| Author |
 Topic  |
|
CatDaddy
USA
310 Posts |
 Posted - 10/21/2003 : 12:30:42
|
Tear off is based on labor. Sometimes dumpster fees are included in price; sometimes you have to add them, based on how roofing is priced in that area. The ridges and the starters come off with rest and any extra effort involved would be hard to measure. I am sure the Almighty Lon could come up with something while he's sitting on his think tank. Another gumwrapper fact for sure. We're are talking real world here.
There are instances where ridge shingles are added to the amount of shingles being replace, but not very often when you are doing a whole roof. Mostly doing slopes. Never say never though.
These attempts to add fluff to estimates, finding a way to start a class action, get over on the big insurance companies will not benefit anyone in the long run. Some of you are insured by these companies and when you try to stick it to them on the front, it's gonna get you in the rear. People like Lon are whats ruining this industry for all of us. Why do you think carriers can't pay vendors more, and vendors can't pay adjusters more? Cause people like Lon keep coming up with ways to try to make a quick buck. Anyone out there work mold in Houston? Ya had this big commitment for long term money and then got it yanked out from under you. Why? Well, when a company is losing 300 million a quarter, ya gotta cut back somewhere. Ya still think its gonna be staffers? Wrong again! Bye, go home.
Have a nice day!
CD |
 |
|
|
CCarr
Canada
1200 Posts |
Posted - 10/21/2003 : 14:23:14
|
While this thread has had some interesting moments after the initial question was dealt with, carnival hucksters that come along into our industry do little but further gray the water.
The P&C insurance industry has been deteriorating for the past several years, and there is no single factor behind the decline. The two major contributors to the decline are rising claim costs and declining return on investments. Both of these issues compounded are putting upward pressure on premiums. Short term profits in the previous quarter are not a trend towards recovery, and the year will come to an end with another overall industry net loss.
While the manner in which PoppaCat tells it, may be humorous, the message he sends is very real.
While there is still evidence that the independent contractor can still benefit from a labor void situation during storm events, and other situations to some degree; we are still a discretionary commodity with no binding ties to the ultimate purchaser of our services - the carriers.
We must in some way, in some manner, both intangibly and tangibly, work towards strengthening our value and ties to the carriers. Vendors simply provide the administrative management of our technical services; they are the "flow - through".
Part of this necessary effort on our part to create and maintain a perceived value to the carriers, is our community standing against carnival hucksters who come along trying to find the next place to chip a new drain hole in the carrier's hull.
The carriers do not have a bottomless well of claims dollars flowing out to the whim of the roofing industry lobbyist du jour. Like all wells, when the volume available gets low, the outflow will slow, and rationing of the available dollar supply will be a reality. This happens in all business or industry when the bottom too often becomes visible.
Kile and PoppaCat are to be commended for their strong and consistent efforts at negating the scurrilous allegations of the latest huckster to come into our playground.
Remember, the carrier is our only real lifeline to survival as independent contractors supplying a service to their claims departments; it is not the vendors. |
|
|
|
Ghostbuster
476 Posts |
Posted - 10/21/2003 : 14:58:12
|
Whoa, Nellie!
Catdaddy, your first two paragraphs started to go someplace, then out of nowhere we went off on an interesting tangent. Then, we have Clayton doing a cheerleaders cheer. (Gotta tell ya Clayton, the image of your hairy legs in a cheerleaders outfit scares me.)
That Big Red and the rest of the carriers got a greenback enema in Texas from mold is Not the fault of the claims department. The one and only fault lies in the industry not recognizing the power of the 'consequential loss clause' in the Texas HO-B. It took that P.A. in Corpus to show the light and insert the tube up the industry orfice. And, shove it he did! For the carriers to take it out on the claims department who is out there properly performing their function is beyond the pale.
For you to crow the company line is a form of gallows humor because the staff adjusters are the next in line to swing off into eternity after the independents. My friend, we are all in the same leaky bass boat here. And, the effect on layed off staff people is worse because you folks have been sheltered in the shadow of job security when, in fact, there is none. We as independent businessmen have grown accustomed to this for a long, long time. So, as they let the trap door out from under you, welcome to our world where there is no group health plan, no profit sharing, no annual picnic, no Xmas party, no volumes of memos from Home Office, no performance reviews, and no pay raises for your extraordinary feats of heroism and service to the fine Insureds! |
|
|
|
CatDaddy
USA
310 Posts |
Posted - 10/21/2003 : 16:01:07
|
Leaky bass boat. LOL.
I was not trying to cast blame towards any of us GB. I get alittle patriotic and defensive when talking about the Mother Ship and the tone can be deceptive.
People like Lon, trying to tell us our business, looking for an angle to make his money 'cause he can't make it out here with the rest of us, REALLY makes my thorns stick straight out!
The adjusters are all in it together. Staff or IA. When the dam breaks, we are all gone. What's the difference if you get to leave before the traffic gets bad or you get to stay late and turn out all the lights for the last time. Its all pays the same.
I would like to add to the list of things IAs and staffers agree on, this. We can call it number 5. Lets dont give these peckerheads(as in WOODpecker) like Lon any more ammo than they dream up themselves. Can I get an amen? I am sure sitting in your living room, watching Springer, eating pot pies, and calling yourself a Consultant doesnt pay much unless there are people listening. Let'm starve. Pretty soon that tear off money will look good to even him. Its the circle of life!
CD |
Edited by - CatDaddy on 10/21/2003 17:59:25 |
|
|
|
CCarr
Canada
1200 Posts |
Posted - 10/21/2003 : 16:48:35
|
About a 6 hour drive NW of here is the start of our moose country, where the Forestry people won't let loggers knock down any "cavity trees", so as not to disturb the habitat and nesting areas for the Red Headed Peckerhead. Obviously, some damn logger cut a fir down that knocked over an unstable cavity tree probably in early September, that caused the willy nilly migration and blathering of one of those Peckerhead species, and its eventual perch on our yard pole.
All adjusters must find common and positive ground, whether we come from Mount Staff or IA Valley, and learn to protect our industry to the benefit of our mutual existence. |
|
|
|
CatDaddy
USA
310 Posts |
Posted - 10/21/2003 : 17:29:51
|
I guess 6 hours north of you is farther than Penitang!(can't spell the whole town name.)I had a claim on a TV reporter out of Barrie when I was in Toronto for Ice Storm '99. She said hello to me on the news the next morning. She was a fox!
CD |
|
|
|
jlombardo
USA
212 Posts |
Posted - 10/21/2003 : 17:51:53
|
| Clayton.....last post...nicely said......Thanks......Joe L. |
|
|
|
Tom Toll
USA
154 Posts |
Posted - 10/21/2003 : 19:13:15
|
Lon, here is an example of what we have to deal with everyday. This is a claim we handled, a really tough roof to measure, a rectangle, one ridge, no offsets, no valleys, no dormers, just a rectangle. Our measurements were correct and the roofers measurements were the same as ours, 19 squares, but he wants 2 squares more. This was after we had left the area. Here is his explanation of why two extra squares are needed as a supplement in his own handwriting and faxed to us:
" ridge cap was doubled -extra shingles was used to hold felt down at ridge cap being tore off and recovered to ridge cap the next day." two bundles left and part of bundle at location.
Can anyone out there please explain to me what the heck this professional roofer is talking about?? |
|
|
|
CatDaddy
USA
310 Posts |
Posted - 10/21/2003 : 19:16:43
|
| Getting his Xmas bonus early TT! |
Edited by - CatDaddy on 10/21/2003 19:17:13 |
|
|
|
Ghostbuster
476 Posts |
Posted - 10/21/2003 : 20:21:21
|
It's really quite simple if you first sit on a tack.
(The) ridge cap was doubled. (The) extra shingles was [were] used to hold (the) felt down at (the) ridge. (The) (ridge) cap being tore [torn] off and recovered [reshingled] to the ridge cap the next day. Two bundles (were) left (in the truck) and part of (a) bundle (left at the) location (was scattered all in the bushes next to the house).
Now, get up off the tack and you're done. |
Edited by - Ghostbuster on 10/21/2003 20:26:32 |
|
|
|
Lon Sterling
68 Posts |
Posted - 10/21/2003 : 20:24:18
|
Thanks for the refereeing, Ghost. These boys do like to pile on, don't they?
Clayton. I'm not the one figuring a way to knock any hole in the hull of the USS Insurance Industry!
It is YOU who figure you'll cheat the roofer a little on every claim. I didn't make you cheat. The carrier decided to do it.
I made the offer to PROVE you DO publish on your worksheets the wrong number of squares for removal on every residential roof you write up - EVERY ONE. Whoever said it is all labor is partly correct and we have an established size for a square of shingles. I'm saying it is YOUR industry that cheats that size.
It does sicken me, no end to see people expound on labor when they have no idea what labor costs in the first place. The Peckerwood slurs are what I've come to expect here from Cornelius' former followers. The only personn asking questions and trying to remain unbiased is Ghost.
BTW, if I've EVER paid less than minimum wage to ANY worker you can cross out my name and put yours on my Mensa card right now.
Clayton, I'm not going to bring down the Insurance Industry nor will you or your brethren save it. You place way too much importance on what effect my statements here may have as well as your own.
Tom, I would have to see the ridge to tell you if it were doubled (actually four plies) or single (actually two plies). If two shingles are place on top of each other and then nailed on the ridge at a normal 5" exposure, then you have a four ply ridge which some people refer to as "double" actually the whole roof is doubled along with the ridge. The four ply ridge was a fore-runner of the "sculptured look" common to Elk's Z-Ridge and Timberline's Timber Tex ridge. It was used to "spice up" the look of the first laminated shingles before comparable high-profile ridge products existed.
You may check to see if your pics of the roof indicated a single corner thickness showing at each piece of ridge. If so it was a two ply ridge. If two thickness are apparent at each exposed corner, then you have a four ply.
To amplify on Ghost ridge statement I'll say this. A single ridg (two ply) is standard on most three tabs and amazingly, 100 linear feet also cover 100 square feet so 100 linear feet of ridge is a full square. With a four ply or "doubled" ridge, the squares would be TWO for 100 linear feet unless you ask Kile and then since they are installed vertically, they are still only a square and the same would hold true of eight roofs if they were laid on top of each other - the no more square feet theory really allows as many vertical feet of roofing as you want to say are included since "you can get a shovel under all of them" as Catdaddy theorized.
Been there, done that and when they are nailed on with separate fasteners at separate times, then YOU guys need to "Feel the Love" in being able to rip off multiple layers nailed separately and enjoy "gravity" making them slide neatly into the dump truck. LOL
|
Lon |
|
|
|
Ghostbuster
476 Posts |
Posted - 10/21/2003 : 20:41:53
|
Lon, we've discussed your sassiness before. I don't want to have to discuss it again. The query has been put forth about tear off and exactly what it entails. The answer must come from the people or firms that research and formulate the prices in the line items of our software. By the way, I recall that the trolls at Big X once told me that the biggest portion of their customer base was the contracting industry. Do you use Big X or have you ever been a part of their survey, or do you know anyone in your field that has filled out their pricing survey?
Therein will lie the answer to this part of the thread. Just what is the breadth of the scope for RFG 220 (-)? |
|
|
|
KileAnderson
USA
875 Posts |
Posted - 10/21/2003 : 22:29:20
|
Here's an intersting one. I went out to look at a roof way out in the country. An hour of drive time from the office. It was an elderly farmer and his equally elderly wife. I get there and there are bundles of shingles on the driveway and the back side of the roof had already been torn off. I took a look and sure enough there is hail damage on the front slope, no problem. But what really struck me as strange was the back slope still had the original felt on it. The shingles had been torn off but the old felt was left in place. It was torn in places but had been repaired by either renailing or patching it. I tried to ask the homeowners what was going on but they were too elderly to even understand my questions.
Has anyone ever seen shingles torn off but not the felt? This was a first for me. |
|
|
|
Lon Sterling
68 Posts |
Posted - 10/21/2003 : 22:44:52
|
Ghost, I have had occasion to see and use all the major estimating softwares used by the claims industry but the tear off cheat was GIVEN to X and the other BY the claims industry and they were TOLD to use that formulary.
Now the sassiness warning is duly noted but also protested in the post below since there are far SASSIER comments directed at me from other Cado posters.
How about a comparison of SASSINESS?
I would like to see how my sassy comments stack up with a few I copied below from Cado posters.
BTW, it is still not my fault several people get defensive here. That is a usual reaction when they know they’ve been caught with their hands in the cookie jar.
ALL of you guys understand the math, yet most everyone ignores the truth and waits for X or someone else to tell them it’s okay to measure a roof’s tear off shingles correctly. Why are you all afraid of the truth? The tear off volume is a definable mathematical entity. It is easily proven by weight and easily figured. AND… If I’m wrong, it is an incredibly easy win for charity. Why no takers? The question really needs no answer because you ALL know the truth. - FEAR – I’m shaking your foundation. I’m questioning your authority, your honesty and your willingness to cover for the carriers in the face of overwhelming evidence that the tear off volume is written incorrectly to lower claims dollars. All this covering up while complaining about lawyers, roofers and public adjusters is a severe case of the pot calling the kettle black.
"We work for the carrier or work for the vendor" is a POOR excuse for helping them cover up an intentionally repeated untruthful formulary.
Don’t blame X when the carrier GAVE X the formulas THEY wanted in the software. It SURELY doesn't appear in Roofing Industry Estimating Software.
Ghost, I can totally live with being booted for "sassiness" since it will be proof that mob mentality and playground bullying is alive and well along with your site's own proprietarily exclusive "sassiness" here on the Planet of the Adjusters.
Here are the NON-SASSY comments of the wannabe schoolyard bullies who think I’m working on the net tear off scam as some class action mantra to feather my pockets.
Au Contraire, followers of the Great Cornelius. His questioning of me last year was as eloquent as his explanation of why I was wrong. His closing argument as to the validity of the tear off math? “How long have you been a roofer, MR. Sterling.” Any debate team would have been proud to have Cornelius leading it. Such fervor and such reasoning pointed out for all to see that the reason the tear off issue should be considered a non-issue was that it had come from a roofer!
My reason for posting the tear off question - I PURSUE THE TRUTH EACH OF YOU IS COMPLICIT IN HIDING.
The follwing APPARENTLY UN-SASSY comments are direct quotes from the following posters. Each of the participants should take pride in ganging up to hide the truth.
Catdaddy: I agree the ridge and starter rows are there. Lon, I would just suggest a wider snow shovel for the poor illegal immigrant that you are paying less than minimum wage to tear if off. Lon: You see he even agrees he is cheating on ridge and starter but thinks it’s warranted because he thinks I use illegal aliens and pay them less than the minimum wage. Turn me in if that’s what you think - (you'll be in for a surprise) but don’t say that gives you the right to lie about the tearoff volume.
Catdaddy again: These attempts to add fluff to estimates, finding a way to start a class action, get over on the big insurance companies will not benefit anyone in the long run. Lon: Now I’m padding estimates? Turn me in for insurance fraud PLEASE! That would be the solution – not cheating me because you don’t like what I’m saying and can’t prove me wrong.
Catdaddy again: Some of you are insured by these companies and when you try to stick it to them on the front, it's gonna get you in the rear. People like Lon are whats ruining this industry for all of us. Why do you think carriers can't pay vendors more, and vendors can't pay adjusters more? Cause people like Lon keep coming up with ways to try to make a quick buck. Lon: Sorry, CD, it is YOUR soulmates who are cheating the tearoff. Can’t prove me wrong? Call me some more names – that always seems to bring cheers from the spectators.
Lon, talking like adsusters think roofers should talk, "Ain’t no sassiness here neither.")
CCarr: While this thread has had some interesting moments after the initial question was dealt with, carnival hucksters that come along into our industry do little but further gray the water.
CCarr: Part of this necessary effort on our part to create and maintain a perceived value to the carriers, is our community standing against carnival hucksters who come along trying to find the next place to chip a new drain hole in the carrier's hull. Lon: I’m not the one trying to cheat the tear off on every claim. It is your industry with your help.
CCarr: Kile and PoppaCat are to be commended for their strong and consistent efforts at negating the scurrilous allegations of the latest huckster to come into our playground.Lon: Perhaps you should check the definition of huckster. It might describe a person who attempts to divert attention from the truth by using evasive tactics instead of proving your method is correct.
And a veritable “Laundry List” of insults pulled from just a few of Catdaddy’s musings:
Catdaddy: Almighty Lon - Another gumwrapper fact for sure - These attempts to add fluff to estimates - People like Lon are whats ruining this industry for all of us - Cause people like Lon keep coming up with ways to try to make a quick buck - People like Lon, trying to tell us our business, looking for an angle to make his money 'cause he can't make it out here with the rest of us, REALLY makes my thorns stick straight out - Lets dont give these peckerheads(as in WOODpecker) like Lon any more ammo than they dream up themselves. Can I get an amen? I am sure sitting in your living room, watching Springer, eating pot pies, and calling yourself a Consultant doesnt pay much unless there are people listening. Let'm starve. Pretty soon that tear off money will look good to even him. Its the circle of life!
CCarr: - Obviously, some damn logger cut a fir down that knocked over an unstable cavity tree probably in early September, that caused the willy nilly migration and blathering of one of those Peckerhead species, and its eventual perch on our yard pole.
AND I’M SASSY?
|
Lon |
|
|
|
Lon Sterling
68 Posts |
Posted - 10/21/2003 : 22:53:09
|
Kile,
I've seen the no new felt trick hundreds of times. In Aledo, TX in 2001, Allstate was paying low prices and roofers were conspiring with insureds to save part of their deductibles.
The trick they were using was to leave the felt, the metal edging, the vents and even the starter in place.
Of course felt is required as is metal and starter - the felt because the vacant nail holes now make the felt next to worthless AND against most codes.
Reported the roofers to the code officials - nothing was done. Sent a letter to the rooked homeowners and some got refunds on the felt from the roofers but no roof changeout.
In my book, both the insureds and the roofers should have been pistol whipped and given their claim money back to Allstate.
Allstate clearly did not figure enough money for complying with codes but the roofers and homeowners who skirted the rules were equally guilty. |
Lon |
|
|
|
Topic |
|
|
|
Hail Damage Visibility
Forum Locked
