|Posted on Sunday, September 17, 2000 - 8:25 pm: |
RJ It appears that pilots program is to assist those adjusters that can handle about 3 claims a day because they either don't know how to handle flood losses or they are not certain of the process of handling of the claims. I can assure you that the Pilot boys aren't loosing any money and infact they are coming out ahead. To think otherwise is pure dreaming.
|Posted on Sunday, September 17, 2000 - 12:16 am: |
If all the claims you are handling are small to no claims then $50 per hour might be fair compensation. However, once you start handling larger files that rate is very low.
If you will remember what happen after Andrew the per diem rate created by them lead to lower fee schedules. Maybe they are trying to destroy the flood fee schedule like they did the wind fee schedule. After all, why should they care they still make their money. This work is not available on a continuous basis, if it were then maybe it would work out.
I am curious about one thing and that is who is keeping track of & determining the hours worked? Sorry I have just one more question. Since the adjusters are being paid by the hour are they being paid overtime & benefits as employees should be? I must apologize again another thought just occurred to me. Since these adjusters are now employees how are they able to off set their road expenses for income tax purposes? Seems to me that if you did the math it would appear that $50.00 per hour may not be all that good, all things being considered.
Another thought just occurred to me, if you are reading this posting please post why you think $50.00 per hour is or is not fair compensation. The more input we have on this subject from everyone may help us all in coming to the right conclusion to this question.
|Posted on Saturday, September 16, 2000 - 12:07 pm: |
just wanted to let you guys know the latest; pilot adjuster i spoke with was happy with the arrangement. that's all.......by the way, the adjusters made more money that way than they would have on the schedule. pilot took the hit for the difference in the pay......i think it shows good intent on pilot's part for the adjusters.
|Posted on Friday, September 15, 2000 - 7:30 pm: |
I agree with you. While I'm working flood losses I find it not to be a problem earning more money that was posted. I find if your organized and know what questions to ask during your first meeting with the insured and explain to him how the policy is written and how the scopes are written and the turn around time of paperwork and also how and when the claim should be paid. If this is explained to the insured's these flood claims can make you some good earnings.
|Posted on Friday, September 15, 2000 - 6:32 pm: |
I really hope that Pilots pay for the flood
doesn't go anywhere. It sounds good until you
put it down in black and white. With 7 days a week in order to make the 72 hrs you have to work
a total of 10.285 hours a day to make $3600 week. I don't know about you, but I can do better in a week even doing basements, and with
less hrs. Doesn't sound like a good plan to me.
|Posted on Friday, September 15, 2000 - 12:54 pm: |
I just learned yesterday that Pilot was paying their adjusters $50/hr (their cut) to work flood in NJ, based on a 72 hr wk. This would prove to be great billing in the coastal and basement areas of the country, not to mention small liosses. Adjusters were happy with this payscale, versus the scale NFIP pays. Wonder if this rate of pay will catch on?
|Posted on Friday, September 08, 2000 - 5:57 pm: |
Another issue to consider is the often extended waiting before you can get to the flood losses. It seemed like a lot of the guys sat and waited up in Washington a few years back. The hotel and other costs go on while you wait.
Take this advice with a grain of salt, as I've only worked a few flood claims, and I'm expressing hearsay.
|Posted on Friday, September 08, 2000 - 2:16 pm: |
Just a note to make things clearer. I have done about 90% flood and 10% wind. I would like to do more wind so I could work a little more often. I am interested in finding some venders that will work someone with very little wind experience.
|Posted on Friday, September 08, 2000 - 12:31 pm: |
That is true that the companies want to use the one adjuster concept. But, not all the wind losses have flood losses assigned to them. You can have a hurricane with very little flood damage. Look at Andrew, for the size of the hurricane in Florida, there was lots more Wind damage with small amount of water losses. Granted Rivers Walk and certain areas right on the water had some flood and wind damage but overall considering the size, water was not a big player.
Someone that doesn't have the experience should be sticking to the wind and then start with very small flood losses and work their way into it. You'll come out ahead. If they pull them because you screwed up the flood, you don't get paid for it that hasn't helped your pocketbook. Or, if they keep giving the file back to you to correct because you didn't know the building was post-firm elevated or even worse, if you go write a total loss due to flood, and you are in a CBRA zone (for those not flood savvy) that means NO COVERAGE you have spent hours of time and work (oh yeah, you got a proof signed and no Non-waiver,of course) you didn't know that there was no coverage. You have made nothing,infact depending on who you are working for, you may now have a E & O problem.
|Posted on Friday, September 08, 2000 - 8:06 am: |
If there is a wind and flood event (hurricane)
NFIP wants to implement the single adjuster concept. One adjuster is assigned both the wind and flood claims. Most major carriers have implemented program. You have little or no choice (if you're flood cerified) in handling both the wind and flood portions of the claim. If you're not flood cerified you (theoretically) receive only claims in areas where there is no flood damage or flood coverage enforce.
I prefer working the single adjuster concept. A lot of money can be made by the adjuster. For the carrier, there is no dupliciation of payments to the insured.
|Posted on Thursday, September 07, 2000 - 11:27 pm: |
You might want to go to the flood quiz discussion.
perhaps you can get some insight. If you have very little wind experience and ,whereas from your post, you haven't done flood. My suggestion would be do wind until you have the experience to tackle the flood. As indicated in the post of the discussion under the Flood quiz perhaps 3 years would be a target to shoot for.
|Posted on Thursday, September 07, 2000 - 7:58 pm: |
Try SWEETS or SCS in Talaka, OK. They are very fine folks to work with and they will accept you if you are honest with them. Good Luck.
|Posted on Thursday, September 07, 2000 - 5:24 pm: |
Flood vs Wind: Which pays better? Flood requires more paperwork but you don't have to climb on any roofs. I have done very little wind. Do any venders do mostly flood? Which wind or flood venders work people with very little experience(16 months)?