Forums

Rich thanks  for your thoghts. I do not disagree with any of your comments.

I have spent as much time working large liability casualtry claims as I have have complex property claims and I know Bob is also a liability adjuster. When I was a senior adjuster for Zurich in the Houston area over twenty years ago I was reprimanded by my bosses of putting information in the file that was not pure factual evidence in file; but was my opine disclosed with some tecky tools that they did not want me to use in the future as many of my reports had my bent that not discovered from normal investigation of finding evidence through interviews.

The defence attorney's who started this come uppance, used the example of  the monkey that climbs the flag pole... the higher he climbs the more of a.. h... he shows.

This is about exposing your principal to tort liability that can be avoided. I have complete respect for Bob and would recommend him for any property claim if he left some of the tools at home and the results out of the reports.Common adjuster knowledge is required and very few experts are required on property claims that occur thousands of times ever day.

If a water sucker brings a mositure meter and infra-red camera I think the adjuster should be present when the readings are made and this should be recorded in the file, for managements evaluation. This will be a good holiday topic.

Ray Hall said on 23 Nov 2009
I am sure he has all the requred tools of an expert adjuster and non degreed engineer on insurance claims like an infra-red camera to find water behind walls.

Ray Hall said on 25 Nov 2009
If a water sucker brings a mositure meter and infra-red camera I think the adjuster should be present when the readings are made and this should be recorded in the file, for managements evaluation.

Ray, you keep bringing up "infra-red camera" and infer I have one, though I have never posted anything about an infra-red camera, do not own one, have never used one. From the articles I have read about them, they are a very powerful tool in the right (trained) hands, and I have not done that training. On the other hand, a simple moisture meter pretty much reads "wet" or "dry" or some fraction. The non-penetrating ones take a few minutes to get acquainted, but they are the only recourse if you are trying to determine the extent of moisture intrusion to a place that cannot be probed with a basic pin-type meter.

I wouldn't mind the mention of infra-red, but your attitude is like you are spinning the topic toward junk-science or something. You do not have your facts straight on me, that is for sure. People that want to talk about the topic of moisture meters should go to this other thread http://www.catadjuster.org/Forums/t...fault.aspx  
or this one, on the broader topic of preventing mold (and the "standards" proposed by the renovation industry) http://www.catadjuster.org/Forums/t...aspx#16379

The only reason moisture meters comes up on the current thread is your attempt to discredit me, has nothing to do with unsealed shingles.

Ray I did have a brief communication with Mr. Acree and actually believe you were trying to help him - so I apologize for any misunderstanding I had on your post telling him to "shut up". You may have been helping him with some of the grief he was getting from Mr. Ghost. Let Mr. Acree get a bit more experience, and be less of a target for bullies like Mr. Ghost. I have a different approach, but that's diversity for ya.

We aren't here for a long time, we are here for a good time.

OK Bob this is not about you and I. My post are read by many just like yours. I still think adjusters who do not know the differance between wind damage and wave wash should not work these claims. I still do not think a tile floor should be broken up and removed if some clean water migrated under the tile. clean water, tile and cement is not much food for mold to grow on. If a tile floor is not loose-buckled from some upheaval of a subfloor or wall that expands... forget about this expense... the water will evaporate.... I will make this statement for the last time.... water claims have cost the American public billions of dollars in increased premiums for Homeowners Coverage, nationwide for doing water removal jobs that were not necessary by an opine by "experts".... be they staff, independant or water suckers who called for this expense, for SOME reason and I don,t think it was CYA.

"When an adjuster hears the sound of galloping hooves, think of horse's not zebra's.

I still do not think a tile floor should be broken up and removed if some clean water migrated under the tile. clean water, tile and cement is not much food for mold to grow on.

I suppose you are referring to the tile that was pulled in my photos on this other thread, I don't believe there's been much other mention of it: http://www.catadjuster.org/Forums/t...fault.aspx
 

Posted by Bob H 10 May 2008
The wood sub-floor had water trapped under the hardwood finished floor AND THE TILE FLOOR in the kitchen, all the way out to here. It has a water ring, and this was not an exaggerated claim by the contractor. That water ran under the tile all the way down the hall at the end of the photo, and tile had to be pulled from a hall bathroom. The non-penetrating meter found where it was, and they just pulled flooring as no other way to dry it.

Ray, this was not clean water on concrete.   The house had a raised foundation, this was tile and wood floor on top of OSB.

Get your facts straight, and please quit taking all the air out of the room. You may not be aware of it, but you speak as though your opinion is the one that matters - and others don't have your years of experience. I am tired of it.

Fot the record all this dust up came about from adjusters not letting the insureds present their claim  to the adjuster; but a 180 degree turn by adjusters who abdicate the role of the real scope to contractors, or more shame full...anticipating the worst on ever clear water claim. Many  policy holders  have told me many stories about contractors and adjusters, who rushed to judgement and did work that was not called for in THEIR OPIN ION. disruped their lives for several days and COST them a large deductible.

It is the duty of the insured to present the claim, not the other way advocated by some adjusters and MOST water contractors. I will let the readers beware of all post from all posters and make good decisions in your claims career. Every adjuster has an opinion and it seems Bob's and mine on this subject is well known.

Bob, I am glad to see moisture meters mentioned even though it is a little off topic here.  I wish I had learned about them earlier than I did. I researched them early in 2008 and bought one when I started adjusting large loss commercial fire claims then used it in Houston after Ike.  I wish I had gotten one years ago.  Even if the house is a slab, it is proof as to water entry whether from flood or other sources, and on the 2nd floor and higher gives a much better picture of what kind of damage to expect in the wood subflooring.  As a contractor, I recently used it to determine how far down the sub floors were wet, and how high up the wall water was wicked in a church that flooded from a broken water pipe.  I don't plan to ever be without it.

I actually agree with both Bob and Ray on this subject of moisture meters.  On the one hand, it is the insd's job to make their claim.  However, most of them are more than happy to be led by some bozo contractor whose main goal is to explode the scope as much as possible.  So, where that leads me is to using a moisture meter to determine what the real extent of the loss is and especially to control the rental period of the dryers and dehus.  I can't tell you how many times I've been on a loss during day two of the dryout and found things already dry with my equipment.  You know very well most of the so-called mitigation companies are going to keep that stuff there for day 3 and 4 after its already dry.

Of course, I'm a staff guy so maybe my perspective is slightly different on this.  On the staff side we're looked to for cost-control on claims as much as we are looked to for coverage assessment and scoping.

Mike, when you get a large fire loss with the whole house of contents packed out and moved back in, has the fire restoration contractor, who got to the house after the fire truck saved you a huge amount by the packed out operation that must take place as soon as the fire is out? I am one of the one,s who does not "try to save " each item of fabric, electronics, clothing, food, makeup, shoes etc.I like to think, when I get on site I am the cost control person, who has to approve of eash cost incurred on the final staetment of loss..".we tried" is a lame line that has been used too much in the last 30 years. WHAT have we really learned?