Forums

Never heard of Virtual Adjuster, but here are some thoughts from someone who's been there/done it.

I'm surprised to see FileTrac and Click Claims in the same sentence on terms of price. When I helped a firm shop for a system, FileTrac was much much cheaper and its price structure was effectively tailored for small vendors. For example, the fee was on a per-claim basis instead of a large up-front fee plus maintenance costs, and a fee for a per-file charge.

It would not surprise me to learn that FileTrac earned enough market presence that Dean Varillas raised prices for his system. Many small to medium sized IA Vendors use it now. It may not look as pretty as Click Claims, but it is much more seamless and practical in my opinion. For adjusters who have never used it, they really can figure it out pretty quickly. I'm using both right now and feel that Click Claims is just a little overloaded with features.

From my current perspective as a field IA, I just want three (3) things from a CMS: a list of my claims, a place to put my notes, and a place to upload documents. Everything else beyond these three have good intentions, but are a luxury and are seldom used; a library (policies, procedures, fees, etc.), time and expense worksheet, report forms that never fully work, 'quick' reserve form, etc.

It has been my observation/experience that adjusters will be much more inclined to put notes in a system that looks very basic. Selective hiring and careful management of this expectation (putting notes in the file) seals the deal.

In conclusion, a lack of extras conversely translates to increased functionality and performance. Good luck.

Posted By Jud G. on 22 May 2013 03:12 PM
From my current perspective as a field IA, I just want three (3) things from a CMS: a list of my claims, a place to put my notes, and a place to upload documents. Everything else beyond these three have good intentions, but are a luxury and are seldom used; a library (policies, procedures, fees, etc.), time and expense worksheet, report forms that never fully work, 'quick' reserve form, etc.

As a field adjuster, I would agree that the additional features are rarely used, but then again, once that file hits the other side of the desk, a great number of what you refer to as "luxuries" are used on each and every file. 

It has been a while since I priced out the software, as after I did it the last time I decided it would be more cost effective to build my own system (a couple of thousand claims per year will begin to add up when you are paying $6-$8 per file). That said, mine is kind of a kludge, and I have no idea if I should just scrap the system entirely and build another or go with one of the "out of the box" systems.

Thanks for your input though, I completely forgot about what would make it easiest for the IA, and that's embarrassing, since that is the absolute first thing I should have considered.

You are correct, but the reason that these features are seldom used is more crucial.  Keep in mind, just because the CMS features are not used, it doesn't mean that the documents are not important and still get delivered to and are used by the adjuster.

• Some IA Vendors don't want all of their client information made available to all of their 1099 adjusters. They just want the specific carrier info that each adjuster is working for available. 
• Most of the forms created by the CMS don't always work like they were intended (easier to send the Excel TE Log via email). Many times, the forms used by the CMS generate a final product that looks clumsy. As such, it becomes easier and better looking to start in Word and finalize in .pdf. 

Granted, these documents are always used; just not necessarily by the CMS. Thus, the solution becomes email to relay pertinent, claim-related documents to the adjuster.  After that, the adjuster uses the CMS for the top items I listed above.

Weird, I tried to italicize the word, "reason", but it made it blue. I tried to undo it, but no luck.

Posted By Jud G. on 24 May 2013 09:13 AM
Weird, I tried to italicize the word, "reason", but it made it blue. I tried to undo it, but no luck.

I thought you were just imitating someone else on here :)

whoa, now that's a scary thought- not going there anytime soon...

Posted By Jud G. on 5/27/2013 11:29:01 AM
whoa, now that's a scary thought- not going there anytime soon...

................................

Ouch, I wondered why my ears were burning.

AA, I have used two out of three ;-) CMS over the last couple of years. Click Claims was extremely user friendly, yet as I struck out on my own, was a bit too expensive. File Trac was nice and cost effective with a per claim basis with no upfront costs.
Virtual Claims Adjuster seemed a decent deal and also on a per claims basis with a few hundred upfront

Posted By CatAdjusterX on 6/5/2013 5:19:33 AM

Posted By Jud G. on 5/27/2013 11:29:01 AM
whoa, now that's a scary thought- not going there anytime soon...

................................

Ouch, I wondered why my ears were burning.

AA, I have used two out of three ;-) CMS over the last couple of years. Click Claims was extremely user friendly, yet as I struck out on my own, was a bit too expensive. File Trac was nice and cost effective with a per claim basis with no upfront costs.
Virtual Claims Adjuster seemed a decent deal and also on a per claims basis with a few hundred upfront

Kudos for the sense of humor, and thanks for the insight. Think I will build my own. $6/claim does not seem like much until you burn through a few thousand claims a year, and then the number begins to have some genuine stress associated with it.

Posted By AcceleratedAdjuster on 6/7/2013 2:59:33 PM

Posted By CatAdjusterX on 6/5/2013 5:19:33 AM

Posted By Jud G. on 5/27/2013 11:29:01 AM
whoa, now that's a scary thought- not going there anytime soon...

................................

Ouch, I wondered why my ears were burning.

AA, I have used two out of three ;-) CMS over the last couple of years. Click Claims was extremely user friendly, yet as I struck out on my own, was a bit too expensive. File Trac was nice and cost effective with a per claim basis with no upfront costs.
Virtual Claims Adjuster seemed a decent deal and also on a per claims basis with a few hundred upfront

Kudos for the sense of humor, and thanks for the insight. Think I will build my own. $6/claim does not seem like much until you burn through a few thousand claims a year, and then the number begins to have some genuine stress associated with it.

.....................................................................

Yes indeed at 6/per claim, that would be a hefty dollar amount with a sizeable volume of claims. Last year I was obtaining quotes for American Veteran CAT Recovery's CMS. The gal at VCA has been very persistent and keeps in contact monthly asking if I want to pull the trigger on this. I always tell her I am still weighing options (when in reality I just don't have the claim volume yet to justify that expense and am using File Trac until such a time that volume begins to pickup LOL)

Nevertheless, VCA also offers a set rate for monthly/quarterly/annual as opposed to a  per claim basis. Here is the contact information for the gal who has kept contact with me for awhile now:

  Ilda Cairns

Virtual Claims Adjuster 

icairns@virtualclaimsadjuster.com

Another consideration would be if your daily business is your main objective and bread/butter and you use catadjusters as a secondary initiative to service your clients who need that assistance.

Use your own, self-designed CMS for daily claims. Then when you need to start up a temporary office to run a storm, you have a software (like FileTrac) that costs nothing when not in use, but is easy to learn when you deploy a group of adjusters that aren't familiar with your system.

Yeah, I guess I will have to use something like that for the catastrophe events, if for no other reason than the fact that most IA's are familiar with FileTrac. VCA seems like an awesome system too, and it seems intuitive enough to it would be easy to figure out for people jumping into it without prior training. The upside is that I have already begun the development of my new system, and I think it will be user friendly enough to compete with any of the others. Maybe I should sell it with the source code and supplement the slow times...

Ida contacts me about VCA about once a quarter, but the setup fees, per user fees/per file fees are kind of a turn off. I simply do not like seeing fee after fee after fee. It's like seconding a claim to a rural IA firm if I don't have someone close.. soon enough I start seeing telephone fees, secretarial fees, file setup fees, clerical fees, after hours fees (when not specifically requested) etc. All it takes a fat stack of random fees and I start looking for someone else, fast.

 

 

On a totally unrelated topic: How do I set up a signature on my forum account. Cannot seem to find it anywhere.