Posted By Marc Dubois on 02/04/2008 7:43 PM
I think that the previous post misses the obvious which is to make obtaining a license a tad more difficult. A three day course where you get the exam answers does't prepare anyone to do adjusting. Make the course more extensive and qualify people more adequately. Obviously the situation seems easy if you weren't on the receiving end of some incompetent adjusters recommendations. The grief caused those poor folks should not be shrugged off so easily.
To clarify: My previous post does not attempt to justify the current system of using some poorly trained adjusters in a catastrophe situation. It simply expresses my cynical attitude that improving the system will cost the carriers money that they don't want to spend, and that they see no need to improve the system (especially if it costs them money).
And I missed the 'obvious' solution of making an adjusting license a 'tad more difficult' to obtain? I didn't miss it - it just isn't going to help unless you make it a lot more difficult. I'd suggest an apprenticeship program. But even then, when the catastrophe hits what does the state government do? That's right - they open the floodgates to get more adjusters (even unlicensed ones) on the job because the voters are clamoring for it.
Correct me if I'm wrong (I know you will ), but California has made their license more difficult to get, haven't they? I know my license is not reciprocal there. When the wildfires hit did they say, "No three day wonders allowed! You can't work here unless you've taken the exam and gotten our 'tad more difficult' license!"? No, as I recall they dropped that requirement pretty quick and allowed out-of-state adjusters.
And, for the record, I took a 5-day course to get my license - not a 3-day. It must have been a pretty good course because everybody passed the exam, including a few guys that would need detailed instructions and a personal trainer to fog a mirror! Had to be a great course!