| Author |
 Topic  |
|
Lon Sterling
68 Posts |
 Posted - 09/08/2002 : 00:59:25
|
Kile, your obvious lack of experience is surpassed only by that of your protector's suppositions about what sort of Alien intervention caused Farmers' letter to have typos. By the way, the Farmers worksheets had NO disposal fees other than the per square prices listed ($16 in 1986 and $20 in 2002).
And Alan, all the worksheets were FREELY offered by Farmers insureds who had trouble finding quality work at those "hugely increased" prices that were never offered by Farmers. The Farmers letter is a matter of public record now.
And the immigrant issue? If there was no attempt to suggest guilt by association, why assume that I would do what that roofer did? Scurry off now to the protection of Cornelius, the keeper of the word and defender of the faith. It must be heresy if a roofer said it. Here's reality - All carriers lie but only some roofers do - why that's even MORE heresy, boys.
Fuzzy math is the stock and trade of the adjusting community. Defending Farmers with typo suggestions without seeing that their letter was exactly reproduced in my post is just the sort of jumping to conclusions Jim Flynt did when he posted that first, "How long have you been a roofer, Mr. Sterling?" That question has NO bearing on the veracity of the letter reproduced. NONE!
An adjuster for barely four years, Kile, and you know from experience to take ALL roofers with a grain of salt? Are all black people inherently good or bad. How about adjusters? Just roofers! I see. And the comical "make roofers rich" statement by an arrogant and uninformed Jim Flynt was classic adjuster hate-mongering. You have no idea of my salary.
And the guy who said all the roofing materials come off and gravity does the rest must have barely enough intellignece to print his name and absolutely NO working knowledge of the roofing industry. But let a roofer USE gravity to allow shingles to slide off a roof and damage the gutters - why that's not hail damage and WE DON'T OWE IT but you WILL be forced to use gravity because we think that lessens what we have to pay for a tear off. The lack of knowledge about real construction is astounding on this board!
Yep, I am a roofer and proud to be one. I'm honest and I enjoy pointing out dishonest carriers and adjusters. I find, however, that most are WAY short on roofing knowledge. And the immigrants? - Kile, what did you offer them for diminished value since the difference in the front and the back of their home's roof would ALWAYS trigger a real estate inspector's comments and a reduced offer by the buyer in an amount to make the front look like the back? No wonder you guys get sued all the time. With experience like this and someone like Cornelius answering questions and reading from the "scrolls of the ancients", NEW ideas will NEVER surface. Heresy, I tell you, Heresy!
|
Lon |
 |
|
|
KileAnderson
USA
875 Posts |
Posted - 09/08/2002 : 01:39:23
|
Lon, first of all, yes, I have been an adjuster for only 4 years, but in that short period of time I have been lied to by roofers so many times that I know to examine every estimate with a microscope. I have done countless reinspections with roofers and not once has a single one of my measurements been off, but the roofer's measurements are often off by several feet. Some would say simple mistake, but if it were a simple mistake they would be short as often as they are long. But oddly enough every single wrong measurement by a roofer is long. Go figure.
Please tell me how a new front slope creates diminished value. The front slope was in need of replacement before the storm. If anything the insured was in a better position than before but we didn't charge for betterment because that isn't the way we operate.
I will concede that there are probably some dishonest adjusters out there, but I haven't met any of them. What is to be gained by an ajuster stiffing an insured? If anything, under many fee schedules it is actually in the adjuster's favor to pay every dime owed to an insured. I have worked for several managers and each and every one of them has told me that if there is ever any doubt it should be settled in favor of the insured.
I have met managers who can be tight and others who are a little more, shall we say liberal, but no matter how tight a settlement is, if it pays the insured every dime that they are entitled to under the terms of the contract it is a fair settlement.
I guess my point is, in my short 4 years in this business I have never met an adjuster or a manager whom I didn't believe was honest and professional. The same can't be said for the roofers I have met. While the majority of them have been honest and professional, there have been enough bad apples to really leave a bad taste in my mouth. All the bad apples do is waste my time and cost me money, because every frivolous reinspection I have to go out on, is another new claim that I didn't inspect that day. But this isn't about bashing roofers.
This is just another frivolous little attempt to nit pick at an industry that pays our bills. Perhaps you should take a lesson in economics Mr. Sterling. Apparantly the settlements got the job done because if every single one of the estimates had been written light then every single insured would have called and complained. But just like every other storm, I'm sure, 90% of the insureds got their roof fixed for the adjuster's estimate or less. I always think that it is amazing that most roofers in an area have no problem with the pricing but there is always that one or two that have a problem and it's always the same one or two. On one storm in Indiana a couple of years ago I had to do 7 reinspections out of 200 claims and every one of those seven was with the same roofer. Some of his measurements were off by as much as 5 feet. When I asked him to break down his estimates by labor and materials just like mine was, he refused. Needless to say, he did the work for my estimate, on the jobs he did get.
If there is a legitimate problem then fight the good fight my friend. I wish you the best of luck. |
|
|
|
Lon Sterling
68 Posts |
Posted - 09/08/2002 : 03:17:06
|
Kile:But oddly enough every single wrong measurement by a roofer is long. Go figure.
Did it ever occur to your Cornelius-fed brain that the re-inspections were necessitated by only the under-educated and dishonest ones and that the hundreds you admit you settled without having to re-inspect tell you that there are indeed many honest roofers?
Kile:Apparantly the settlements got the job done because if every single one of the estimates had been written light then every single insured would have called and complained.
Do you know what ASTM number is required on 20 year three tab shingles without having to go look it up? I seriously doubt you do. And felt? What ASTM number is required for single family dwellings needing felt? Are new vents required by the International Residential Code or not?
A whole thread was conncerned with this very issue the other day and not a one, not even Cornelius, had an answer for the poster. Did it ever occur to your Cornelius-fed brain that YOU weren't doing YOUR job as an adjuster by writing estimates without taking these factors into consideration? Did you ever think that an insured MIGHT not know if your settlement was fair if he found a roofer with as little experience as you have to "do the job"? Yet, you rail against a roofer who shows up. If you kept your mouth shut, you might learn something.
99.99 percent of the people posting on this board don't know what "the job's" REAL scope is and where the codes are applicable and what they even say.
The DV in your immigrant policyholder's future had nothing to do with the "better" roof on the front but EVERYTHING to do with the TRUE worth of the home as perceived by the buyer when the inspector noticed the difference in the two roofs and wrote it up. The home's value in the eyes of the buyer (the REAL and TRUE test of merchantability of that particular home) quite surely was affected by the difference in the two roofs. Your viewpoint may not have been that of the buyer or the real estate inspector but nevertheless, if the house sells for less and the two different roofs are the reason for that, YOU OWE DV because that is a real loss to your insured in many cases.
The fact that you can get "IT" done for a certain price DOES NOT mean that you owe that price. If another contractor's price is higher but reasonable, you may not dictate that HIS price must meet the other, lower price. You are guilty of price-fixing if you do.
If he agrees to your price, so be it. But YOU may not force the insured to take the lowest bidder in every case and that's a fact.
The most laughable posts on this board, besides those about alien-induced typos posted by Cornelius, are those where you and your buddies act like you know how to roof and what sort of labor is required.
The funniest one today was the "Gravity Poster". He couldn't roof a dog house and he has no concept of why multiple layers DO NOT come off at one time! His ignorance is astounding but common among field adjusters.
Each of you should be forced to actually perform the labor on an entire roofing job under the supervison of a REAL PROFESSIONAL ROOFER who knows the codes and not the trash that follows you to storms. And for the ones who chime in to say "I used to do roofing." I say HA! You couldn't pass the roofing licensing exam in ANY state that has one.
And for all you who have adjusted claims and settled Built Up Roof losses with a Sweep Back, Flood and Re-Gravel or a Spud and Flood, you are the WORST of the WORST. Adjusters who INVENT specifications or repeat them when they hear them from some untrained supervisor, claims manager or roofer are the bottom-feeders of the Insurance Industry! THERE IS NO SUCH REPAIR LISTED IN THE ENTIRE NRCA WATERPROOFING MANUAL!
From the responses and hatred evident on this board for REAL ROOFING professionals, it is quite apparEnt that none of you want to learn anything about the roofing industry but would instead rather make stupid remarks about how rich we are and how much we lie and how truthful are the "scrolls of the ancients" which are guarded and doled out as Cornelius sees fit.
Until next time or whenever TASS decides truth might indeed be heresy! |
Lon |
|
|
|
Ghostbuster
476 Posts |
Posted - 09/08/2002 : 07:50:32
|
Sooo, let me get this straight, you finally say you are a roofer yet you come across as a whine merchant, why is that? Are you moonlighting? I'm reminded of the adage of the man who complained about the rain but refused to use his umbrella.
I, for one, have no doubt as to the veracity of FIG's shuck and jive that offends you. So what else is new? Perhaps a better sin for you to pursue is the insurance industry practice of the approved shop programs. Now this is something you and your pals at the local trades association can really sink your collective teeth into, the practice of contractor discrimination.
Doesn't it offend your delicate sensebilties, (and financial bottomline), when your competition down the street gets in bed with the carriers leaving you high and dry? Does this seem to you an unfair trade practice? Why should an insurance company sell the services of your competition? Does that seem right to you? Do you think your trade association lobbyist should start visiting with the various legislators to pass a law banning this harmful practice?
Lonnie darlin', there's your REAL target. This trifle over 2/3 squares and a vent stack doesn't even show up on the radar compared to the big cahuna here on the Planet of the Apes. |
|
|
|
ALANJ
USA
159 Posts |
Posted - 09/08/2002 : 09:24:43
|
Ghost:
Great point! Now another question? Why do we have to be have to send the state a check ever year so that we can write estimates and go to all these schools? When the approved vendor/contractor can send anyone out to do the same thing and not? The contractor does not answer to the State Insurance Commish and we do.
|
|
|
|
Ghostbuster
476 Posts |
Posted - 09/08/2002 : 10:24:59
|
Alan, that's easy, it's because we're special. Not to mention, the Great State of _________ needs the money. Besides by paying our annual professional adjusters license fee, we get to do all the U-turns in the middle of the street we want as part and parcel of our professional duties. The contractors aren't supposed to do that. They are supposed to turn their trucks around in peoples driveways and break the concrete driveways and mailboxes. They then knock on the peoples door and give them a free estimate for the damage that some miscreant just caused and drove away without stopping.
Isn't that the way things are in your town? |
|
|
|
Russ
USA
75 Posts |
Posted - 09/08/2002 : 11:37:04
|
| Lon, If a Company "lies" (Especially in wrting) Thats called Fraud. There is recourse through the Courts to right wrongs commited by fraudulant means. You are forgetting the Main entity in our business, The Insureds. If I had roof damage to my home and my Adjuster wrote an estimate with tear off at $20 per square and I had gotten 10 proposals from Roofing Contractors that stated It would cost $30. a square, I would call the Carrier and complain and probably have my estimate changed. If you go back in the forum archives a couple years, you will find a similar thread by a Roofer complaining about tear off price. We Adjusters are information gatherers for the Carriers. We work with VERY SPECIFIC PRICE GUIDES according to the geographic location of the storm and they are provided to us by the Carrier and are NOT to be changed unless there are circumstances that warrant a change. We must also explain these circumstances. Let me get to the bottom line. If there are roofers tearing off shingles for $20.00 a square, You need to contact them and band together to have the price changed. You are certainly taking your case to the wrong Folks. Have a great day and please WORK SAFE. |
|
|
|
KileAnderson
USA
875 Posts |
Posted - 09/08/2002 : 11:47:02
|
Lon,
First of all, roofing is not rocket science, so don't try to make it seem that way.
Second. The entire concept of diminished value is BS created by contractors and lawyers to line their own pockets. If the real estate inspector you mentioned had inspected the roof before the storm he would have said that roof is 25 years old and should be replaced. The homeowner would have been on the hook to replace the entire roof to sell the building. After the storm and the insurance settlement, the real estate inspector would say the back slope of that roof is 25 years old and the front is new so now Mr. Homeowner is on the hook for half a roof. Explain to me how that is diminished value? You can't because it isn't. According to the contract the insurance company owes to return the insured to his prior loss condition. Since you cannot put on 25 year old shingles he gets brand new shingles, he is in a better condition than he was in before.
As for all the vents and other accessories found on a roof, I always pay to replace whatever is there. I don't know anyone who doesn't. I also include dumpster charges, dump fees where applicable and 2 story and steep charges. I always write a thorough estimate.
If you read my post I believe it says that most roofing contractors are honest and profesional. As a matter of fact I have met several that have been a joy to work with and have made my job much easier. So don't think I'm trying to paint all roofers with the same brush. I was just trying to explain to you why Jim asked the original question. It was to point out that you are not an objective third party and you have quite alot to gain from your argument.
Perhaps another thing you should keep in mind is we are not the ones who set the prices. Insurance companies have people called pricing specialists who do nothing but talk to contractors and suppliers in their area to find out what the going rate is for labor and materials to set the average price for the region. We take that information that they give us, apply it to the scope that we have witnessed, measured and photographed and out comes the estimate. So we aren't the people to make this case to. It is out of our hands. It's like complaining to the cashier at the grocery store about the price of apples. The cashier doesn't set the price.
Now, lets get down to the real problem. What do you think the price should be? Is $20 a square not enough? What is your actual incurred cost? I really want to know. Would $30 be enough and does that price have a dumpster and dump fee component built in or do you still need disposal fees on top of that? How much difference are we talking about? |
|
|
|
Newt
USA
657 Posts |
Posted - 09/08/2002 : 13:01:21
|
Lon, Russ has some good points, and as all these adjusters will tell you , it is an insurers
market at the present. And believe me from my prospetive they are having a ball with it. After
being a commercial builder for a while I did no work for governments, or insurance claims.
I did build an insurance agency building. Putting your eggs in one basket has its perils. What I bid was what I charged. If the client was not willing to meet my price, I declined the counter offer. I did not cut corners. If the adjuster has no control over what the insurer offers, they are messengers too. What controls the price are other roofers low balling bids to keep their hands in work. I have no idea what the roofing market is, but to the adjusters it is at the melt down stage. Some of the best are idle and my friend it is serious. If they lash out not all of it is frustration, some of it is fun, roast that bird before he gets away.
I am trying to become an adjuster and these folks are trying to beat some sense in my head and
I get a dressing down all the time. One thing I have noticed, Ghost Buster is always serious as a heart attack so don't get him riled for our sake. |
|
|
|
Lon Sterling
68 Posts |
Posted - 09/08/2002 : 16:16:49
|
Well boys, I see the beginnings of DIALOGUE and the absence of censorship. There may be hope yet.
Ghost,
First, my sensIbilities are no more offended than yours. As a lurker, I have seen you complain about the contractor/adjuster issue too. I've seen your indictments of FIG. My post was NOT meant to address ALL the issues that I know are unfair. In the board's collective zeal to "shut up and abuse" a (should I even print the word?) ROOFER, its members grasped at every straw they could think of to impeach the character of ALL roofers.
No, the HARD PART for me comes when a new, well-meaning field adjuster calls me to look at a roof when they don't have a clue as to what's wrong with it and they've called me because of my track record of years worth of HONEST inspections and articulate reports. They call me because they know, from experience, the accuracy and impartiality of those I've supplied them in the past and that I will also call the next one like it is. Those field adjusters, whether it be from lack of training or from just trusting all their superiors, probably DO NOT know what upper level management is doing to cheat service providers and policyholders. That's why I treat those adjusters fairly and honestly and in so doing the companies are also treated fairly.
The last one I did for Farmers was only three weeks ago and the claim was for hundreds of corners of shingles turned up after a windstorm and several leaks in the roof. I took 10 high resolution clear digital pictures to document what really happened. Yes, there had been high winds, but no, there was no wind damage. The leaks were caused from UV degradation of improperly applied plasti-caps. A total of three on the entire roof were incorrectly located on a course of felt which had been laid as a dry-in when the crew took a break. (Its bottom edge covered the top of the last shingle course applied before they left for whatever break they took.) The plasti-caps had since disintegrated, leaving water entry points around the elevated nails but only where they lined up with the three tab cut-outs which allowed sun exposure.
The curling corners were due to an older sealant strip which did not comply, at that time, to the new U.L. 997 Standard calling for modified asphalt self-sealing adhesive which expands and contracts and helps to eliminate horizontal stess fractures as the shingles shrink with age. Incidentally, the U.L. 997 standard is part of the new IRC.
The bad sealant was only located on the corner of each of the three tab shingles so age-induced shrinkage had caused the slight curling of those corner which coincided with the direction of 90+ mph straight line winds. The homeowner incorrectly thought the shingles had blown up. They had not. The faulty sealant strip occurred only at the last three or four inches of one side of the three foot wide shingle. From the ground, the shingles all appeared to have been blown up at one corner. The adjuster thought they might have, also, but called me at the recommendation of the claims manager. It resulted in a no claim and infoirmation supplied by me to the homeowner on how to turn in a warranty claim to the manufacturer.
So, you see, Ghost, my beef is my terrible affliction of being honest while seeing upper level Farmers management do what they did in the post I made. This WILL go to court but it won't be on my dollar! It will be the State of Texas versus Farmers, verse 8 or 100 or whatever. If they didn't try these tricky things at the accounting and upper management levels, they would not have to deal with them.
And by the way, Ghost, I complain about what I want when I want, just so you'll know. I think that seems to be your style also. I will say that yours is done with a homorously effective style, I might add. Truth is truth. I have watched as carriers have chopped YOUR portion of the pie, too. I've watched as you and your brethren complain, also. Some have recounted stories about spending 10 hours settling a complex loss, only to have some price-dictating carrier say that the claim could have been settled in 4 hours and that is all they are going to pay. The SAME price-fixing is happening to independent adjusters as roofers yet the adjusters actually TAKE JOY in attempting to do the same thing to contractors on behalf of the companies who hire them. All I can say further, Ghost, is that "what goes around is NOW coming around"! Instead of beating each other up to make the carrier more money, we should both be looking at ways to raise the professionalism of what we do and how we do it and not standing still for the company explanation of the scope of "The Job" whether that job be settling a claim or roofing a building.
By the way, MY radar screen sees everything you've mentioned and MORE. I am simply eating this elephant one bite at a time and the letter I posted is a very impeachable example of their dishonesty during an inquiry about tear offs.
And Alanj,
While you pay a license fee and buy an E&O policy, try to put yourself in the place of a contractor whose general liability policy NOW eliminates any payment for water damage and his entire business is waterproofing.
And Russ, sorry to have to break the news to you but all of the computer models I've done show that contractors who meet the eligibility requirements to bid on State jobs and who are awarded contracts as the LOWEST bidders are generally in the $5 to $8 per foot range for a three ply glass and cap sheet including flashing! Look through ANY of your "survey-acquired" comprehensive price sheets and tell me you see a price over $400 per square for Built Up Roofing. An untrained adjuster ALWAYS cuts the scope of the job, not necessarily dishonestly but from lack of knowledge and then there is always some trailer trash who calls himself a roofer that follows storms who will take the job for that amount and cut even more of the scope out to make himself enough money, as Cornelius implies, to buy Mama that new Porsche. Hogwash! Not one of you guys has ever completely adjusted a loss and paid for a scope of work which meets the NRCA Waterproofing Manual's specs for like kind and quality. You have, however, found plenty of "roofers" who will "do the deed" and it is a DEED rather than a properly installed job.
The point of my post was to say that Farmers misrepresented the facts during a TDI inquiry. I have 9 other properly obtained answers to the same inquiry that also misrepresent facts, just with different explanations. All are major carriers and ALL are guilty of misrepresentation. We'll look at a new letter on another day. Hopefully, those letters won't show signs of alien tampering which HAS to be the only explanation of the "TYPOS" in the FIG letter.
Come on guys. You're being treated the same way. How does it feel? I actually have sympathy for Cornelius. He just can't see why it is happening to him (the "feed and clothe the children" part). Hiring untrained roofers who will cheat the scope to make a profit and look good to the carrier's bottom line is the same force that is at work in your adjusting community. As long a carriers are allowed to benefit from inexperienced adjusters, things will NEVER change.
As far as a good adjuster saving a company money, it should NEVER be by dictating prices and shopping for trailer trash roofers in the name of a lower bid. It should, however, have EVERYTHING to do with the money being saved over the long haul with fewer interior claims, bad faith lawsuits and regulatory fines.
20 Years ago, I saw much of this coming. We used to laugh at Mortgage lender inspections that were supposedly made to protect the investors' interests in the homes they owned the paper on. Those inspections were jokingly referred to as WD40's (Windows Down drive by and look at 40 mph). This same mentality is costing good adjusters jobs and giving policyholders nothing close to "like kind and quality".
And Kile, your callbacks or re-inspections? The same thing happens to ME! Every mistake on the short side I make, I get the job because the price on the estimate is a low bid and with our company's reputation, people jump on those like crazy! I get a fair percentage of the ones I bid accurately even if it does take arguing with the claims department but I NEVER get the ones where I make math mistakes on the high side - they go into the trash can.
And, Cornelius, the expression is "I couldn't care less", not "I could care less" because if you COULD care less it would mean you DO care MORE. Does that make sense?
Thanks to all for at least being more civil and putting your views into a more non-combative form.
|
Lon |
Edited by - Lon Sterling on 09/08/2002 23:28:21 |
|
|
|
Lon Sterling
68 Posts |
Posted - 09/08/2002 : 17:58:52
|
For Kile,
I've put your copied post in bold so there would be no question as to what you said.
Lon,
First of all, roofing is not rocket science, so don't try to make it seem that way.
Actually, Kile, I doubt you know what EVT (Equiviscous Temperature) is and how it relates to roof performance. Nor would you know the particulars of the roofing portion of the International Residential Code. You wouldn't have known why that 6.5 year old roof in Texas didn't meet U.L. 997 either. No, I would imagine that the sum total of your roofing knowledge is what you learned from your two-week "hit the high spots" Adjuster's licensing course taught by another adjuster, a few CE courses and the amount of experience you've gained in four years of working around other adjusters and supervisors and dealing with roofers whom you admit may not know much themselves since their measuring is ALWAYS wrong. Rocket science? No but neither is being a roof thumper, as Cornelius calls them.
Second. The entire concept of diminished value is BS created by contractors and lawyers to line their own pockets. If the real estate inspector you mentioned had inspected the roof before the storm he would have said that roof is 25 years old and should be replaced. The homeowner would have been on the hook to replace the entire roof to sell the building. After the storm and the insurance settlement, the real estate inspector would say the back slope of that roof is 25 years old and the front is new so now Mr. Homeowner is on the hook for half a roof. Explain to me how that is diminished value? You can't because it isn't. According to the contract the insurance company owes to return the insured to his prior loss condition. Since you cannot put on 25 year old shingles he gets brand new shingles, he is in a better condition than he was in before.
Nice rant. DV is REAL and no one "invented" it. It was a NATURAL progression to deal with UNFAIR settlements when nothing else would make insurers do the right thing. Show me the language in the policy that says exactly "we don't owe to match" - chapter and verse please.
When I inspect a roof and there is hardened asphalt poured down a poorly installed valley, I am going to assume that there has been a problem and that the same problem might occur later in another valley. Of course, that will be my perception. To most, even you, perception is reality. Why else tell the immigrant story? If a real estate inspector writes up a roof because of a mismatch in the shingles or for it's being patched or repaired, then his perception is that there may be other problems this repair may not have fixed or that it might me a symptom of some underlying damage that could affect other portions of the roof. The "write-up" would probably never occurred had there been even an older MATCHING roof.
When the buyer sees that report and perceives that the inspector may have uncovered a problem which may manifest itself later, he is VERY likely to want a new roof to be sure that he is not forced to re-roof after the purchase. That lower offer to the buyer is REAL and it is a direct result of his being alerted to a repair that may be suspect.
I recently sold a car which had a door replced because of a hit and run impact while I was at the grocery store. Only the door was replaced and painted. The person who bought the car wanted some consideration because he could tell the door had be replaced (no OEM sticker was replaced by the repairing facility) His offer was for $600 less because the car had been "wrecked" in his mind. With 0% financing ruining the used car resale market, he was the only caller in two weeks worth of ads. I took the offer at $600 less than the car was really worth according to Edmonds. That, friend, is DV.
As for all the vents and other accessories found on a roof, I always pay to replace whatever is there. I don't know anyone who doesn't. Ask State Farm. There answer is "Unless they're damaged by hail, we don't owe for them." I also include dumpster charges, dump fees where applicable and 2 story and steep charges. I always write a thorough estimate. Do you also pay to reflash chimneys and skylights where no hail damage is evident except on shingles?
If you read my post I believe it says that most roofing contractors are honest and profesional. I think your SECOND post had language to that effect but CERTAINLY not the first! As a matter of fact I have met several that have been a joy to work with and have made my job much easier. So don't think I'm trying to paint all roofers with the same brush. Good, that's progress. Now, if you can begin to learn from those who may not agree with you, you'll be on the right track. I was just trying to explain to you why Jim asked the original question. It was to point out that you are not an objective third party and you have quite alot to gain from your argument. Jim, asked the question in a condescending, know-it-all manner and I might add that he did so while answering with all sorts of excuses for Farmers. Jim's response was totally transparent and mean-spirited on its face and shows exactly why I have the LEAST respect for him of all posters, as the board bully. He KNEW my occupation had no correlation to Farmers' ANSWER whatsoever! Jim should look into the Farmers answer and quit worrying about the prices of cars he thinks roofers drive.
Perhaps another thing you should keep in mind is we are not the ones who set the prices. While you're not the ones who set the prices, you trust the price lists you are given and while you feel it is okay to hammer a roofer about his prices, you are silent when you report to your bosses (even though they are using the tactics they taught you to use on roofers right back on your billings.) Insurance companies have people called pricing specialists who do nothing but talk to contractors and suppliers in their area to find out what the going rate is for labor and materials to set the average price for the region. These people are hired and/or contracted with by insurers and they almost NEVER win in court when the cases go that far because their surveys are weighted with the hope that the insurers will smile favorably on their money-saving surveys whether they are truly accurate or not. Take Texas. You don't HAVE to have Workmans Comp. Do ANY of the residential pricing surveys include Workmans Comp? NOT ON YOUR LIFE! At some .56 on the dollar for labor, Workmans Comp takes the roofing job from profitable to a loss IMMEDIATELY. We take that information that they give us, apply it to the scope that we have witnessed, measured and photographed and out comes the estimate. So we aren't the people to make this case to. It is out of our hands. It's like complaining to the cashier at the grocery store about the price of apples. The cashier doesn't set the price.
That's the answer I was expecting. While I, as a contractor, go with an adjuster to help document a no-claim and get nothing for my honesty except a thank-you and an "I can't recommend any contractors", it is okay for you guys to go along with and even defend letters like the one posted by Farmers. You also find it okay to adjust claims using skewed pricing surveys that do not adequately reflect true costs and you complain about the honesty of ROOFERS?
Now, lets get down to the real problem. What do you think the price should be? Is $20 a square not enough? What is your actual incurred cost? I really want to know. Would $30 be enough and does that price have a dumpster and dump fee component built in or do you still need disposal fees on top of that? How much difference are we talking about?
Were talking about dishonesty in the Insurance Industry which is used to unfairly cheat on prices, scope, burden and a myriad of other things. If you've EVER paid for a spud and flood you're guilty of this same dishonesty. In other words, if there is no spec that suits your own knowledge-challenged idea of what is owed, then invent one and recruit a "trailer-trash" laborer who calls himself a roofer who'll do the deed.. er uh, I mean THE JOB for that.
What goes around IS coming around! |
Lon |
|
|
|
Ghostbuster
476 Posts |
Posted - 09/09/2002 : 08:16:23
|
Lon, we are not offended that you are a roofer. Many of us have done roofing thru the years. The callus' on my paws did not come from turning the key to the executive lounge. This whole frenzy fired up not because of your chosen trade but rather from a womans worst enemy, the fragile male ego. Your feathers got ruffled, then Jim Flynts feathers got ruffled, then before you know it, the whole barn was on fire!
On the surface, I really don't have an issue with your thrust at FIG. But, this is just one elephant in the herd. I see not just a herd but rather the entire species that has developed some habits adversely affecting the adjusting, agency, loss control, and even you and your fellow trades. As these habits originated from the upper levels of company management, (along the lines of the Enron boys club), I do not know of any way to clean house without, (again), burning down the barn, like Enron.
Once a mind is made up, it is not easily or quickly changed without something drastic happening. (Again, the fragile male ego.) All of us are highly frustrated that a mere 5 or 10 or 30 years ago everything seemed to going pretty well. But, change is enivitible and here we are.
Lon Quixote, if it's your turn to fight the glorious fight with the windmills we'll hold your coat and buy you a cold beer afterwards. And we won't even pick your pockets for the loose change. |
|
|
|
Admin
547 Posts |
|
|
Topic |
|
|
|
Must Farmers INSIST on misleading statements?
Forum Locked
Topic Locked
