| The greatest ignorance is to reject substantive matter out of hand, yet insurance policyholders do it as preset course, unaware of their vulnerability till often too late.
With such compelling information the question is when will you preempt the course setting...join the base? |
In Reply to: Re: Insurance Adjuster Standards for Hail Damage posted by tonyb on April 23, 2002 at 15:59:16:
Well, here is one you may not have expected. I am in insurance adjuster, have been one for over 25 years, specializing in property damage claims for homeowers and business owners.I have worked for several of the largest insurance companies in the U.S, and now have my own independant adjustment company.
Everyone should realise one important thing. Insurance adjusters are not created in the depths of hell, but are just regular people and policyholders themselves. They have families, pets, homes, live and work in their communities,etc, just like everyone that complains about their performance.
Hail damage is one of the most simple or most difficult types of damage claims to settle, mainly, because everyone assumes that if they have hail in their back yard, and a contractor assures them that they can get "brand new siding or roofing", that they must have damage.
My pet peave is the use of water, ultraviolet lights, "come back at four pm, you can see it best at that time", etc. etc. I have met some really great people, and I have met some people that I would describe as those that assume that because they have paid a premium, they are owed money, no matter what the contract of insurance, (policy) says.
Complaints about your policy? try reading it!!!If you don't understand it, that's why you have an agent to ask these question of before the adjuster gets there. Not your neighbor or brother in law, your agent!!! The adjuster is trained to read a policy; why does this upset people? Isn't everyone expected to be proficient in their job. I sure don't want my auto mechanic to not know what the manual on my car says, and I expect my doctor to be trained and up to date on current procedures.
To those people in areas where there was damage from hail, ask to meet your adjuster, they will probably be glad to explain their decisions to you. Word to the wise, if you show up with your contractor, attorney, etc.,or a fighting attitude, don't be surprised if the adjuster does the same thing.
Lastly, there are good adjusters, and not so good adjusters. If you are having a problem with yours, call the company, and request, (nicely) the reassignment of your claim to someone else.
If you want to see pics of some really great damage claims, especially hail, email me. I can show you what it looks like when it is really there.
Posted by tonyb on July 18, 2002 at 04:35:02:
In Reply to: Re: Insurance Adjuster Standards for Hail Damage posted by Dan Cole on July 17, 2002 at 22:22:55:
Reading the policy does not in any way explain what policyholders are entitled to such as, a basic understanding in terms of fundamental adjusting principles, rights, and rules that govern insurance company behavior. And, how to calculate, prepare and settle their claims. Equal information truly is the benchmark of fairness.
You suggest asking the agent and the company adjuster for help and advice. According to the N.A.I.C. (the government entity that makes the insurance rules) the agent represents the company, not the policyholder; and the company adjuster and independent adjuster represent the company, not the policyholder. Here are a couple of references to help better understand where you fit in claim transactions:
Because the insurance company hired an independent adjuster (private insurance company adjuster) to adjust the policyholder's fire loss claim did not create a fiduciary relationship between the policyholder and that adjuster. Where there is a dispute as to coverage of the policyholder's claim, retention of an independent adjuster by the insurance company is not for the benefit of the policyholder:
Thompson v. Cannon, 274 Cal. Rptr. 608, 224 C.A. 3d 1413, Cal. App. 4 Dist., 1990.
The policyholder sued an independent adjuster for a breach of fiduciary duty. The court held that the adjuster had a fiduciary duty to the insurance company, not to the policyholder:
Thompson v. Cannon 224 CA Ap3 1413 274 CaR 608, 1990.
Your pet peeve is with those who have a view of their damage that you don't share. Now you have hit on my pet peeve: those who profess to represent both sides in the same transaction at the same time. They may be regular people, but they may as well have been "created in the depths of hell." Misrepresentation is nothing to hang your hat on.
How to know what to expect in case of loss.
Subject:
Comments:
Optional Link URL:
Link Title:
Optional Image URL:
|
|
|
 |
|
| About DisasterPrepared.net |