The Mold Myth
|
Logged in as: Guest
|
NOTICE: We are no longer using this forum for discussions. Please follow the links to the new forums.
Catastrophe Central-The Adjuster's Forum : Community Center- Forums
New Site Registration : New Site Login
Login  | |
|
The Mold Myth - 5/18/2005 6:05:37 PM
|
|
|
trader
Posts: 1203
Joined: 4/19/2004
Home base: Houston, TX
Status: offline
|
In my adjusting time of over 40 years, I have never heard of a property loss that did not allow new for old material if it was submerged or soaked with water from an INSURED peril. Depreciation may apply and replacement cost may be purchased in some contracts.
Common reasoning comes into the picture also. Structural lumber not warped, iron or steel tubs, tile and concrete floors , electrical wire , pig iron etc.
The wet material may be removed to any trash dump without any special attention to the workers health. A "mold remediation contractor" is a waste of every ones money. If your house floods this year, take a lot of photos, cut the drywall and carpet out, clean the walls and floors with bleach and water, then dry your house out and wait for the adjuster before build back.
< Message edited by trader -- 6/22/2005 6:22:01 PM >
|
|
|
|
|
RE: The Mold Myth - 5/18/2005 6:55:55 PM
|
|
|
RedSupraT
Posts: 274
Joined: 10/31/2004
Status: offline
|
The problem is, most homeowner's will not do anything to the home UNTIL the adjuster gets there. They tend to feel that they might not be reimbursed for any time/money spent mitigating their damages.
You do run into some people who do actually go above and beyond whats needed to mitigate their damages. Too bad there aren't more people like this. Its seems most mold problems arise from the homeowners failure to correct the problem in a timely manner.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: The Mold Myth - 5/19/2005 10:26:13 AM
|
|
|
kenwsmith
Posts: 1
Joined: 5/19/2005
Status: offline
|
Mold is, and should be of reasonable concern when found, or suspected. The key word being "reasonable". Homeowners (understandably) base their fears upon information contained in the media- and only the scariest mold situations that the media reports on.
For an insurance adjuster to dismiss the existence of mold, or altogther deny that in some case, mold can be dangerous or unhealthy - is, in my opinion is simply irresponsible on the part of the adjuster.
Obviously, those who are pillaging, spreading fear, or otherwise presenting every wet house as a mold-fest, should be called out & dismissed for what they are. No insurance company should be taken advantage of- and the first step is for that insurance company to acknowlege reasonable concern, take reasonable action, and pay reasonable prices for mold remediation.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: The Mold Myth - 5/19/2005 10:46:23 AM
|
|
|
trader
Posts: 1203
Joined: 4/19/2004
Home base: Houston, TX
Status: offline
|
Insurance adjusters do not dismiss "mold" when they pay for removal of wet damaged building products damaged by an insured peril. They just dismiss the tyvec suits , gloves and mask.
The only time mold comes up is when a contractor thinks they can scam an insurance company. Its over guys go back to bringing out the drying fans to remove rebond carpet pad.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: The Mold Myth - 5/19/2005 11:06:23 AM
|
|
|
trader
Posts: 1203
Joined: 4/19/2004
Home base: Houston, TX
Status: offline
|
I was the first adjuster on a large commercial mold lawsuit in Texas and had to be in court 14 days for the trial. Not one medical witness was allowed to testify, as the main stream medical community has never stated that ony one of the thousands of household molds can harm humans. Its over guys. Insureds will not even turn in mold claims or any type water claims.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: The Mold Myth - 5/19/2005 11:58:12 AM
|
|
|
Wes
Posts: 622
Joined: 4/19/2004
Home base: Deerfield Beach, FL
Status: offline
|
Trader, I am handling daily claims in south Florida and I still get a good amount of mold claims. I think the only thing that is going to shut down the mold scammers is the policy exclusions or limits on any claim with mold involved. It is already making my job much easier when there is a $5000.00 limit on mold remediation.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: The Mold Myth - 5/19/2005 1:53:15 PM
|
|
|
trader
Posts: 1203
Joined: 4/19/2004
Home base: Houston, TX
Status: offline
|
Wes. Mold claims will drive the HO 3 into the ground and companies will stop writeing broad coverage. The way to avoid a Texas situation is to limit mold remediation to a nominal amount like $1,000.00 and no allowance for test.
As active as Florida is on insurance it seems a statement from the surgeon general of the US could stop the hysteria created by the rug cleaners. Good luck. It will kill resales on houses, everthing. Each mold claim should be set for trial.
These claims are bathroom, kitchen and roof leaks right.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: The Mold Myth - 5/19/2005 2:00:10 PM
|
|
|
Wes
Posts: 622
Joined: 4/19/2004
Home base: Deerfield Beach, FL
Status: offline
|
Yes all of my mold claims are baths, kitchens and roofs. I also get a lot of mold claims involving polybutylene plumbing.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: The Mold Myth - 5/24/2005 3:51:57 PM
|
|
|
trader
Posts: 1203
Joined: 4/19/2004
Home base: Houston, TX
Status: offline
|
I thought all of the polybutylene pipe leaks were settled by the class actions suits about 10 years ago. If you still have the plumbing in mobil homes and apartments etc whats sudden and accidental about that. And what happened to "must be in this policy term "?
|
|
|
|
|
RE: The Mold Myth - 5/24/2005 4:56:55 PM
|
|
|
Wes
Posts: 622
Joined: 4/19/2004
Home base: Deerfield Beach, FL
Status: offline
|
The courts determined that not enough people were informed of the polybutylene class action suits of ten years ago. The whole entire thing has been reopened and is still available to anyone with polybutylene in their homes. Many of the housing developments here in south Florida are still plumbed with polybutylene. When I receive a claim I can tell by the address if it is going to be a polybutylene issue, that is how common it is. Info: www.pbpipe.com
|
|
|
|
|
RE: The Mold Myth - 6/8/2005 8:09:48 AM
|
|
|
DavidA
Posts: 8
Joined: 10/8/2004
Status: offline
|
As an adjuster working in Florida this year I have two things to say about MOLD. (1) It is REAL (2) It is not a myth. Time as well as legal litigation, will reveal how serious this issue IS in the future. To work in a mold-infested area without gloves or a mask is stupidity! I have first hand experience of ill health from working in and around mold and nobody will convince me it is just an issue being raised to screw the insurance industry. Sadly, the insurance industry in general, appears to be in denial regarding mold.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: The Mold Myth - 6/8/2005 9:13:03 AM
|
|
|
trader
Posts: 1203
Joined: 4/19/2004
Home base: Houston, TX
Status: offline
|
To adjuster DavidA: If evidence law,s in the United States will not allow medical "experts" to testify in court about toxic mold ;as no evidence exist, do you think the laws should be changed to allow "junk science testimony". Please get your facts from lawyers who try these cases, and persons who have set through mold trials as defendants. A new mold lawsuit has not been filed in Texas for many months. Why ? If you dont have a chance to win it takes the zeal away.
I have paid to remove mold for 43 years. You have laborers haul it to the landfill. Its in your puter as remove and haul. Please read the Forbes article a second and third time and you may get it.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: The Mold Myth - 6/8/2005 9:34:45 AM
|
|
|
trader
Posts: 1203
Joined: 4/19/2004
Home base: Houston, TX
Status: offline
|
I predict all the first party property policys in the US will have a dollar limit on "mold remediation" with a zero amount on "mold testing". The last headline case was a liability case with a run away jury. It seems when the money goes away, so does the disease.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: The Mold Myth - 6/8/2005 10:44:43 AM
|
|
|
Wes
Posts: 622
Joined: 4/19/2004
Home base: Deerfield Beach, FL
Status: offline
|
Is DavidA employing sarcasim in his posts. Surely he is not using that article to qualify in any way shape or form his belief in the dangers of mold.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: The Mold Myth - 6/9/2005 8:14:41 AM
|
|
|
okclarryd
Posts: 616
Joined: 4/19/2004
Home base: Oklahoma City, Ok
Status: offline
|
This is really a two-sided coin.
I was a supervisor over several adjusters working mold claims and would, on occasion, go with them on an inspection. Sometimes the inspection would be the initial one and sometimes it would be a follow up inspection. The ride-along was part of the supervisory tasks that I had to perform.
On several of these inspections, I became ill after being in the dwelling after 15-20 minutes. I had to endure some very high-powered antibiotics to clear out my lungs and bronchial tubes. Don't try to tell me this stuff is harmless. Some is and some isn't.
The other side of the coin was the extreme and unneccessary procedures that were forced on us (the insurance company being the us) to remove the contaminated materials and dispose of them. The costs were absolutely unbelievable and out of control. The contractors were buying airplanes and boats and Denali's were on back order.
Mold.
My point here is that there is a real danger working around some of this stuff. I'm an "Old Phart" (referring to another post) and have been all the way around the track at least once. The insurance industry reacted badly to the published dangers and allowed repairs to escalate into the incredibly expensive zone. And, the contractors took advantage of a situation with their only goal ........PROFIT. Most of the contractors could have cared less about their customers health and welfare. Just "show me the money".
This situation will eventually be resolved, as all situations are, and the trip in still interesting. And, as usual, the folks in the boardrooms that make these decisions should leave their boardrooms and get out on the street for a while for a little closer view of what is and what ain't.
But they probably won't. Wish I could afford a Denali.
Y'all have a nice day.
_____________________________
LARRY D HARDIN
|
|
|
|
|
RE: The Mold Myth - 6/9/2005 4:06:49 PM
|
|
|
ranger
Posts: 186
Joined: 11/20/2004
Home base: Bonham, Texas
Status: offline
|
The mold claims I handled in my early days of adjusting always involved a water pipe breaking beneath a pier-and-beam dwelling. I would pay to have the area beneath the floor dried out and a microbiocide fogged once a week for 3 weeks. I would then pay to have the drywall sealed and painted if it was dry or removed if it was wet. I never heard complaints from any of these insureds about more mold growth.
Then came Melinda Ballard and the $32,000,000.00 judgement against Farmers Insurance Group. I had left Farmers Insurance Group in Dallas, Texas and I had been hired by a large independent in the Dallas area. Farmers found me and I started getting mold claims assigned to me. The Farmers mold office in Round Rock, Texas had titled me the "Mold King of Texas" due to the amount of mold claims I was handling. I never required medical attention from working mold assignments. After the large award I learned the new procedure for handling mold claims. The first step involved an environmental specialist that would measure and identify the mold in the interior of the house. The cost for this service escalated from $500.00 to $2,000.00. The restoration company would then come in and almost gut the house before they were finished. I saw mold removal costs escalate from $3,400.00 for a small house to $34,000.00 for the same job. I have had mold removal estimates for over $100,000.00. I did not see any great increase in pricing for the restoration contracting.
Insurance companies remodled a lot of homes for these insureds. I believe the word spread that with a mold claim you could get your home with 1960's and 1970's interiors updated to the late 1990's styling. I have been in homes where I asked the insured what the mold looked like when they first saw the mold and they described it as being a very small spot close to the floor. At the time I was there they had let the mold grow halfway up the wall before they turned in a claim.
I know one couple involved in the mold removal business that was living in a $250,000.00 home and at the height of the Texas Mold Crisis purchased a moved into an $800,000.00 home. Their automobiles and jewelry became more costly during this period.
It would have been wonderful for all Texas adjusters if the HOB policy would have been kept with their low deductibles and gone to a mold coverage limit of $5000.00. I believe this was blocked by Texas consumer groups. Instead most all Texas insurers have done away with writing the HOB and gone to the HOA with 1% deductibles. This alone has accounted for a 75% decrease in my claim assignments.
|
|
|
|
|
fOR those WHO ARE IN DENIAL ABOUT MOLD - 6/9/2005 11:12:02 PM
|
|
|
DavidA
Posts: 8
Joined: 10/8/2004
Status: offline
|
$925,000 Award in Mold Exposure Case
Joins Leading Personal Injury Claims
June 2, 2005--Mold exposure has jumped to the forefront of significant personal injury claims with a recent $925,000 award in Wayne County Circuit Court to an apartment resident. The verdict, the highest ever in Michigan for personal injury damages resulting from mold exposure, could ultimately force a new standard of liability on property owners and landlords.
The apartment resident, Esmeralda Mahaffy, developed permanent, severe asthma from exposure to high levels of toxic mold after her apartment was negligently repaired following a flood from a toilet in the apartment above her unit in 2001. The incident occurred after years of ignored complaints of water leakage and persistent mold on the walls and ceilings. The verdict followed a seven-day jury trial in April before Wayne County Circuit Court Judge John H. Gillis Jr.
"This is the largest single personal injury Michigan verdict since mold claims began being pursued in Michigan in 1999, a significant legal development because many defendants and their lawyers do not take injuries from mold seriously," said Jennifer Grieco of Sommers Schwartz, Mahaffy's attorney. "The jury, however, took the injury seriously, despite the defendant's arguments that mold is the same as mildew and found 'everywhere', and appreciated the effect the severe asthma condition Ms. Mahaffy developed would have on her life."
The jury found that the apartment management of Maple Creek apartments in Woodhaven, Mich., failed to follow industry guidelines in cleaning up the damp, moldy conditions. As a result, Mahaffy was hospitalized three times for severe asthma attacks, one of which nearly killed her when she stopped breathing. She remains on medication and has dramatically altered her lifestyle to guard against future asthma attacks.
The case may set a liability precedent for property managers and landlords that negligently maintain their commercial residential properties and fail to follow established industry guidelines for the clean up of water intrusion and mold damage.
"The verdict supports the validity of mold litigation actions, certainly as seen through the eyes of increasingly conservative jurors," Grieco said.
The jury, speaking through its verdict, told the manager of the apartment complex that it should have done more than send in a handy-man to rip out drywall when faced with signs of visible mold. The published guidelines are easily available on the Internet but this apartment manager never bothered to investigate the appropriate protocol, neglecting his duties to the paying tenant to provide a safe and habitable living space.
Grieco is an expert in the accelerating field of mold litigation and has handled numerous cases that resulted in large settlements and jury verdicts for homeowners against builders, home inspectors, condominium and apartment management companies and insurance companies. Her practice includes construction defects, toxic torts, product liability, personal injury and medical malpractice. Grieco was named one of "Michigan's Emerging Young Lawyers" in 2004 by Michigan Lawyers Weekly.
Southfield-based Sommers Schwartz is one of Michigan's largest law firms.
Editors: A copy of the complaint and case evaluation summary is available, as well as a photo of Jennifer Grieco. Contacts The Quell Group Marsha Stopa, 248-649-8900 mstopa@quell.com
|
|
|
|
|
RE: The Mold Myth - 6/9/2005 11:18:08 PM
|
|
|
DavidA
Posts: 8
Joined: 10/8/2004
Status: offline
|
All I am saying is that the insurance companies better get off the "Mold is all hype" horse, and start respecting the FACT that people are getting sick from MOLD issues and wining in court! Trial lawyers are taking it serious- we as adjusters BETTER and the insurance companies SURE BETTER.
--------------------------------------------------------------------
$925,000 Award in Mold Exposure Case
Joins Leading Personal Injury Claims
June 2, 2005--Mold exposure has jumped to the forefront of significant personal injury claims with a recent $925,000 award in Wayne County Circuit Court to an apartment resident. The verdict, the highest ever in Michigan for personal injury damages resulting from mold exposure, could ultimately force a new standard of liability on property owners and landlords.
The apartment resident, Esmeralda Mahaffy, developed permanent, severe asthma from exposure to high levels of toxic mold after her apartment was negligently repaired following a flood from a toilet in the apartment above her unit in 2001. The incident occurred after years of ignored complaints of water leakage and persistent mold on the walls and ceilings. The verdict followed a seven-day jury trial in April before Wayne County Circuit Court Judge John H. Gillis Jr.
"This is the largest single personal injury Michigan verdict since mold claims began being pursued in Michigan in 1999, a significant legal development because many defendants and their lawyers do not take injuries from mold seriously," said Jennifer Grieco of Sommers Schwartz, Mahaffy's attorney. "The jury, however, took the injury seriously, despite the defendant's arguments that mold is the same as mildew and found 'everywhere', and appreciated the effect the severe asthma condition Ms. Mahaffy developed would have on her life."
The jury found that the apartment management of Maple Creek apartments in Woodhaven, Mich., failed to follow industry guidelines in cleaning up the damp, moldy conditions. As a result, Mahaffy was hospitalized three times for severe asthma attacks, one of which nearly killed her when she stopped breathing. She remains on medication and has dramatically altered her lifestyle to guard against future asthma attacks.
The case may set a liability precedent for property managers and landlords that negligently maintain their commercial residential properties and fail to follow established industry guidelines for the clean up of water intrusion and mold damage.
"The verdict supports the validity of mold litigation actions, certainly as seen through the eyes of increasingly conservative jurors," Grieco said.
The jury, speaking through its verdict, told the manager of the apartment complex that it should have done more than send in a handy-man to rip out drywall when faced with signs of visible mold. The published guidelines are easily available on the Internet but this apartment manager never bothered to investigate the appropriate protocol, neglecting his duties to the paying tenant to provide a safe and habitable living space.
Grieco is an expert in the accelerating field of mold litigation and has handled numerous cases that resulted in large settlements and jury verdicts for homeowners against builders, home inspectors, condominium and apartment management companies and insurance companies. Her practice includes construction defects, toxic torts, product liability, personal injury and medical malpractice. Grieco was named one of "Michigan's Emerging Young Lawyers" in 2004 by Michigan Lawyers Weekly.
Southfield-based Sommers Schwartz is one of Michigan's largest law firms.
Editors: A copy of the complaint and case evaluation summary is available, as well as a photo of Jennifer Grieco. Contacts The Quell Group Marsha Stopa, 248-649-8900 mstopa@quell.com
|
|
|
|
|
RE: The Mold Myth - 6/10/2005 12:52:01 AM
|
|
|
trader
Posts: 1203
Joined: 4/19/2004
Home base: Houston, TX
Status: offline
|
Listen up gang. I never said mold should not be removed, and I have paid to remove mold for over 43 years and that was before I learned mold was toxic after working in it for 35 years, with out any ill effects. I and thousands had been exposed to mold that had killed thousands of adjusters and constructon workers and was kept quit by the insurance companys claims departments.
There has not been one death case in the world, that the experts listed as exposure to mold. Find one and post it and I will backtract. I belive Roger, I belive Leonard my old boss, both are allergic to mold but they are both alive. Hell I know people who are allergic to perfume, liptor and red wine any many more chemicals.
All good plaintiff attorneys know you never can tell on a jury trial, this one hit the jackpot but please post the overturned verdict in 2-3 years. The same firm who tried the Ballard case lost the Oakridge Baptist Church Vs. Utica National, Montgomery County, Texas March 2004. I was the 2nd adverse witness and next to last defense witness. Not one medical expert, the jury will not buy it in Texas.
|
|
|
|
!! You are viewing a post in the forum archive.
NOTICE: We are no longer using this forum for discussions. Please follow the links to the new forums.
Catastrophe Central-The Adjuster's Forum : Community Center- Forums
New Site Registration : New Site Login
 New Messages |
 No New Messages |
 Hot Topic w/ New Messages |
 Hot Topic w/o New Messages |
 Locked w/ New Messages |
 Locked w/o New Messages |
|
Post New Thread
Reply to Message
Post New Poll
Submit Vote
Delete My Own Post
Delete My Own Thread
Rate Posts
|
|
User Agreement | Privacy Statement| Contact |Copyright 1995 - 2006 CatAdjuster.org. All rights reserved.
0.250
|
Printable Version
