- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: NPR Podcast about Flood Insurance shorting homeowners following Hurricane Sandy
Posted on 2/14/17 at 1:05 pm to wickowick
Posted on 2/14/17 at 1:05 pm to wickowick
quote:
Something the insured gets and adjuster that isn't good at his job. After the floods in BR a friend of mine was presented a flood estimate for repair of $75k he thought it was low. I looked over the estimate and compared it to what was in the house and agreed. The scope of damages was not correct. He called the insurance company and after a quick review of discrepancies they agreed to reassign the claim to another adjuster. The new adjuster was more experienced and needed very little direction to see the issues. The new estimate was for double the original amount with the correct scope of damages...
Are you an adjuster? Everything is so black and white, check-the-box, according to you. It'd be great if you're right, I just don't think life works like this. 
1
Posted on 2/14/17 at 1:12 pm to wickowick
quote:
Can you give examples of low balling in flood?
They gave our business a loss estimate of $45k. Had an independent assessor come back with $95k in damages.
They also argued that the back portion of the property was a "basement" even though there was no such language in our coverage policy.
This post was edited on 2/14/17 at 1:12 pm
Posted on 2/14/17 at 1:14 pm to NYNolaguy1
quote:
It's hard to be impartial to your claimholder when your boss is paying you $400 million a year in profit.
Let's not ignore scale here. You can't just throw around a large number and act like it lined one persons pockets. This is the same mentality as "corporations are bad".
I don't doubt that there is a large amount of fraud in every catastrophic event, but you can't just point the finger because there are a bunch of 0's involved.
Posted on 2/14/17 at 1:14 pm to Mo Jeaux
I am an independent adjuster and it does work like that. Now if a carrier says that don't pay for x, the adjuster can not make that x happen, but a majority of the time when the proper components are included in the estimate then there are very few problems unless the contractor is out of line on pricing.
Most companies use an independent software that takes into account labor, material and equipment rates. Those prices come from local building supply and contractors in the area and are updated monthly. They are not perfect but they take care of 95% of all claims and when there is a discrepency, I can compare units of measure and pay rates to see why there is an issue...
Most companies use an independent software that takes into account labor, material and equipment rates. Those prices come from local building supply and contractors in the area and are updated monthly. They are not perfect but they take care of 95% of all claims and when there is a discrepency, I can compare units of measure and pay rates to see why there is an issue...
Posted on 2/14/17 at 1:15 pm to NYCAuburn
quote:
Going back a lot of what you see is, "I have 250k in insurance, so where is my 250k" that's not how it works
I run into it all the time and have to explain to people that it doesn't benefit you to over-insure a house because just because you have 250k on your policy doesn't mean thats how much you'll get paid on a total loss...only cost to rebuild
Posted on 2/14/17 at 1:18 pm to Bmath
quote:
hey also argued that the back portion of the property was a "basement" even though there was no such language in our coverage policy.
So you had damage below the base flood elevation and a disputed in coverages. Just because there is damage does not mean it is covered damage. Was that area lower that the rest of the property?
Posted on 2/14/17 at 1:34 pm to OceanMan
quote:
don't doubt that there is a large amount of fraud in every catastrophic event, but you can't just point the finger because there are a bunch of 0's involved.
He asked why they wouldn't pay... Because ultimately the claimholder is not the client.
If you go back a page it describes in detail how adjustors in the field altered engineering reports to make FEMA happy.
More than one engineer pleads guilty to falsifying insurance reports- NY Times
quote:
Long Island engineering company and one of its former executives pleaded guilty on Tuesday to charges that they had deliberately falsified engineering reports of homes battered by Hurricane Sandy in 2012.
HiRise Engineering of Uniondale, N.Y., and Matthew Pappalardo, a former director, were accused of falsifying engineering reports that were used to determine the structural damage to homes caused by the storm. Those reports were evaluated by flood insurance adjusters and federal officials, and homeowners were reimbursed based on them. As a consequence, numerous flood claims may have been undervalued or denied under the National Flood Insurance Program, a part of the Federal Emergency Management Agency.
The issue came to the fore in 2015, after investigations by The New York Times and the CBS News program “60 Minutes.” Eric T. Schneiderman, the New York attorney general, secured the indictment of the company and Mr. Pappalardo last summer and referred evidence of crimes outside New York to the federal Justice Department.
On Tuesday, the New York case concluded when Mr. Pappalardo pleaded guilty to one count of unauthorized practice of engineering, a Class E felony, while the company admitted to a criminal-solicitation violation.
This post was edited on 2/14/17 at 1:36 pm
Posted on 2/14/17 at 1:37 pm to wickowick
quote:
Most companies use an independent software that takes into account labor, material and equipment rates. Those prices come from local building supply and contractors in the area and are updated monthly. They are not perfect but they take care of 95% of all claims and when there is a discrepency, I can compare units of measure and pay rates to see why there is an issue
RS Means?
Posted on 2/14/17 at 1:40 pm to wickowick
quote:
Was that area lower that the rest of the property?
The short answer is "currently." However, it was constructed at 1 foot above the 100-year flood level at the original ground level. After 30 years there was a small amount of flooding because the city-parish turned a nearby creek into a major drainage canal. So dirt was built up around the building to prevent any further flooding. The front half of the building was also raised up several feet with mitigation funding.
In August, the original back portion of the building flooded. The insurance company is now calling it a basement because it now sits below the ground immediately outside the building. That ground is no more than a berm.
Posted on 2/14/17 at 1:48 pm to NYNolaguy1
quote:
RS Means?
Xactimate
Posted on 2/14/17 at 1:50 pm to Bmath
What elevation were you paying premiums on?
Posted on 2/14/17 at 1:50 pm to wickowick
quote:
I am an independent adjuster
Posted on 2/14/17 at 1:59 pm to wickowick
Without the policy sitting right in front of me, I only remember reading it that we were paying premiums on the entire building. There was no elevation specified.
They amended our policy after the flood to reflect the original level of the building as being below grade. Our argument is what the hell were we paying premiums for if they can come back after the fact and make that call.
They amended our policy after the flood to reflect the original level of the building as being below grade. Our argument is what the hell were we paying premiums for if they can come back after the fact and make that call.
Posted on 2/14/17 at 2:01 pm to wickowick
also amazed at how many people don't realize that the coverage on their contents for flood is ACV
Posted on 2/14/17 at 2:06 pm to ThePoo
ACV?
Posted on 2/14/17 at 2:10 pm to Bmath
actual cash value
aka depreciated
aka depreciated
Posted on 2/14/17 at 2:10 pm to Bmath
quote:
ACV?
Actual cash value, or , in other words, less than it'll cost you to replace something.
Posted on 2/14/17 at 2:11 pm to Bmath
quote:
ACV?
Actual cash value (aka depreciated value). Basically what the item was worth at the time of the loss, not what it costs to replace new.
Posted on 2/14/17 at 2:18 pm to Bmath
quote:
Without the policy sitting right in front of me, I only remember reading it that we were paying premiums on the entire building.
You can't partition off part of the building on flood (except for policies for individual condo unit owners). So the premium will be for entire building up to the coverage limit the policy had.
quote:
There was no elevation specified.
Does the declaration page show an "elevation difference". This would be the difference between the Base Flood Elevation (BFE) for that area and the lowest floor used for rating.
quote:
Our argument is what the hell were we paying premiums for if they can come back after the fact and make that call.
But were you paying premiums on the correct elevation? Sounds like the premium being charged was based on the elevation of the front part of the building that has been raised. Then when adjusting for the claim, they found that the building had a lower floor that should've really been the lowest floor for rating the flood policy and they corrected it later.
Posted on 2/14/17 at 2:19 pm to wickowick
quote:
Xactimate
Which is about as accurate as Brandon Harris.
Page 3 of 4
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News