be against the law (although NOT using a field adjuster may be wrong for other reasons)

Good point, Ray. The carrier doesn't have to send anybody out at all, at least according to the contract.

But there may be case law or fair claims regulations that dictate that the carrier has to properly investigate claims.

And if the carrier DOES send somebody, there can be liability for sending the wrong person. or an incompetent person, or not listening to the person, etc.

Maybe the carrier doesn't have to send an adjuster OR a contractor.

But if they choose to send an adjuster that doesn't know how to write an estimate or a contractor that tries to be an adjuster I'm sure there could be some liability or violations of regs/laws.

As you say, the insured must prove the loss.

But if the insured says it costs X amount of money and the carrier has done zero investigation to prove otherwise, they probably would need to write the check.

I agree 100% all reported losses are not cookie cutter, that's were experience and proper training kicks in.Kinda law or medical school takes several years of school, BEFORE you get a license.

Joeblack, when does an "adjuster negotiating a settlement with a claimant on behalf of an insured."

An obvious lack of knowledge of what an adjusting licence allows. as for contractors, here in the great white north they have been "adjusting" for years. Companies like it and the local authorities fail to notice.

Nothing wrong with haveing a contractor inspect a loss for an insurance company, if it moves the claim foward at less cost in payment or investigation cost, this is the duty of management to the stock holders

I was kinda surprised that property adjusters did not realize the main job of a bodily injury adjusters is negotiation with 3rd party claimants or their attorneys on the final settlement amount.The London Underwriters are now looking for these type adjusters with this background to work their claims, instead of leaving it up to defense lawyers.

Most of my work at the moment is negotiating and assisting with negotiations on litigated property claims.

Your adjuster lic is only good for "Insurance Companies". Once you step out side of that relm you are practicing law, unless you are working directly for an attorney as a "expert" or under their supervision. Funny you posted this. This has been a hot topic between myself and several others over the past few weeks. We even went as far as doing the legal research on this.

BP may have a issue with this as they are not reconized as "self insured" with any state DOI we can find. Several lawsuits have been filed in Alabama over this in State and Federal Court. Guess we all get to see how this plays out in the courts.

We may have another Texas Wind lawsuit war before this is over. Gonne be fun to watch.

Alan this will be another time that a law license cost will be returned with good dividends. The claims are now being looked at as not enough info to make a final offer, but we will finance your suit with an ADVANCE. I think the reserves will blow passed the 20 billion this year. BP may still try to limit the liability exposure with some marine law thinking; or if you will some new international court law like the aircraft industry.Many of the roof thumpers will go home, I think when they get this thing plugged. These 25 claim offices are "show offices", but they will close a few claims.

I could be wrong but it seems to me that a company that is "self insured" simply has no insurance and pays out of their own pocket. When they pay claims out of their own pocket it is not insurance and it is not "adjusting".

Let's say you are the cook for a local taco stand. A customer slips on the salsa and cuts their forehead on the counter. The boss says "Oh no, I have no insurance."

The boss asks you to negotiate with the injured party.

You take your apron off and follow the customer out to the parking lot.

You tell the customer, "Look, we have no insurance for people getting hurt. My boss is sorry but he can only pay $100.00 but he's also willing to give you a free meal."

Would that be "adjusting"?

I don't think so because you would be representing the "principal", ie. you are not a third party (an adjuster representing the restaurant's insurance company to figure out what to pay a claimant) you are the principal (the restaurant itself) offering a settlement directly to the claimant.

See my previous examples, a principal representing his own interests doesn't need to have an adjusting license.

However I could see how it might be different if you have subcontractors working for BP, instead of being actual BP employees.

If you tell the world you are a separate business representing BP that is a situation that might need an adjusting license or law license because now you are no longer the principal but a separate entity.

I don't know the answer.

Your adjuster lic allows you to repersent insurance companies "only". Having a adjuster lic does not give you the authority to work for a subcontractor who is repersenting a 3rd party who is not a insurance company or a " non recognized self insurer". As we all know you can register and jump through each state DOI department to be qualified, reconized and regulated as a self insurer. I do not see a problem with being a document gather and submitting the documents to the company and letting their employees make the call on each claim.

The easy answer would be to make everyone a legal assistant and have a bunch of lawyers reviewing and okaying each file. I'm sure we will get to see how all this plays out. This is like watching a NASCAR race. You know there is going to be a big wreck sometime during the race. It's just a matter of time.

Yes, but some of us are standing on the track while that wreck is happening.