| Author |
Message |
Jim Flynt
Registered User
Username: Jimflynt
Post Number: 268
Registered: 6-2001
| | Posted on Sunday, April 28, 2002 - 9:20 am: | |
Jim Lakes is correct.
Never go out on an assignment before and without talking to an adjuster or two or more who have worked for the particular vendor.
Before your post about Boyle, I had heard differing stories from several adjusters about Boyle. Some were good reviews and some were not so good. I generally subscribe to the 'Where there is smoke there is fire School' so personally I would have been reluctant to work with Boyle and in fact haven't (although he has called me in the past trying to send me on assignment)
Jim is right that if you will look around the CADO pages and contact a few of the oldtimers you will generally get the information you are looking for. When I am asked about the reliability or integrity of a particular vendor, I will comment to the inquiring adjuster that I would not work with this vendor, although I may not reveal all the stories I may have heard. (I don't need to defend a libel or slander action).
Recently I became aware of a specific vendor from the Birmingham, Alabama area who has not paid 15 to 20 cat adjusters for their work performed 4 to 6 months ago. I am not going to post the name of that vendor here at this time, but if anyone gets called to go out on an assignment, it would best serve them if they would ask around before jumping in without knowing the facts about this Birmingham vendor.
Anyone who accepts an assignment from the GAB Chicago office is also forewarned that you should not take an assignment there without getting all the facts. (There are several adjusters (myself included) still waiting for holdbacks from two years ago).
This is a small fraternity, and sooner or later, the cat adjusters who have been around for a while, learn who to trust and who not to trust. Most are willing to share what they know if you will only ASK IN ADVANCE.
|
JimLakes
Registered User
Username: Jimlakes
Post Number: 77
Registered: 12-2000
| | Posted on Friday, April 26, 2002 - 12:16 pm: | |
Clayton and All,
May I suggest an answer to your question?
How do you “Know before you go?”
Every independent adjuster on this site has the source for the answer to this question. It is a matter of picking up a phone and calling several of the adjusters on this site that have at one time or another worked for or knows someone that has, the vendor in question.
I guess I don’t understand why it is so impossible to do this. When I choose to use a new adjuster that I have not used before I simply call several of the noted names on this site and ask them, “Do you know this adjuster and is he or she a quality adjuster?”
The same can be done of vendors. If you do not know them or have never worked for them, call or E-mail a few of the noted people here and they will, in most cases, be able to steer you in the right directions. I have had many, many adjusters call me and ask about a certain vendor and I will relay to them the honest truth as to what I know about them. I don’t think, only once or twice, did I recommend they not go and those people on here know who that was.
Make use of a great site that Roy Cupps has put together for YOU, the independent adjuster and all of us.
Thanks Roy.
Jim Lakes, RPA
|
mark salmon
Registered User
Username: Olderthendirt
Post Number: 169
Registered: 12-2000
| | Posted on Friday, April 26, 2002 - 11:15 am: | |
Clayton, I suspect you can never really "know before you go" Everytime I leave for a storm I have butterflys. Will there be enough claims, will I be working for a supervisor (lead adjuster or any of those power positions) that will be fair and let me do my job. If it is for a new vendor then the butterflys are bigger. Go to enough storms you will get burnt. But that is the price we pay as 1099 contractors for our freedom. I was suprised in the recent poll how many people have only worked for one vendor. If you have only worked for one can you really understand what I mean by freedom? I have gone out with small vendors, knowing the risk (that is my version of know before you go) and been lucky. Indeed the only time I lost money was with a big vendor and a big carrier. Good faith is important, I have turned down work because I didn't feel that good faith had been established (a judgement call). Leave me my freedom, don't turn me back into an employee. |
Clayton Carr
Registered User
Username: Clayton
Post Number: 50
Registered: 11-2001
| | Posted on Friday, April 26, 2002 - 10:11 am: | |
I am trying to pick up here from a situation I related in the "Vendor .... Hall of Shame" thread yesterday. There, 19 posts later, with the Wong Whey leading with his irritable propensity to bounce a thread from its' intended course; there was finally a meaningful and substantive dialogue between John Durham and Mark Salmon and I thank them for that.
However, this current thread is yet again an attempt to have the question that was posed, "how do you really know before you go" - answered.
Frankly, Chuck Deaton's comments last night in another mold thread gave me the impetus to come forward again.
We, for our vendors and / or carriers are required to produce evidence of our certifications, licences (driver and regulatory), and insurance - just to name the basic three. Safe to say that without providing any / all of this, a person would watch the weeds grow at home for a long time.
Chuck mentioned last night about E&O coverage, and the likelihood of any of us asking for or receiving a certificate of such insurance from any vendor we chose to align with.
Much has been said in the last few years in these forums relating to "know before you go"; primarily related to compensation issues and file volumes.
It is clear to me now, there is more involved in that quest to know, that would / should allow the adjuster to make an informed decision on whether or not to go.
It reminds me of Lord Mansfield's words in 1766 (Carter vs Boehm), a landmark case where the principal of the utmost good faith was developed. Those words are even more important to all of us now and should not be limited to our dealings in insurance; they have survived the test of time for over 200 years.
The principal of the utmost good faith is not difficult to discern, it is designed to equalize the bargaining position between those who know and those who do not know. |
|
