Forums

Ray,

I am from the old school. I will do my own scope, photos, and appraisal. I will not get through 20 a day but they will be correct when I send them in. And also, when the insd, contractor, PA, examiner or anyone else calls I will be able to discuss the loss with them.

Old School me too, but I do not use a typewriter or carbon paper to write my reports these days. What makes your scope any more accurate by putting it on paper than recording your words and have it transcribed by another person. Why could you not train an another person to follow your directions on the measurments and take the photos that you have already verbally labeled. Now if you have the scope, labeled photos, measurements and a computer program; why do you have to do the computer input to put "estimate" out as a finished product. Most pro's read their dictation for accuracy before sending it out. If I had the help to close 20 very good files per day I would take the time to read each one before sending it out.

 

I have always known the differance between good storm claims, bad and just passable.

OJOH and FICUS both have a place. Both reward the business men who do this very hard work better than the hit and miss of OJOH. Its always the same in any occupation- profession 10% at the top and then the rest.

Who will be the labor broker, vendor, bold person who will advertize for the 10% to assist them and expect  not to keep 40% and limit you in what you can earn in a 16 hour day.

Either system is foward progress of an evolving niche industry. Not the present business as usual.

Having some one else write an estimate, with my name on it would not be acceptable. I would think that would possibly pose an e & o situation. I agree with you, I could not afford to pay 5 people until I got paid and I doubt that would be acceptable to them.

I am seriously considering getting a tablet PC so the unit could be taken in with you. Instead of scope notes, just write the estimate while there and do reports later at night. Has anyone tried this procedure.

Thank both of you for your input. I choose not to debate the two of you at this time as I would like other Cado members to think about what can be done in 960 min. per day multipled by 6 persons bringing in about $10,000 per day in gross fees.

This is not a new concept, its just not out of the closet. When more input is posted I will argue each point.  Thanks.

 

I've been lurking around here for some time and enjoy reading the exchanges of everyone, even when they have differing opinions.

I do not understand why you, Mr. Hall, seem so focused on change in they way adjusting is being done. There are many posts where you somehow manage to bring up your theories as to how things should be changed, and I have to wonder what's in it for you.

You've been touting your FUCUS way of adjusting at every opportunity and now you've come up with another, the OJOH (whatever that means) way of scoping and adjusting losses.
Are you hoping someone will pick up your idea and you get credit for it? If that's the case why not just call it the HALL way and be done with it?

I for one tend to get somewhat offended at the way you seem to want to reduce adjusting losses to one experienced adjuster hiring several inspectors and doing as good or better job than the 100s of seasoned, experienced professional adjusters who are out there making a living. Whether you realize it or not, your constant promotion of your FUCUS theory is demeaning to experienced adjusters.

At the tail end of a long and successful adjusting career, I would think that you'd be regaling everyone with the insight and brilliance of your experience rather than trying to tear down the structure of the profession and leave that as your legacy.

James Johnson

I feel that the carrier is going to this platform, it is not for the I/A. This will be for a staff inside person or a hired gun to review and pay as many as they can in a day's time. They will then worry about the

staff cat crew to handle the reopens and problem files. Thus cutting down the claims handling expense even more with more insured with a check in there hand and more commecial's on TV

on how fast they got there check, no unfair claims practice by paying what the carrier feels is right without delay, need for E&O used as much and then using apprasial clause more.

Sorry but I am also with Ray Hall on this. Our profession as 'professional catastrophe adjusters' is on the way out. The above poster asks why Mr. Hall uses his many years of experience to belittle our profession. I believe it is Mr. Halls many years of experience that is allowing him to forsee our future . Why would a carrier continue to pay our professional fees for a large staff of licensed adjusters when they could pay for just an office full of licensed adjusters to review a bunch of minimum wage trainees scopes, estimates and reports. With the advent of digital photo, video and adjusting software in the hands of any person with at least a high school education our many years of experience and needing to be personally at the loss site becomes less and less required. Not to mention because of all the hurricane crap and what is happening to carriers like State Farm the insurance policy is going to be so limited, cut and dry and clear that carriers won't need an adjuster with 15 years experience to interpret the darn thing. I am now 40 years old. I hope there is enough insurance adjusting left for me to make it somewhat close to my golden years. LOL

Tom I used xactiscope when it first came out years back. I was on a bigred storm and my manager would not allow because he wanted to look at scope notes I explained that I was using xactiscope and that my estimate was a reflection of the scope notes I imputted on my PDA. He still would not allow. The next storm my manager would allow. You know how that goes every manager wants something dfferent. However most managers would not allow. The problem using it with bigred was you could not sync it with there version of xactimate. I would have to sync to my version of xactimate then data transfer to bigreds version. I used it for Travelers and some smaller carriers and they allow and it worked great. Process is easy: Input admin info on laptop transfer to pda. scope claims (input scope and measurements on pda at risk)download claim from pda to laptop and estmate is completed .Takes alittle more time at the risk but you speed up with use. It was awesome to get back to the hotel attach to cradle and bam all estimates synced in about a minute. If I had to close the claim on site it meant less time sitting in my truck. Eventually I started syncing after each loss because I was afraid pda might crash and I would lose all info(ouch) although this never happened I have a thought about your comment regarding someone else writing an estimate with your name on it. This happens more then one would think. I have seen countless ia estimates being changed by staff and the revised estimate would still use the original adjuster as the author of the estimate(including the revisions). Also Ive seen husband and wife teams where the wife performed much of the activities but the ilog would not actually reflect who performed the task. I do agree about paying 5 people . Im more of a loner and feel I'll make more on my own. However I do feel there are some merits to Ray's concept and IA adjusting will move in that direction.

JJ Im an experienced adjuster and in no way feel offended by this concept. If you feel strongly about this topic then dont read. Hell,the title says it all(your not being mislead ).You know what the thread is going too be about just don't click it and move to the next thread. The concept is already being used to some degree by the carriers. The point is for a IA company to develope a program or take a chance that the carriers will staff this out. I dont see in anyway that he is tearing down the profession rather he is offering up creative ideas.

Come on folks, we have the ball rolling, lets not stop it. Ray's idea has positive merit. With a little fine tuning, it might work. Janice and I work as a team and have utilized that concept for years, with huge success. Keep the ideas coming.

Bryan, thats one reason I don't work big red files. They burned me once, but will not burn me twice.

Bryan,

JJ did well in articulating his frustration in a public forum where Ray requested that others share their opinion. It will be up to Ray to construct an intelligent reply. Plus, Ray's a big boy and I'm certain he will conjure up a tactful and equally intelligent response.

In the older version of the CADO forums, Mr. Hall displayed and outlined his copyrighted FICUS theory. If it stands the test of some well intentioned and intelligent adjusters, then its chances of succeeding will increase. I don't know JJ, but he does voice the opinion of several who have told me that they have grown tired of hearing about FICUS consistently surfacing in unrelated topics and forums. I don't think that his opinion should be squelched.

Personally, I'm not bothered by it. Ray makes a good point and the CADO forums is a great sounding board so that the bugs can be worked out. One firm I worked with used the general method of FICUS. I know for a fact that three other vendors out of seven on this carrier's list used this method. This carrier is now bankrupt because it got poe and had no moe money left. Is it because they used the general approach/method of FICUS? I don't have the answer to that. Arriving to that conclusion would require extensive and copious amounts of records which none of us have access to. Yet, it does make you wonder.

I choose to ignore the constant resurfacing of Ray's theory when it's brought up in unrelated topics. (While I'm on the topic; Ray, could you please stop doing that?) My reason, I don't beleive it (FICUS) will ever take place with the carriers that my firm services. They are smaller than the big five carriers. Plus, the demand for customer service and claim precision are much too high for our carriers/clients to allow this type of manufacturing approach to adjusting claims to take place.

I say let the big five strut their stuff and try it out. After (if) the bad faith suits start rolling out, look to see waves of restructuring take place to go back to the old way of adjusting claims. Even if State Farm or other large carriers do take this approach, I doubt that you will see them administering this approach to their upper clientele of insureds.

After reading through this and trying to sort out FICUS or OJOH, It sound to me like with FICUS you bassically become a small vendor. Thats great if you find people whos work you can trust. I personally see no problem with it, it no different than somone going out with there spouse, one handles inspections, one handles the estimate. As long as the "ADJUSTER" can speak for the end product, sound like it will work. 20 a day sounds like a little much to keep up with but the concept sounds viable.

JWG

Just a couple more things, Ray, that maybe you can explain after all our inputs.

If you're talking about 20 losses a day, I'm going to assume this is in CAT situations only.

The people you have working under you....do you bring them along with you and incur the additional daily living expenses, or hire them locally.  What happens at the end of the assignment, how do you keep these trained "helpers" if they can't earn the upper end of the pay scale and survive the lean weeks/months afterward? It almost sounds as if these folks are "your staff", but are they paid percentages or hourly?   I'm trying to figure out the economics of this plan versus working alone or as a 2-person team.  There is also vehicle expense x2 on each loss the way you described it.

Jud
JJ was not articulating his opinion of Ray's concept but his opinion of Ray. If your not bothered by his post then why even bother posting.

rbryanhines,

(quote) If you feel strongly about this topic then dont read. Hell,the title says it all(your not being mislead ).You know what the thread is going too be about just don't click it and move to the next thread. (quote)

Fortunately, this is a public forum where differing opinions are able to be posted. Fortunately, you're not the person who gets to decide what people read nor what they post. To suggest that I not post my opinion or move on to another thread is absurd.
That suggestion is right up there with burning books that have content that you're not in agreement with.

Everyone is entitled to their opinion, like other things, everyone's got one.
May I suggest that if you didn't like my post you move on to the next one?

JJ

Oh, I'm not bothered by it.  I simply offered my .02 since Ray asked and posted his ideas on a public forum: "When more input is posted I will argue each point."

------------------------------------

When I saw this happen, the firm deployed inspectors to photograph, measure, and describe the damages shown in the photographs.  This information was electronically submitted to an experienced adjuster who then wrote up the report based on what was damaged and in the context of the appropriate forms.  The estimators were getting 40% of the fee schedule while the experienced adjuster received the other 20%.

I was doing my own thing while this was going on, so I don't know how many files were turned in at this rate.  That would suck to be the in-house adjuster.  If it were me, I'd get cabin fever before I chose to starve.

I hate to get off topic; but would have ever thought that State Farm would try a case on Hwy 90 in Gulfport/Pass Christian. Biloxi and tell the judge/ jury the house with the slab only left, did not have any wind damage before the tidal wave.

Is it possible the insurance carriers did not have enough adjusters?   Right.

Would the claim decisions turned out better if 100 FICUS hit the coast and measured the slabs and sent back 15 photos on what was left.? Yes

If experienced wave wash adjusters were in the office, they could stick build 2 totals per day use their skills (sic) to seperate the wind/ water on building and contents and settle MOST of the claims.

It has been done this way for the time I have been an adjuster.The house with flood insurance would be a slam dunk.

Now back to the topic. Insurance carriers think we make an obscene amount of money for our training. They are looking for ways to cut adjusting expense. This certainly is not news to Local IA regular claims IA firms. If the carriers find a way to get 600 good claims a month with one adjuster... you know the answer.

Join in all sides: How about some wantabees ?