, Resources for Adjusters from Adjusters
Adjusters Becoming PA's | Archive Index |

The Adjuster's Forum » General Discussion » Adjusters Becoming PA's « Site Map »
Topics | Home | Current Forum | Jobs, Training and more | Adjuster Roster | Channels | Resources | Contact Us

Author Message
Dan Meler
Registered User
Username: Danmeler

Post Number: 3
Registered: 3-2002
Posted on Saturday, March 23, 2002 - 12:31 pm:   

Let's face it...IF every adjuster and every insurance company kept the promises the Good Hands people and Good Neighbors (etc.) make...the insureds would seldom be willing to share their settlement with a PA. The sad fact is that promises are routinely not kept. My wife and I are working the reopened Northridge earthquake...MY GOD, most of the files I get were so badly handled the first time around it's shameful...indescribable really. THOSE insureds needed help but trusted the carrier instead. I'm guessing Much fewier than half of the claims were handled in a reasonable manner in 94-95 on this quake. We'll never know. It's embarassing.
Kelley Roberson
Registered User
Username: Kelley

Post Number: 21
Registered: 12-2000
Posted on Wednesday, March 13, 2002 - 7:50 pm:   

DWW, you have made several good points & I do thank you for them. 8 claims in 34 yrs may seem like a lot to you but no one asked if they were at fault claims. Only one has been an "at fault" claim. 3 of the claims have to do with what is going on at the moment.

The vehicle that is giving us such a fit is a 1983 Mercedes 380 SL(coupe). It has been garaged & maintained. No dents, tears or chips. Spoke rims ( not wire wheel covers). Orginal MB stickers were still on the windshield. Cloth top had no tears or punctures. Trannsmission, both timiming chains & u-drive system had been replaced less than 100 miles ago. The agent knew what type of coverage I was looking for, he even came out & took the needed photos.

I ordered an appraisal last week, I am to pick it up in the morning. Out of 3 vehicles vandals attacked 2 were burnt to a crisp. Everything from the engine firewall back is distroyed. The front shroud of one vehicle was destroyed by the fire dept. The MB front shroud shows major damage, both engines may have some salvage value. Insurance has totaled all 3 vehicles. The truck can be used for a work truck, we will buy it back for the salvage.

Like I stated, I have sent a copy of the policy to the State Board, they requested for me to do so after I spoke with them on the phone.

I have a phone log set up, everything goes into it. I ran a business for 17 yrs that the "he said she said" could be big issues. I learned through a couple of legal battles. We use to do large commercial contracts. You learn a lot there.

Thank each of you for your imput.
Tom Strickland
Registered User
Username: Toms

Post Number: 34
Registered: 12-2001
Posted on Tuesday, March 12, 2002 - 7:42 pm:   

mark salmon
Registered User
Username: Olderthendirt

Post Number: 145
Registered: 12-2000
Posted on Tuesday, March 12, 2002 - 11:54 am:   

While the talk has been educational and technical there is a point at the begining that has been lost, there never was a complete and competent appraisal of the vehicles (as related to us) done. If that had been done the other points might be moot. Thank heavens we cat adjusters never eye ball a roof or guess the size of a room. What is disturbing is that the claims department doesn't care if they have all the information or the right information.
D Wong Whey
Registered User
Username: Dwongwhey

Post Number: 85
Registered: 10-2001
Posted on Tuesday, March 12, 2002 - 8:53 am:   

Ah Tom you are never wrong to suggest having it in writing.

Just remember the flattest pancakes always have
two sides. Perhaps we could invite the agent involved here to present the other side of the coin before moving from a settlement process to an E&O claim?

You must have been a sharpshooter Tom. You're a lot more itchy about pulling the E&O trigger than I, absent more facts.

Tom the MIScommunication may well be that she thought she was getting a 'stated value' policy (AND DID) but MISunderstood that a stated value policy does not afford the same protection as an 'Agreed Value' policy. The former pays ACV or less (actual cost) and the later pays a pre-determined 'Agreed Value' when there is a loss.

It seems to me unfortunate as well as folly to impugn the agent when with a loss history of 8 losses over a 34 period, this insured is JUST NOW learning of an assertion of deficiency in coverage, or moves to assert she was not sold the proper coverage she intended.

(Message edited by dwongwhey on March 12, 2002)
Tom Strickland
Registered User
Username: Toms

Post Number: 32
Registered: 12-2001
Posted on Tuesday, March 12, 2002 - 7:16 am:   

AH, SO, OH DWW SWAMI, yOU ARE correct. However, I may have misread her post, but thought she said I thought I purchased a 'stated' value policy. On older cars and collector cars they can, in some fashion.
However, the gest I got here is that a lot of communicating with different people on the phone with little or no results.
I personally think that when a deal comes up, reduce it to writing so everyone knows where you are coming from, also it commits a party to things that they 'forget' when the check is issued.
I really think with all the apprasisers and "my friend" doing an appraisal, that too much "MIS"communication" is going on.
If it were my loss, I would have 3 reputable area dealers quote me the "ACV" of these vehicles and the "retail" in order to determine the RC.Also I would get 2 or 3 "repair" estimates (if repairable and if not) just to show the carrier the difference.
Then submit my proof accordingly. YOu either get a check or some type of denial letter telling you "WHY". And lastly my telephone call this a.m. to my producing agent is to place your E&O on notice of a pending claim (with a follow-up letter) as to what was supposed to be purchased and what "was" purchased.I repeat, Be prepared to be treated as a "dummy" for "not" reading and "Knowing" what policy you have,had on your vehicles. (of course, excuse could be that you are an insurance adjuster and did not know to review your policy and coverages upon reciept)of which as an adjuster we have memorized each and every policy, rightttttttttttttttttttt!!!!!
as usual IMHO!!!!!
D Wong Whey
Registered User
Username: Dwongwhey

Post Number: 84
Registered: 10-2001
Posted on Tuesday, March 12, 2002 - 4:36 am:   

Tom, very few insureds ever purchase an "agreed value" policy for automobiles. Usually it is done only in the case of collector vehicles, antique autos, and high valued sports cars.

I suspect the problem here is a misunderstanding over the difference between the common word vernacular usage of what one might think a 'stated value' is as compared to what is intended by a stated value policy. As you no doubt know, and the point I was trying to make earlier, the lesser of 'stated value', ACV or actual repairs (and not an 'agreed value') is the purpose and intent of a stated value policy. You were correct that this insured should take time to read and review policy language to determine coverage settlement procedures rather than to rely on their own understanding of what 'stated' means otherwise. (Remember that guy who said it all depends on what the definition of IS 'is'?) The policy should and generally will spell out the definitions as to policy INTENT.

Now if this insured has had three high value, collector vehicles or antique autos damaged, then I could be wrong. But generally, an 'agreed value' policy might also include some provisions for garaging such vehicles which might preclude or lessen vandalism risk exposures.

Perhaps Kelley can shed some light on the type and year manufactured of the vehicles in question.

Generally speaking, contemporary vehicles are not insured for 'agreed value' due to the nature of prohibitively high premiums as well as the conflict with the nature of indemnity not allowing an insured to profit from a loss by settlement for an amount greater than ACV, which is most especially applicable for contemporary auto losses.

The original post indicates that the poster has made approximately 8 auto claims in 34 years. Such a loss frequency history generally would be a 'red flag' to any agent or carrier NOT to write an 'agreed value' policy and perhaps even a 'voluntary' policy. In most states, such a risk loss record would probably take coverage away from voluntary carriers and throw coverage over to the reinsurance or state involuntary facility ("Assigned Risk Pool") with exponentially higher premiums.

(Message edited by dwongwhey on March 12, 2002)

(Message edited by dwongwhey on March 12, 2002)
Tom Strickland
Registered User
Username: Toms

Post Number: 31
Registered: 12-2001
Posted on Monday, March 11, 2002 - 10:19 pm:   


Sounds to me like you have an E & O against your agent and I would file it ASAP. Further, read DWW as he is quite on the ole nail etc. Also, a little known situation in texas may be worth your while in looking and checking is "dimiutive" values, don't know your entire situation, but check it. also look into the appraisal provisions, DO NOT accept a payment thinking that you will do better later on with attorney,etc. Also, from now on and as of tuesday a.m. write , write and write more, no more phone calls, hard to document a one sided remembrance of the conversation. I would send a letter tommorrow a.m. with details as to day one (1) of purchasing policy (ie,agent stated value) up until 03-11-02 that way you have placed them in a position to answer in writing (as your last paragraph will be please respond in writing and no more phone calls,etc) and which will memoralize all the events for any legal possibilties down the road. Stated values are just that (in some instances,they find a replacement for less) but it sounds like you have more problems communicating your problems And what you want and they way you want to settle rather than with the settlement. so my suggestion is again in writing and place your agent on notice as to an E & O claim as they did not put a stated value as you requested. (however, get ready to accept some liability due to the fact when you rec'd the policies, YOU should have read and known then what you got )
hope some of this helps.
D Wong Whey
Registered User
Username: Dwongwhey

Post Number: 83
Registered: 10-2001
Posted on Monday, March 11, 2002 - 7:28 am:   

An omission in my earlier post should have said that all insureds are also 'Self Insured' (SIR) for all loss exposures 'NXS' of applicable policy limits as well as for perils excluded.

(Message edited by dwongwhey on March 11, 2002)
D Wong Whey
Registered User
Username: Dwongwhey

Post Number: 80
Registered: 10-2001
Posted on Sunday, March 10, 2002 - 8:43 pm:   

What is Agreed Value Coverage, and Why You Should Care

There are typically three methods used to decide what you get paid if your auto is a total loss. Each is different, and protects you to a different degree. Only one guarantees you get what you expect, or even what you pay for.

If you're in doubt as to what you have now, don't take anybody's word for what is included in your coverage. Read the policy language yourself, and ask your agent for written clarification if you have any doubts or questions.

#1 Agreed Amount (or Agreed Value)
The most desirable for car collectors. It leaves no doubt as to what will be paid in the event of a loss. With Agreed Amount coverage, the amount you see on the policy is what you'll get if the car is written off as a total loss. Period.

How Do I Set My Agreed Value?

#2 Actual Cash Value (ACV)
Typically provided by standard auto insurance policies. The insurance company decides what you get paid at the time of the loss. While you may have some input if you don't agree with them, the final decision is theirs. It will be based at least in part on using sources which you may not agree with. If you refuse to settle for what they want to pay you, you may need to resort to legal action to arbitrate the issue. We can help if you are already in a dispute, this service can be very expensive.

#3 Stated Amount (or Stated Value)
Often provided on collector and limited use policies. The policy language typically states the insurance company will pay "the Stated Amount, or the Actual Cash Value, or the cost to repair not to exceed the Stated Amount whichever is less.".

Guess what: The Stated Amount is just used to determine your premium cost: The higher your Stated Amount, the higher your insurance premium. The contract language permits them to pay what they decide the Actual Cash Value of the auto is. They are under no contractual obligation whatsoever to pay the Stated Amount. Surprise!

Kelley Roberson
Registered User
Username: Kelley

Post Number: 19
Registered: 12-2000
Posted on Sunday, March 10, 2002 - 10:21 am:   


1) Same incident on all vehicles

2) Stated Vallue is determination of the replacement cost of a object for insurance coverage. An amount is stated in the policy, this is the max. amount a carrier will pay out on any one incident. This type of policy is often purchased on older/classic vehicles, art work, jewerly, etc. Most claims are based off of either RCV or ACV coverage. When an amount is stated,say 20,000.00 in the policy then ACV does not come into play. Replacement cost is set at 20,000 K.

3) Texas

4) No, did not consider self insuring. Would need to investige & gain a better knowledge of subject. I then would need to weigh the pros & cons on subject before I could consider such an option
D Wong Whey
Registered User
Username: Dwongwhey

Post Number: 79
Registered: 10-2001
Posted on Saturday, March 09, 2002 - 10:13 pm:   

Kile, every "insured" engages in a form of "self insurance" so long as they retain a portion of the loss, which is also called a "deductible" and also known as a 'self insured retention (SIR)."

"Insurance" as most know it consists of indemnity protection by a carrier or organized insurance "company" yet is only one of hundreds if not thousands of other methods of risk management and "insurance protection".

I will respond further and in greater detail in answer to your question, once Kelley answers the question which was posed to her.
Kile Anderson
Registered User
Username: Kileanderson

Post Number: 139
Registered: 1-2001
Posted on Saturday, March 09, 2002 - 8:42 pm:   

DWW, can I ask you why you have an obsession with self insurance? The way I see it, the reason insurance exists is because people can't afford to be self insured. I haven't researched it thoroughly but it's my understanding that in order to avoid mandatory insurance in most states you must post a bond to prove that you are financially responsible in the case you cause an accident. Most people I know can't afford to tie up a large sum of money and risk losing it if something does happen or if a jury is feeling generous. For those of us among the great unwashed, auto insurance is the only way to go.
D Wong Whey
Registered User
Username: Dwongwhey

Post Number: 78
Registered: 10-2001
Posted on Saturday, March 09, 2002 - 8:23 pm:   

Kelley I have four more questions:

Were all three cars damaged at the same time by vandals or were there three separate events?

What is a "stated value" auto policy (or) what is your understanding of what a stated value auto policy means?

In which state are your vehicles insured?

Since you state that you just changed carriers, did you consider "self insuring" your autos? Why or why not?

(Message edited by dwongwhey on March 09, 2002)

(Message edited by dwongwhey on March 09, 2002)
Kelley Roberson
Registered User
Username: Kelley

Post Number: 17
Registered: 12-2000
Posted on Saturday, March 09, 2002 - 5:41 pm:   

In Sept. I had to file a property loss & it went so, so. I attempted to file a supplement the first of Jan, it was not responded to until last week, they kept loosing it.

The current "big" problem is with auto(s).

Carrier has followed "basic" cliam procedures but the basic was a very sloppy mess. My assigned adjuster could not make it out so an adjuster friend was asked to scope the damages on the vehicles. Inspecting adjuster made comment on the condition of auto engines, the hoods were never opened up. Adjuster stated one vehicle has wire wheel covers, in fact the vehicle has wire spoke rims. Adjuster states added on towing items, 5th wheel & undermount to frame packages are included in "towing package", spoke with CCC who did the values & they stated they are two different things, Adjuster failed to note them. The list goes on & on. The carrier refused to send someone out to properly appraise the cars, they told me to hire my own appaiser.... I did.

One vehicle has coverage issues, there are things written into the policy that no one can explain why. I attempted to purchase a stated value poliy on one of the vehicles, was told by agent on several occasions I had purchased such. The carrier now states what I have is not a stated value policy on said vehicle. Rather to drag an attornery which I know does not phase the carriers, I just ran a copy of said policy and sent it to the Dept. Of Insur.

The bad thing is loss was due to vandals & they destroyed three on my vehicles. The carrie has demanded declaired I have not responded to their settlement ( O hae the letter they sent that makes that statement). Up front I told them I would not attempt to close all three at once, I would work through them one at a time. They agreed. I have had numerous phone chats with adjuster, mgrs & cliams off & each time we have had this discussion.

Every manager I have spoke with has stated they did not feel their adjuster had not acted in a professional manner. They are so busy telling me if I don't like the offer the adjuster made I can just take it into appraisal. They will not address the issue of the poorly done scope.

I decided the best thing was to do was take the carriers "offer" and let the "professionals" get involved.

All of my coverage is with the same carrier, or I should say was until last week.
D Wong Whey
Registered User
Username: Dwongwhey

Post Number: 74
Registered: 10-2001
Posted on Monday, March 04, 2002 - 12:32 pm:   

Kelley what is the nature of the current loss with which you are unhappy?
Is this a property or auto claim?
If property, is this a mold claim?

Since you say that you hate auto carriers, have you considered "self insuring" and opting out of state mandated carrier coverage? Most states have provisions which allow such.
If not, why have you not considered self insurance?

I join with others in asking that you share more facts so we can independently assess whether the carrier followed proper claim procedures.
joseph m lombardo jr
Registered User
Username: Jlombardo

Post Number: 3
Registered: 1-2002
Posted on Monday, March 04, 2002 - 8:57 am:   

alan jackson
Registered User
Username: Ajackson

Post Number: 105
Registered: 12-2000
Posted on Monday, March 04, 2002 - 8:09 am:   


Now you know why I went to Law School. I am working with one law firm here in Alabama on the mold issue. You should see how the company handled these poor people. If carriers would do the "right thing" then it would put 90% of the lawyers and pa's out of business. If I have one more adjuster ask me what toxic mold is, I think I will scream. Yes, we have adjusters here who do not have a clue on what mold is or even how to write a simple estimate correctly.
Tom Strickland
Registered User
Username: Toms

Post Number: 28
Registered: 12-2001
Posted on Sunday, March 03, 2002 - 2:41 pm:   

Kelley, Lets get some more information!!i.e., type of claim,facts surrounding the outcome, etc. This sounds 'very' intersting!! Claims handling procedures as you have described is what makes "us" the goats!!!
If you do not wish to post, email me as I too, have went through an experience and may have some ideas that would assist you.
As with other professions, when an adjuster has a "claim", the adjuster knowing what you do, may just be trying to show "how" much he does, does not know, or the "real" power he has over a claim. What, if any, of these circumstances apply??
Let me know, "Remember, there is more than one way to skin a cat" (or get the situation resolved)

(Message edited by toms on March 03, 2002)
Kelley Roberson
Registered User
Username: Kelley

Post Number: 16
Registered: 12-2000
Posted on Sunday, March 03, 2002 - 2:16 pm:   

Like so many adjusters I have had pet names & made snide remarks about PA's, now I am rethinking my feeling about these people.

My first thought is that if all claims were handeled correctly from the carrier there more than likely be no need for PA's.

I have adjusted claims where I felt there was coverage, recomended payment only to have the carrier come back with a different interputation of said coverage. I have watched as compaines took things out of context & always usually to swing things in their favor. I have had to re-write my recomendations & leave company mgrs. unhappy because I would state as to so & so's recomendations.... this always makes them happy.

One of the things that have most recently made me rethink my opinion & need for PA's has to do with my carriers treatment of my own personal loss(es).

If I ever treated an insured the way my adjuster had treated me I would have been fired & sent home. Company had refused me the right to a new adjuster, they have stated the adjuster is qualified & I am being unreasonable. I have proof that the adjuster did not do the inspections stated in the report. I know I am being treated wrongly & that the info the carrier is telling me is so incorrect as to my rights. When one of the carriers managers asked why I thought I knew so much I told him why. This did not make the mgr. happy, he stated I should of told them up front I was an adjuster. My comment was why ?, would I have been treated different ? I did not tell them on purpose, I wanted to know how the general public is treated, now I know.

I am now filing a comlaint with the Dept of Insur. here in Texas about the carrier. I am also hiring somone to handle my loss. I realize an adjuster handeling their own claim is not always a good ideal.

If PA's are gaining strength it could be because carriers are not treating people fairly. Carriers may not make their staff adjusters tow the line as cat managers do. In the period of 34 yrs of owning homes & autos I have files 5 property calims, only one was handeled profesionally.I have filed about 8 auto claims, I hate auto carriers is all I can say.

Should we not place blame where blame lies ! Carriers & staff adjusters need to shape up & learn about intergerty. Company Cat mgrs. ( not the claims company mgrs) need to learn it is not their "opinion" that should make a claim payable. If you thing the companies mgr opinion does not dictate the claim just rething how policy interputations changes each time the manager changes during a cat assignment.

Yes,there are going to be PA's out there who don't give a damn about what is right but at the same time I know of some cat adjusters that have no business in working any claim due to the don't bother to look at the policies they are working. There is good & bad in all professions.

Does not most of the time when a PA gets called in is because people feel they are denied coverage they feel they have ? They are being treated unjustly, unfairly by the carrier or the adjuster or maybe the adjuster is just being a prick. Yes, before everyone starts screaming, there are time when the isnured is a prick !

I am thankful I have yet to deal with a PA that refused to close. All so far have been reasonable & have been there due to the carrier denying coverage not because of how my part of the work was done. WE just get the blunt end of it so often.
Gale Hawkins
Username: Gale

Post Number: 169
Registered: 12-2000
Posted on Monday, February 11, 2002 - 12:36 am:   

At the WIND conference last week it was stated that the PA's are interested in getting CE made a requirement for staying licensed in FL.
Clayton Carr (Clayton)
Posted on Sunday, November 18, 2001 - 1:30 am:   

Mike's comments Friday night brought out a good range of comments from others. I can relate to Alan's sensible and sensitive thoughts.

I have done a lot of property Loss Control work as a subcontractor, for companies hired by carriers to inspect and evaluate risks and under my own letterhead; aside from some day to day claims activity.

This has, fortunately for me during the past two quiet years, kept me occupied and kept me in sufficient coin; so as not to have to look outside the only industry I have worked in these last three plus decades.

Often, this has led to other opportunities - risk management work, which in effect is really what 'insurance consulting' - at least for what I have done.

Most inspected risks are not hazard free, which can lead to one or many recommendations, be they for liability or property. If you treat people correctly (i.e the way you yourself would want to be treated) and are open and explanatory to them; they will most times ask your help.

Numerous enough times an insured of some carrier will moan on about a loss they had that was denied, or another that was not covered. I suggest to these people that if they want, they can set an appointment and I'll come back and discuss that issue with them.

Sometimes it is a simple 1/2 hour chat after listening to the story and reviewing their 'paper' and their policy; and then in detail explain to them why that loss was correctly denied and you go on your way richer only in your mind having helped someone understand something, but not having charged for it.

Other times, the 'paper', policy and story will lead me to believe that their not covered loss is actually covered. At that time I will enter into a contractual arrangement with that entity, if they wish, and pursue the matter for them on an hourly basis.

Other times that insured of some carrier, may have coverage totally inadequate for their operations and risks inherent to their operation. I'll do the same with them as the former paragraph, and do a risk analysis with them for a day or whatever it takes; then have them call in their incumbent broker or at times another broker of their choice and lay out some different coverage programs that best suit that entity.

Throughout all or any of this, I am up front with all along the line - the vendor that I'm subcontracting for doing the Loss Control work, and the carriers. In fact carriers, through their brokers have often enough recommended me to the entity to utilize for planning and implementation of the Loss Control program.

And for those who may perceive me working for some carriers insured, to try and get his claim covered or properly indemnified; think that that spells PA - I disagree. Claims and Loss Control are two of the basic elements of Risk Management.

Anyway, without going around in a bigger circle, there are a wide range of insurance related assignments we can do; when the weather doesn't take us elsewhere to work of our first choice.

The last point I would have on this, is that in my opinion, double dipping or pimping only occurs; if a person doing these things actually sold insurance to an entity such as I may have described above, or tried to withhold or hide the fact of any of this involvement - anywhere up or down the line, or through unprofessional acts tried to paint a picture that did not exist - anywhere up or down the line.
alan jackson (Ajackson)
Posted on Saturday, November 17, 2001 - 8:38 pm:   

In my state we do not have P.A.'S. It's called practicing law without a lic. However, I have been consulting with both plaintiff and defense lawyers concerning mold. I'm not proud but, I have a five year old. The now or never baby. I'm the worldest oldest dad of a five year old. Well close anyway, I'm 39.

Mold has finaly hit my state. If all my contracts come to pass, I should be fine for say the next five years or so. We all have to do what we have to do. We need to take a serious look at becoming P.A.'S or "consultants" So far it has kept the boy fed and a roof over my head.

The adjusters I have dealt with are very concerened when they find out a " adjuster consultant" is working the other side. The depositions have been quite intersting.

We all have families to feed and a future and or retirement to look forward to. Either the carriers can treat us right or face us on the otherside. Yes, I have had more "fun" playing consultant than I ever had adjusting.

Just something to think about. What would all the big boy's do If everyone turned consultant in their down time. Sooner or later the black list would be so long that even Burger King cooks might become cat adjusters.

If all my contracts come in I'll need some help. Please forward your CV. Excuse me resume to my attention. I think January should be an intersting month. TV mold ads and all.

P.S. I think Dave has a great idea.
Posted on Saturday, November 17, 2001 - 3:59 pm:   

In South Florida, I do not really think there is this "trend" of adjusters moving to public adjusting. There may be more public adjusters increasing, and they may be coming from the adjuster side. But overall, adjusters are increasing in South Florida because of the increase in demographics, business, and politics. It has been almost 10 years since Hurricane Andrew had arrived, and the economy seems to have improved because of it. I am beginning to be proud of being from the home of the "hanging chad" in one respect. In other respects, I really got upset when Broward County held the balance of the presidential election. I really got surprised when Mohammed Atta used one of the Broward County Library System computers, where I teach as well, for writing e-mail to his buds in Germany. All roads seem to lead to South Florida. So, the trend is not so much the result of the cross-transition of adjusters as it is the result of the preoccupation of the litigious society here in South Florida. Communication and good faith adjusting practice, however, is key to successful claims closures and settlements.
D Wong Whey (Dwongwhey)
Posted on Saturday, November 17, 2001 - 11:56 am:   

Mike it sounds like you don't possess the knowledge or skills necessary to make a living doing just one thing. The rest of us here do. Perhaps you need to concentrate your efforts on one job and give up the other three! A 'little' knowledge is a dangerous thing.

Or as Daddy used to say, a jack of all trades and a master of none. Sounds like the shoe might fit.
Ghostbuster (Ghostbuster)
Posted on Saturday, November 17, 2001 - 10:42 am:   

Mikey, please favor us with details on how your grass is greener.
Posted on Friday, November 16, 2001 - 9:53 pm:   

To My Brethren:
I am a Public Adjuster, Independent Adjuster and Insurance Consultant. I am also a licensed Insurance Broker. I am licensed in PA. and New Jersey.
Take my word for it, this side is not bad at all. There are good and bad on both sides.
I just will not put all my eggs in one basket and TRUST the Companies. After working for them over 15 years, I am no longer naieve.
Look forward to your comments.
Ron McGuire
Posted on Thursday, September 06, 2001 - 10:48 am:   

This is easier then you think.On this CADDO website, go to RESOURSES, Vendors/Services, scroll down a few notches to "My Property". Now you can be a member, get your own "PA" kit, free advise on the internet to inflate your claim, etc. Just what we need. Do-it-yourself PA"s
ron rhodes
Posted on Tuesday, September 04, 2001 - 10:04 pm:   

when the oil co wanted the mom & pop out, all tanks had to be replaced and only company chains own the stations.
if i have to look at a lawsuit on every claim how many 5000 ded can i stand.
after 12 years maybe its time i hung it up
Steven W. Ebner (Medulus)
Posted on Tuesday, September 04, 2001 - 6:32 pm:   


I think we've sunk pretty low here, and after I mentioned a modicum of dignity. And, Mark, I do not thank you for that particular image. Most of us have had too many meals on the road for that to be an attractive picture.
mark (Olderthendirt)
Posted on Tuesday, September 04, 2001 - 5:00 pm:   

Maybe something like the downhill skiers wear, but with a (for us guys that is) builtin girttle to hide our bellys. Would certianly show of our muscles better then dockers and golf shirts. Try to picture all the (male) cat adjusters you know in form fitting rubber suits. It boggles the mind!
Ghostbuster (Ghostbuster)
Posted on Tuesday, September 04, 2001 - 1:06 pm:   

(The temptation is too strong to resist.) Looks good in RUBBER??

Are we going down the path of full body prophylactics here? Maybe something in a designer, pastel color in keeping with that Chi-Chi Miami Beach motif? And, please clarify. Will this new look for adjusters be in a standing tall or afterglow sag? More than once an Insured has accused me of being a ______ (fill in the blank along these lines), but I never thought that safe adjusting would come to this.

(I know, this is way over the top. I apologize for being unable to resist my baser instincts. But, it's a dirty job and someone has to do it.)
SO Florida Boy
Posted on Tuesday, September 04, 2001 - 11:52 am:   

Well, here I sit and read about he PA situation in Florida. I have been actively doing adjusting since 1985 and have seen my share of situations. I will gladly say that the PA adjusting community in Florida is one that like all professions find good and bad. I can honestly say that I have dealt with more good than bad, so much so that yes, I might consider becoming a "black cat". We all need to make a living and the carriers are hell bent on feeding their agents without compensating their step children in the claims department. Too many times I have seen uneducated claims managers and adjusters hammer the insureds, their own clients, into a less than realistic claim settlement. My only concern is that all lot folks forget about the lenders. These lenders are are named on claim checks and make it difficult to be compensated in a timely manner. I do agree with being teamed with a law firm who can charge 30, 40 even 50% for their services. The lenders will pay the law firms more quickly than an individual PA. I just think I will take some lawer friends this week to see about doing some " STEALTH" adjusting. First thing I will advise them is Mold is Gold and I look good in Rubber.
Steven W. Ebner (Medulus)
Posted on Monday, September 03, 2001 - 11:56 pm:   


As usual you have brought your considerable wit to bear on coming up with a viable answer to the question. The bottom line is that we need to feed our families and seek our fortunes (tongue in cheek). If we can't do it by working for an insurance carrier for a reasonable wage in relation to our expenses and a modicum of dignity, we will do it working on behalf of the insured. Not where I want to go, but my children are not starving yet.
alan jackson (Ajackson)
Posted on Monday, September 03, 2001 - 10:22 pm:   

Let's see. What is 10% of a mold claim??? I must assume that PA's still get 10%. Sounds profitable.Hmmmmmmm, nope can't be a PA.Will not do it. Why settle for 10% when all I gotta do Is pass the bar exam and get 50%. Greed on a much higher scale.

All this Mold Stuff makes it easy to study
Kile Anderson (Kileanderson)
Posted on Monday, September 03, 2001 - 10:11 pm:   

Maybe it makes sense. We can in effect, double the work assignments. If we have an adjuster on every claim and a PA on every claim we can work twice as much. With things the way they have been the past couple of years, it may not be such a bad idea.
Ghostbuster (Ghostbuster)
Posted on Monday, September 03, 2001 - 9:29 pm:   

Not really surprised. I've long held the opinion both sides are grazing the same grass with only a scraggley wire fence separating us. I would venture to further opin that all of us have pondered the question of hopping that fence.

Perhaps the biggest obstacle is that inherent character defect we have of being control freaks. For someone other than the Insured to be a party to the loss offends our singular need to be in charge of the proceedings. (There is just one star on this stage, and it ain't a gonna be you!)

But, being the prima donnas we are, with the carriers and vendors alike, (actively or passively), not soothing our delicate egos, we start to look around and think the unthinkable. Or worse, actually do it. (A jumping we will go, a jumping will we will go, Hi-Ho the merrio, a jumping we will go!).

So whatta ya say out there in vendor land. Please, put us out on the road. Idle hands and idle minds are the Devils workshop, doncha know. If we'uns don't have 200 of other peoples problems, (i.e. files), to solve, we ain't happy.
Florida Adjuster
Posted on Monday, September 03, 2001 - 8:36 pm:   

I have noticed in the last year a trend developing in South Florida. I am referring to a large number of adjusters becoming public adjusters. I am not referring to the rejects of our profession but good adjusters. Seasoned adjusters, quality adjusters with many years experience from large independants. I have asked them why they went to the “Dark Side” and the one common thread I hear is dissatisfaction in the way they were treated by their employers and clients. What do you think?

Topics | Home | Current Forum | The Classifieds | Adjuster Roster | Channels | Resources | Contact Us