John, to this point I have not told someone they were wrong. I have only asked questions to try and see others thought process. That being said your comment that “The reason I can justify that is the trade, being whatever it would be, is a professional price for a professional job. If you as a general getting 10 & 10 to oversee the job cannot pick a credible subcontractor then that is your problem, not the insurance company. If you have a bad employee, that is also your problem. It is not right that you try to add a "Project Supervision" charge also to a normal restoration project so that you can go out to supervise someone who is already getting a professional price to do the job, (Double Dipping)”Is completely wrong. I know our cost better than you can imagine and Project supervision is a cost. You talk about backing up what my cost are and that’s why we have chosen xactimate as a tool to aid in our bid process. When estimating a job I have to account for all cost. Project supervision is a cost and has to be written in as a line item since it’s not covered anywhere else in the estimate. This is not only my stance it is the stance of the creator of the software and price guide (see my previous link). You spoke of the bible, when reading and believing do you trust all of it or pick out only the parts that suit you. My point is if you’re going to use a program (like xactimate which many insurance companies do) to aid in the estimating process than you have to trust all of it and not just pick the parts that suits your needs. Our firm does meet resistance to a fee for project supervision but I can say we have had it paid evertime. We went to appraisal three times and had it paid because we can back up our pricing structure. Whats funny is evertime it has been against a carrier where the adjuster used xactimate and ended up hurting their position.

Byran, I'm OK with our conversation. A bit stubborn, but I don't think you were saying I was flat out wrong.

Well, on one had this validates your fee as OK. On the other hand, it shows that there is a pattern of not establishing an agreed value with the parties involved, to the point that it takes outside help to resolve it.

We have aired this topic out pretty thoroughly, and it is evident that when you are dealing with insurance work you may have an uphill battle on the line item for supervision.

If you are working on a plain-jane rental property, that's one thing.  if you do awesome custom homes and need to command the price, then perhaps the fee could be described in the actual tasks being done to get an adjuster to be on the same sheet of music.   I have had claims where everyone who had ever touched the file knew that the homeowner was very demanding, and would not tollerate "Johnny 6-Pack" and the paint crew from hell into his house.  Those kind of premiums can be described when they are warrented, for high-end work. 

You say you are in Houston. I had a high school drinking buddy named Bryan Hines at Westchester High from 1970-1974. He went to college, I went to the school of hard knocks. Are you the same Bryan??

that is some of the sausage that would go into steep and high fees. I don't personally believe it needs to be spelled out in granular detail, as long as the issue isn't overlooked entirely. On your other point, if it makes sense and you see the need, put it in your estimate. Obviously paying for drywall does not give one a toilet - so if the site needs tasks that are tangible, and you are aware of it - then there is something to consider.

I agree with the point Byran made, that temp-power and temp-fencing, toilets, etc. could be legitimate line items. Supervision is legit too - but the consensus here is that 20% covers it. On a $50,000 loss that is 10,000.

Most of you have heard my rants about estimating programs for  a few years. Well lets all think that we had one of the below losses and which box of rules books would apply to a "fair adjustment of a large fire loss". The homeowner is a contractor who has been dealing with insurance carrier's and adjusters for years. He has a home in a very remote mountain region that does not have an all weather road.

He sends in 30 photos before the loss and 10 after the fire loss. He sends in a material and labor cost by the trades which total 70% of the policy limit.{ but no line item estimate} A full set of blue prints and complete inventory of the UPP in each room with a sketch of its location, RC, Age and condition and wants to start rebuilding within 10 days. How would you write up this loss to submit for approval to pay the amount claimed ?

You get a guaranteed replacement cost on a total fire loss from the insured who is also a contractor in a lump sum bid, that is $60,000.00 less than your line item estimate on the carriers select program. However you have a time demand of the of 15 days in the policy. The UPP demand is $60,000.00 more than your amount made up by the replacment department of this carrier. The APS is not resolved at his request and the ALE is ask to be left open for 2 years.