Adjuster Estimates

Tags - Popular | FAQ  

PrevPrev Go to previous topic
NextNext Go to next topic
Last Post 05/12/2012 6:45 PM by  Jud G.
HAIL: The difference b/t a Hail Hit and a HAAG Hit...
 28 Replies
Sort:
You are not authorized to post a reply.
Page 2 of 2 << < 12
Author Messages
Ray Hall
Senior Member
Senior Member
Posts:2443


--
11/29/2010 3:19 PM

This topic in a nutshell is described in Willis post about the the "amount of damage from wind hail. This is the real world of adjusting, as long as carriers can keep getting more money for hazard insurance determined only  by paid losses to settle all claims, even those disputed claims at the lowest level of the claim tree(roof claims); cost of defense will always win out.

0
Ray Hall
Senior Member
Senior Member
Posts:2443


--
11/29/2010 3:20 PM

This topic in a nutshell is described in Willis post about the the "amount of damage from wind hail. This is the real world of adjusting, as long as carriers can keep getting more money for hazard insurance determined only by paid losses to settle all claims, even those disputed claims at the lowest level of the claim tree(roof claims); cost of defense will always win out.

0
Jud G.
Advanced Member
Advanced Member
Posts:509


--
12/03/2010 1:23 PM

Ray, you've got a run on sentence even without the phrase after the semicolon. Are you saying that when the pressure is on, carriers will fold like a cheap suit to settle their claims?

That thinking infers that some carriers may adjust their claims in the absence of sound principles just so they can save a buck.

My approach: use sound principles on the front end by taking your time, stick to the facts and avoid a bean counter approach. I've seen too many supplements and those that enter Appraisal because the adjuster wanted to rush his inspection or the paperwork only to have the carrier nickel and dime their way through a loss they didn’t inspect.

The reasons for rushing involve anything from crappy fee schedules to unscrupulous principles like requiring 'torn backing' in order to consider repair/replacement for hail damage.
 

0
Shotgun1053
Guest
Guest
Posts:3


--
12/20/2011 12:15 PM

I am a staff adjuster of more than 13 yrs.  I could not agree mre with your comments.  Our company used HAAG for many years, but due to litigation involving claims, our position is changed to utilize a number of different firms.  The HAAG studies from years ago remain solid and provide a good starting point.  I have always maintained that we should defend our position in court, however that requires solid investigating and good communication with the customer, best accomplished at the time of inspection.  It always amazes me when a contractor that the homeowner knows nothing about, has more influence than the adjuster.  The company I work for has NEVER suggested that we NOT pay for the damages we find.  Therein may be some of the problem.  There is no substitute for experience!  Getting to that point can often be an uncomfortable journey.   

0
Roy Estes
Member
Member
Posts:155


--
04/02/2012 3:33 PM

There are carriers who are resorting to using "Engineers" to perform roof inspections. I have inspected behind several engineers and for a g-note they tell the carriers what an experienced Adjuster should have already told them, the problem is the carriers lower their fee bills and expect to get GA's when the only one's who will work are newbies. And when that happens you get what you pay for. And then the IA Firms are trying to pay 60% I hear. I told one engineer he didn't know the difference between a blister, and a hail hit, and Another one on a Commercial built up roof, called a blistered roof a "Severely hail damaged roof" when the Dude should know that when the built up is hot mopped on, and there is moisture you will get blisters it is that simple.

 

"Each of us as human beings has a responsibility to reach out to help our brothers and sisters affected by disasters. One day it may be us or our loved ones needing someone to reach out and help." RC ESTES
0
suzukini
Guest
Guest
Posts:44


--
04/02/2012 9:45 PM

I've learned in the past couple of years to give each carrier what they want.  Some follow HAAG to the letter while others go the "if it looks like hail hit it, call it" route.  There just isn't a "right" or "wrong" way to do this these days.

I had a claim a couple of weeks ago that has me (and the inside reviewer) bewildered.  Hail in the area sized up to golf balls (I know this because it hit my house too). Confirmed damage to the gutters, downspouts, gutter guards (holes in plastic where hail hit), vent caps.  Back slope looks like a speckled egg.  I marked my test square, circled the hits, shook hands with the contractor, and left.  I got this one back the other day from my reviewer stating the carrier inside adjuster did not see any evidence of hail damage on the shingles in my photos.  I was asked to write a roof minimum charge for the vent caps and 3 wind damaged shingles.  I can't wait to see what happens when the contractor and insured persue this one further...*sarcasm*

0
linhoch
Guest
Guest
Posts:33


--
05/09/2012 1:39 PM
It seems like the major carriers take turns being the jerk about hail damage. One of them is always holding the Haag line about hail damage to comp shingles. If you are working for that carrier, that's what you have to do to get a file passed. If you can't stomach being that guy, which I can't, work for someone else.

It was SF's turn to carry the baton in the 80's. I know an adjuster who was working there and having to argue about every roof and every sq and every hit every day. The company changed their position and the next day the flood gates opened and they were buying roofs again.

Haag may or may not be right scientifically. But if the gravel is removed and there are patches of asphalt missing or oozing out of every impact point, I'm just too vain to tell the owner there is no damage. My loss, I guess.
0
Roy Estes
Member
Member
Posts:155


--
05/11/2012 10:50 PM
Jud you and I both know that it does not take a HOLE in the matting to be considered hail damages. As far as HAAG certifications Bullsheeat. The shingle manufactures all have impact testing, and they all have the answers, although they call this intellectual andall that.

All you have to do is ask the newbie desk adjuster. who used to be a stripper and a Claims manager was hanging oput at the bar she worked at and he gave her a jobthey can tell you when they review your claim file. If ANYONE disputes that hail upon impact does not reduce the life of a shingle they are idiots. it may not damage the matting, but it does create a weak spot in the shingle, and that particular area will be the 1st to blister I know because I grabbed shingles in Witchita KS in 2002 and put it on my shed roof, and i marked the hail impact areas even though the AMFAM dipshi oops I meant QC inspctor said no damages, The damn shingle is blistered only in areas that hail had splattered and remoived the granuals.

So take your texas All lines license, And spend a ton more money, get on CADO and Say I WANNA BE A JUSTER BY TRADE. Ill turn you onto my friend Cletus.
"Each of us as human beings has a responsibility to reach out to help our brothers and sisters affected by disasters. One day it may be us or our loved ones needing someone to reach out and help." RC ESTES
0
Jud G.
Advanced Member
Advanced Member
Posts:509


--
05/12/2012 6:45 PM
Roy, I agree. I took the residential Haag certification course in March 2012. In that course, they backed off their old torn matting definition. Now, their definition of functional damage to comp. shingles indicates that the bruises or gouges must be 1/2" or greater in size.

The functional damage definition is fine and dandy and could actually up in court. However in the world of insurance, policies pay for damage that results from a covered peril. The policies I work claims under still do not distinguish between functional and aesthetic damage (I've heard rumors of some TX policies that are doing this for metal roofing/siding). Thus, the Haag definition of functional damage and its connection to policy coverage is entirely irrelevant.

As you know, the key with blistering is that if hail hit the blisters, you've got damage. If its just popped blisters and no hail hits, then sol. The trick is to be able to tell when you have both blisters and hail and when you only have blisters that popped on their own (from mfg and wear/tear).

So long as the policy is exists as an aleatory document, no court of law will abandon its lean towards the insured...unless insurance polices begin to issue endorsements spelling out how coverage applies in the event of functional versus aesthetic damage.
0
You are not authorized to post a reply.
Page 2 of 2 << < 12


These Forums are dedicated to discussion of Claims Adjusting.

For the benefit of the community and to protect the integrity of the ecosystem, please observe the following posting guidelines: 
  • No Advertising. 
  • No vendor trolling / poaching. If someone posts about a vendor issue, allow the vendor or others to respond. Any post that looks like trolling / poaching will be removed.
  • No Flaming or Trolling.
  • No Profanity, Racism, or Prejudice.
  • Terms of Use Apply

    Site Moderators have the final word on approving / removing a thread or post or comment.