Forums

"but then I get this residual deductible showing on the final."  

Final what?

If it's a GLR and you want to change the SOL embedded within it, you will need to deselect the "Auto update from estimate" check box on the "Loss Recap" tab.  

Then, input the actual deductible.

It sounds like you may have an assignment set up through Xactanalysis and/or you have the carrier version of XM8, not the contractor version. There can be some confusion between adjusters sometimes because we all have different set ups.

I just tried a sample estimate with a loss less than the deductible. I have the contractor version of XM8. On the summary page the software subtracts a portion of the deductible equal to the amount of the loss to show $0.00 due. So the amount of the net loss (ACV loss) shows twice: once as the ACV amount and again as a reversing entry to zero out the amount due. Is that what you mean by "residual depreciation"?

Are you aware that you can change individual line items to "recoverable" or "non-recoverable"? The button is right there when you enter a line item. This feature is necessary because an estimate can have both types of depreciation. For example some policies are ACV for carpeting and RCV for everything else. An estimate like that would have two separate line items for depreciation. Did you check and see if you have items marked both ways by accident.

In my office we don't use Xactimate to create SOLs. We write up our own. So many claims have odd sublimits, prior payments, multiple estimates, and several lines of coverage, it's crazy to attempt to show that in Xactimate. For example if I write a repair estimate in Xactimate, but part of the dwelling loss is someone else's emergency service estimate, why would I want XM8 to show some subtotal that doesn't really exist? That's why I might show the deductible as zero in XM8 but subtract it from the entire RCV on the SOL.

Another thing is I have been trained that not ever number on a SOL has to be added or subtracted from another. XM8 uses a "reversing entry" (as they say in accounting) to zero out the SOL as mentioned above. But here's a perfectly acceptable alternative:

Item: Dwelling

repairs as per adjuster's Xactimate estimate, at RCV $283.33
less depreciation per adjuster's schedule (3.33)
repairs at ACV 280.00

less deductible (1000.00)

net claim 0.00

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

Technically, if you subtract 1000 from 280, you get a negative number. But there is nothing wrong with showing the numbers this way.

Most humans could easily understand my example. A computer might not like it, depending on how it is programmed, but I will throw my lot in with the humans, as long as some of us are still around.

Technically, if you subtract 1000 from 280, you get a negative number. But there is nothing wrong with showing the numbers this way.

Most humans could easily understand my example. A computer might not like it, depending on how it is programmed, but I will throw my lot in with the humans, as long as some of us are still around.

Leland, if this guy is on FL Citizens, then the estimate is through Xactanalysis.  I agree that there's nothing wrong with showing the numbers this way.  However if the examiner is dense, then everything is wrong with showing the numbers this way...