Forums

My  complaining about having your work reviewed by another person with more experience and more knowledge, plus 4 eyes are always better than 2 and someone agreeing with you must indicate you got it right the first time. ALL adjusters have their work reviewed.

Nah file reviewers are great.. its the ones that have -0 personality that need to go..

why would you not want a file reviewer?  its like being able to turn in a test.. missing a question, then they give it back saying "psst.. fix this before i grade it"

As much as we try to have the perfect file, mistakes can still be made. It is essential that files be reviewed by a qualified reviewer. Therein lies the problem, QUALIFIED file reviewer and not one trying to impress the higher authority of their knowledge and prowess. We are all in this together and should present ourselves as doer's and professionals.

why would you not want a file reviewer?  its like being able to turn in a test.. missing a question, then they give it back saying "psst.. fix this before i grade it"

Deja vu-

That is exactly what they did on the test for the Texas state insurance adjusters license!!!!!! I guess it had somrthing to do with the gaurantee to pass or your money back.

Jim,

You need to see about getting all the short stories you have laying around that you have written in your down time published. Are you this eloquent in your narratives on your claims.

One of the hats I wear now that I am on staff is that of file reviewer. For obvious reasons I would not like to be fired. (That's called disclosure of your conflict of interests, a concept those in Washington would do well to learn.)

Some of the reports I review are amazing, and some are just amazingly incompetent. Sometimes you offer the carrot (like hiring the competent adjusters when you have another assignment available) and sometimes you offer the stick (like pulling the file and refusing to ever use that adjuster again). My philosophy as an independent was, and as a staff guy is, that we are in the claim process together. If we are adversaries, the main goal is not being accomplished. And the main goal, need I remind anyone, is to indemnify the insured in as prompt and fair a manner as possible. It's really not about the examiner or the adjuster. It's about the insured. In the most basic of terms, we simply happen to pick up a paycheck in the process of providing a service to the policyholders by attempting to pay the right amount -- or as George Meherle would have said, "not a penny more or a penny less".

Overpaying claims creates higher premiums.  Underpaying claims is at best due to lack of knowledge and at worst due to lack of ethical standards.  I rely on independents to supply me with all the information I need to make a reasonable decision about what is the right amount to pay.

Steve, thanks for your comment about the insured (policy holders). Insureds seem to get lost in some cases and of course, that is who we are serving and should be receiving priority, not the vendors or carriers. The insured has a contract of adhesion for multiple perils and should get a reasonable settlement, within a reasonable period of time.  I understand the carriers have a vested interest in loss claims, but they provide, by contract, a method of indemnification if the policyholder has a covered cause of loss.

Whoever hired you has gotten a good man, ethcal, decent, and knowedgeable. Keep up the good work. Don't concern yourself with eliminating adjusters that know not what they do.  All they do is damage our profession.

Tom, we need a few bad adjusters. Otherwise folks won't be able to recognize a good one. The bad ones make the good ones look even better.

I originally posted a 2 paragraph rant but deleted it because I thought I may be recognized.  I had 2 files in the same day get rejected and had to explain to the file reviewer why the file reviewer was wrong.  Both files after wasting my time were accepted. 

Number one i paid to paint a ceiling which was faux same as the walls, so had to pay to match.  File reviewer did not understand this.  (BUT afterall it is their job to nit pick) 2nd, a file reviewer from 2000 miles away said I was replacing too much drywall that she could see from the photos.  I think it would be easier if someone with 8 years experience such as myself, just take photos and have some one sittiing in a cubicle 2000 miles away make the decisions on what should be painted and how many square feet of materials should be replaced.  AFter all, everyone knows that if 50 adjusters make an adjustment on the loss, then all 50 adjusters will have the exact same total for the estimate (sarcasm)

If you feel the need to have someone that has never been to the loss tell you how to do it,  then more power to you.  It is my opinon that I am being hired for my expertise.  I will agree with you that it is ok to have someone tell me what I did wrong  IF THEY ACTUALLY SAW THE LOSS.  But please don't lecture me on a loss that you have never even seen. 

I interviewed with a carrier last year for a Property Examiner position. I was actually shocked that they didn't require hands on experience. Honestly I think they should. I don't think I would be very effective at grading another adjuster's work if I had never actually done it myself.

It's impossible for examiners to inspect after you have already inspected. Just because they haven't been there doesn't mean they don't know what they are talking about if they do have experience. And it would stupid for the insurance companies to send an examiner out to every house you scoped.