Forums

Posted By RESTCON on 7/11/2013 11:29:14 PM
 I am REAL good at estimating. Can look at 10 claims by lunch using my system. Am willing to work two weeks and if you dont make more money than you ever have, my work is free except expenses. On hurricanes, I usually average $10,000 a week by myself. I am only interested in adjusters who get deployed often.Willing to prove myself. Restcon@aol.com

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

RESTCON,

I am sure you are a fantastic scope writer. Further your "ad" is very appealing and seems like a no-brainer. Now I don't own this site but I do own another site. There is nothing more underhanded than someone advertising their (for profit) services in the forums. On this site and mine, their are clear directives with regard to advertising your services and both sites have ads from companies and/or individuals that are paying to advertising their services.

Is it appropriate that others offering a similar service are paying to advertise their service whereas you are not?

This industry is all about credibility. Why should anyone trust you to come through with your promises to make them more money than they have ever made when you cannot be trusted to follow the rules of an industry website? If you are willing to take shortcuts here by side-stepping proper advertising guidelines, what shortcuts are you going to take on another adjuster's estimate? 

Robbie,

I am sending your file back once again for correction. Please correct "their are clear directives with regard to advertising..........."
For an adjuster such as yourself to correct and inform others while continuing this behavior in skills is lacking on your part. While you continue to inform others of the importance of using spell check and correcting any and all work before submitting; as it reflects the professional in oneself, it would be prudent to follow ones own advice as well. I trust I may advise you on that. 
Stay safe and stay dry. ;o)

Posted By pondman on 7/12/2013 3:21:13 PM
Robbie,

I am sending your file back once again for correction. Please correct "their are clear directives with regard to advertising..........."
For an adjuster such as yourself to correct and inform others while continuing this behavior in skills is lacking on your part. While you continue to inform others of the importance of using spell check and correcting any and all work before submitting; as it reflects the professional in oneself, it would be prudent to follow ones own advice as well. I trust I may advise you on that. 
Stay safe and stay dry. ;o)

Pondman,

While I wholeheartedly agree with the requested corrections, I do have to say that the sentence that I have taken the time to underline is grammatically incorrect. Please revise and resend.

Acclerated,

Yes it is a run on, but there is no need to correct. The Insured has withdrawn the claim so we are CWP. It has been noted in the remarks.

Stay dry up there in Asheville !

If it sounds to good to be true.....

Posted By pondman on 7/12/2013 3:21:13 PM
Robbie,

I am sending your file back once again for correction. Please correct "their are clear directives with regard to advertising..........."
For an adjuster such as yourself to correct and inform others while continuing this behavior in skills is lacking on your part. While you continue to inform others of the importance of using spell check and correcting any and all work before submitting; as it reflects the professional in oneself, it would be prudent to follow ones own advice as well. I trust I may advise you on that. 
Stay safe and stay dry. ;o)

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

Pondman,

your post has absolutely nothing to do with this thread. Nevertheless, I did utilize spell check on this post. Try it yourself, copy and paste my post and run it through CADO's spell check. Not a single mistake was picked up. If you don't know by now Pondman, I do practice what I preach. Even though spell check didn't pick up any mistakes, yes I did use "their" in the wrong pretext and should have been "there"

Stay safe and dry as well my friend.

Any adjuster who gets deployed often doesn't need or want anybody scoping for them. 10 inspections a day five days a week should yield you more than $10K a week. And I mean absolutely no disrespect here, but what is an elite-level adjuster doing looking to work someone elses claims? One thing I've learned about this field is that talk is cheap. There are guys on this site who get consistent deployments for top-tier carriers even in slow years. I'm pretty sure those guys would never farm out their inspections to someone else. Maybe some lower-level carriers might allow it, but none of the majors would.

He's trying to keep expectations low; plus this adjuster would be splitting his cut with his scoper.   If you think his talk is cheap, call his bluff...talk is cheap, ya know?

I can understand this guy's attempt to get more writing done inside.  Most adjusters get tired of the field and want to do more paperwork for various reasons.  This could be due to aging, injuries, the unpredictability of the field, etc.  

If I were to do something like this, it would be because of the industry's attempt to pay adjusters so much less for reviewing files than for those that do field work.  The problem is that you get people (not adjusters) with 1-3 years of experience who review files for adjusters who've been adjusting claims for 20+ years.  It makes perfect sense that you would need to make more money in a job that requires greater skill.

The guys who know their stuff turn down file review/examiner work routinely, because it is egregiously low and/or set at a fixed rate.  This appears to be a good solution to restructuring your pay so that it's affected by individual claim volume and performance.

Other adjusters would love to just do more and more field work and never have to write a report.

I'm not trying to enter into a back-and-forth on this forum, as you can see my total posting count is low. If I could "call his bluff" and use him, then he sends me 10 scopes a day, my invoicing total would go through the roof. The problem would be when IA and carrier management found out that I had someone else inspecting my claims. As I said, some carriers might allow it, just not the one I handle claims for. Also, what happens if questions arise with regards to scope? I wasn't there, never met the insureds. What if I have to go out to re-inspect(multiple claims?) On top of all this, I would be splitting my pay with the other guy. Sounds like ultimately I would be better off inspecting and closing 4-5 a day myself. Again, I'm just speaking for myself. Maybe some guys could pull off this kind of system without compromising the quality of closed files. If all ten a day close seamlessly without issue, more power to you. Give it a shot.

Sorry dbonham; not willing to start a back and forth either if it's an argument- just a discussion. There are entire firms out there that write the estimates based on photographs and a chicken scratch diagram.  I see nothing wrong with it so long as the attempts to put together an estimate are done with the intent of including all covered items claimed by the insured (aka: good faith).

Anyway, I could see something like this working out. I've been doing this 12 years now and only draw a diagram for my scope notes. My photos tell the rest of the story. My reports and photo descriptions supply plenty of detail and I rarely receive follow-up questions. We live in an age where if it isn't in the photos, it's not damaged and can't be included in the estimate.

Furthermore, if the arrangement between the IA Vendor and the Adjuster is defined as a 1099 Contractor, the Vendor (legally) has very little say regarding the manner in which the adjuster's work is done. This is a reason why you may see some vendors who pay adjusters on a W2 Employee or as a 1099 Contractor.  With W2, the vendor is required to take out workers comp, unemployment, etc. on the adjuster, but this benefit protects the firm.

If the vendor jeopardizes the 1099 arrangement by exercising too much control (the IRS has 20 criteria that serve as a guide to determine this) over the adjuster, they can expose themselves to third party tort. This arrangement is not conditioned by the size of vendors, but their client contracts and management decisions by the vendors themselves.

Some contracts by carriers will specify a restriction against subcontracting out to another adjuster/entity. Thus, a W2 arrangement would be required. In this case, the vendor can comfortably tell you that you can or can not delegate your tasks to assistants or other adjusters.

Plus, this discussion really interests me since many carriers are getting cheaper and expecting more from adjusters. Some of their fee schedules are so low that the amount they are paying is a liability. I see this as a reason we all need to figure out ways to be more efficient and improve workflows. Outside of that, I look forward to major storms that create favorable demand.

As a one man show, I have little control over what carriers pay in fees.

Speaking of carriers getting cheaper and what they pay.........any comments on this.....

Schedule Fees:   $25  for anything 7/12 and greater as steep charge

                            $25 for two story or greater

Now you get a claim that is going to be close to 40-50 squares and has pitches of 18 and 13. It is not walkable and needs rope and harness to lock yourself into to complete scope per carriers guideline. Carrier doesn't pay for rope and harness or ladder assist, not that ladder assist will work, both your North and South slopes are 18 pitch into 13 pitch valleys. You need a "sky hook" to hang from. Here's your $50 and don't forget you need to split that with the IA Firm. A $30 death trap. 

 

Posted By pondman on 7/16/2013 6:22:02 PM

Speaking of carriers getting cheaper and what they pay.........any comments on this.....

Schedule Fees:   $25  for anything 7/12 and greater as steep charge

                            $25 for two story or greater

Now you get a claim that is going to be close to 40-50 squares and has pitches of 18 and 13. It is not walkable and needs rope and harness to lock yourself into to complete scope per carriers guideline. Carrier doesn't pay for rope and harness or ladder assist, not that ladder assist will work, both your North and South slopes are 18 pitch into 13 pitch valleys. You need a "sky hook" to hang from. Here's your $50 and don't forget you need to split that with the IA Firm. A $30 death trap. 

 

The carrier just pays you to get the job done, not to cry about when you have take the extra 30 minutes to use ropes (tools that you should have and should expect to have to use as an adjuster). 

 

That said, while I think that most carriers are reasonable and would not mind a steep charge, the reality is that the lack of those charges are not necessarily the carrier's fault (in most cases). It is the fault of every mom and pop and adjuster who has incorporated or formed an LLC deciding that lowballing their own fee schedules is the only way to get their foot in the door. Think about it: 4 IA firms solicit a carrier. 1 offers a reasonable fee schedule with a clerical fee, photo charges, mileage costs, steep charges and whatever other legitimate add-ons they can think of. The two in the middle offer some lighter variations thereof with lower overall costs, while the last offers the same (or a lower) fee schedule with no add-ons at all. 3 of the 4 IA's are guilty of whittling away at the fee schedule. In my state alone, there are over 100 IA firms, most of which are one man shops (though some are quite impressive in size). Every single one of those firms are competing for the same carriers, not to mention the national players with active marketing departments.

There is no getting around it. More adjusters means  more competition in the marketplace, and a high amount of competition means lower product costs.

The lower fee schedules in the vast majority of cases are self inflicted wounds by the adjusting industry. There are the occasional exceptions, in which a carrier will throw a vast amount of volume at a single firm and then come back at contract renegotiation time saying something to the effect of "now that we have you by the tender parts, you need to drop costs by 15% this year if you want us to stick around". The firm will generally go ahead and pass the lost revenues on to the IA's, and if they decide to walk, some other firm will come along take the work, thereby perpetuating the cycle. 

 

The only upside I see is that we have come close to finding the bottom with a number of fee schedules. Anything less, and a lot of the field adjusters would be better off flipping burgers. 

Posted By AcceleratedAdjuster on 7/18/2013 4:37:01 PM 

The carrier just pays you to get the job done, not to cry about when you have take the extra 30 minutes to use ropes (tools that you should have and should expect to have to use as an adjuster). 

...

That said, while I think that most carriers are reasonable and would not mind a steep charge, the reality is that the lack of those charges are not necessarily the carrier's fault (in most cases). It is the fault of every mom and pop and adjuster who has incorporated or formed an LLC deciding that lowballing their own fee schedules is the only way to get their foot in the door. 

...

The only upside I see is that we have come close to finding the bottom with a number of fee schedules. Anything less, and a lot of the field adjusters would be better off flipping burgers. 

 

A carrier's Vendor Relations department has a job because the Claim Department delegated that task to them.  The Claim Department has a job because Underwriting approved applications.  Underwriting has a place because hardworking Agents hustled to sell a promise and peace of mind to an insured.  The insured, the Customer, has been paying their/our paychecks.  (I apologize for the hodge-podge summary- I do have a point). 

Individual IA's who cry about low-balled rates should be the least of the carrier's concerns.  The carrier needs to consider the fact that they will bear the worst share of the consequences for accepting and/or encouraging low-balled fee schedules.  Consequences for something like this are witnessed through the release of droves of uneducated (but certified) and oblivious minions who have been assigned claims by IA vendors that desperately grovel for work.

This is not just mom/pop vendors, but also Account Executives for national carriers who regurgitate obsequious chatter and irresponsible commitments just to land accounts.  This is where it becomes egregiously troubling because you have the backing of a national vendor with no legitimate feedback from decent Field Adjusters who will ultimately decide whether the rate is reasonable.  Sadly, these guys are trained to keep their mouth shut, but emotions will catch up to them.  Their emotions will eventually deteriorate their ability to deliver results that were promised by vapid sycophants higher up the chain.

Now, back to my intro to the insurance industry in the beginning.  The carrier's major concern should be over the liability for accepting low-balled fees.  The carrier will ultimately bear the blame for this.  Granted, it goes without saying that the vendor loses the account- that's chump change when it comes to the scale that is impacted on the carrier level.

This form of 'rate-neglect' encourages poor service, numerous and costly supplements (numerous carriers do not track this expense by the way), larger percentages of claims go into appraisal, lawsuits get filed over simple issues, etc.  Further down the road, lawsuits stay filed because customers are too pissed off to settle.  Over-promises that lead to poor delivery also proliferate assumptions (ass-outta-U-'n-me), errors, and omissions that eventually culminate in bad faith.  

While individual claims are eventually corrected, it is the general practice of accepting substandard rates that could eventually result in a form of institutional bad faith.  In many cases, vendor relations should stop looking the other way and exercise a reasonable level of discretion before they suggest and/or accept rates in exchange for service from competing vendors.

Never forget that in the world of insurance the claims department is the pond scum and cat adjusters are the crud under the pond scum.

Jud, thanks for your "well worded" post replying to your previous post. What exactly does it have to do with the original thread topic? Nothing. It's a shame that new and aspiring adjusters have to read this jaded dialogue. Stay on topic. Give something back to this community as opposed to your jaded views on the system. This is like reading Amanda Bynes twitter feed, its not relevant and you end up regretting reading it in the first place(even though it is mildly entertaining). I'm not sure what this Atlantic hurricane season will bring, but if there is a landfall, There will be a lot of field adjusters who will make big money, and there will be a lot of older file examiner types who will hate them for it. It's pretty much a metaphor for America at this point. Some might disagree, but the guys who still have something to offer to this field will stay positive and offer something to the group as a whole. Sorry if I have offended you, you clearly have cultivated views on the carrier-vendor relationships, it's just not relevant to this thread.

The vendors are crafty in a sense.. They deploy people they trust to handle claims to conclusion. It's not always a disaster situation like you've outlined. Then again, I'm talking about a top-tier vendor/carrier relationship. Whatever companies your talking about, it might differ...I can't speak for those companies.

Posted By dbonham on 7/21/2013 12:15:20 AM 

Jud, thanks for your "well worded" post replying to your previous post. What exactly does it have to do with the original thread topic? Nothing. It's a shame that new and aspiring adjusters have to read this jaded dialogue. Stay on topic. Give something back to this community as opposed to your jaded views on the system. This is like reading Amanda Bynes twitter feed, its not relevant and you end up regretting reading it in the first place(even though it is mildly entertaining). I'm not sure what this Atlantic hurricane season will bring, but if there is a landfall, There will be a lot of field adjusters who will make big money, and there will be a lot of older file examiner types who will hate them for it. It's pretty much a metaphor for America at this point. Some might disagree, but the guys who still have something to offer to this field will stay positive and offer something to the group as a whole. Sorry if I have offended you, you clearly have cultivated views on the carrier-vendor relationships, it's just not relevant to this thread.

Dustin, thanks for keeping me in check.  Staying positive is always a challenge for me since I have four kids from one terrific marriage, bills to pay, and a very uncertain line of work where change is constant.  For me to watch upper management lose touch with the very people (us) who work on the front lines to keep their firm afloat can be very distressing at times.  It is easy to ignore the many great things we have going for us in this exceptional country and terrific career we have as Adjusters.  

As a long time member of these forums, I value your concern over the importance of staying on topic.  This enables more people to benefit from organized thoughts and provide knowledge that empowers those who come here.

I'm not sure what post you are referring to; you stated that I responded to my own post.  I think you mentioned my very last post wherein I responded to 'AcceleratedAdjuster'.  My attempt to stay on topic with this thread relates to increasing efficiency in the midst of declining rates as they pertain to the original post's search (Need a Cat Partner).  My post attempts to follow the direction of this thread in that it refined one of many reasons why rates decline and ameliorates several dangers of declining rates.

I don't know your friend Amanda Bynes, but perhaps you can tweet her so she can stop by and visit CADO's humble forums.  During her visit, perhaps she can clarify what the Atlantic Hurricane Season, examiners, and field adjusters have to do with needing a Cat Partner.  If she does, perhaps she would consult her sixth grade English text and enrich you regarding your use of the word 'metaphor'.

Posted By olderthendirt on 7/20/2013 8:10:23 PM
Never forget that in the world of insurance the claims department is the pond scum and cat adjusters are the crud under the pond scum.

This is a harsh, but truthful thought.  It is always important to hold the agents, underwriters, and claims departments with significant respect as partners of a team.  The customer only sees these separate departments and roles as "The Insurance Company".