Forums

You're right, Mudulus One....the Loup is a little murky right now.  I think The Daryl'z'zz' brother Larry was playing with us on that comment.  Notice his absence?  If I cup my ear to the south, I hear chuckling & ice cubes meetin' Mr Daniels in OKC!.  Cudo's LDH!!

Davis vs. Mid-Century is a case you might want to look at.

 

 

Randy, I think you should go ahead and get your law degree.  You are so able to drone on with your posts that I'm sure you could also bore the jury to death long enough to get a verdict.  I, on the other hand, just need to find one of those Dodge City hanging judges to take me out of my misery quickly.  And by the way, it's practice.  

 

Before you all jump on me... just let me say it one time "Hee Haw"...jackass at work! 

Like most of the paths we walk, the edges and gutters are set by state law.  Florida says pay RCV...

It,s really a common sence question. I always think "betterment" rather than depreciation and i don,t get my old brain in a bind.

 

 I remember the "nailable surface" lawsuits in Texas very well. The short version is the insurance commish stated a comp. laid over a wood shingle (deck) had to be all torn off and new deck applied. Three small Texas carriers disagreed and about 197 insurance carriers in Texas rolled over for the commish.

The three Texas Carriers sued the commish on the rule and won. This was about 1990-91.

 

Replacement cost coverage has been written on property insurance for over 50 years. It is an "extra" for an additional cost. Some contracts have the built in language, such as a HO-3.

 

If I ever get another dwelling roof claim from the Texas carriers, I will have some fun with the roofing salesman.

I bet you will, Ray. See what happens when I sit back and don't answer your challenge? It brings out two of our community's most knowledgeable to answer the question. I do remember the materials only ruling coming down. I didn't live here then, but I was working a cat here. State Farm did their usual - err on the side of caution -- and immediately told their adjusters to stop depreciating estimates entirely until they decided what to do. However, by far the majority of the claims I handle now are in other states and handled through IA's while I monitor the team I put in place. So I was glad to have Bob and Leland step up to the plate to confirm that my knowledge was up to date.

Florida seems to have some special laws about depreciation (or lack of the same), but they don't apply to the commercial claims I handle in Florida, so I don't know them. In most states the depreciation of labor and materials is standard practice when there are materials involved in the operation. However, Mike's observation is correct. Since most estimates do not break out labor and materials separately, few examiners will bother with or notice whether you have depreciated labor and materials or only materials. I think maybe I've had the depreciation I applied questioned maybe once in the last ten years. That was by a PA who wanted a higher payment for himself up front. He called me a few choice names in the process.

That having been said, apply the depreciation in every estimate so I won't send the estimate back to you. I am tired of sending estimates back to adjusters who should know better -- especially when I sent them an instruction sheet with the assignment telling them to do it. I hear far too often, "But it's a replacement cost policy." I shouldn't have to explain to someone claiming to be a General Adjuster that ACV is paid up front.

 

BTW, when I get to 500 posts I wonder if I get to be an advanced member like Racko and Sir Harvey.