RE: How do the vendors stack up?
|
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  | |
|
RE: How do the vendors stack up? - 3/12/2005 9:20:53 PM
|
|
|
Gale
Posts: 739
Joined: 4/19/2004
Home base: Murray, KY
Status: offline
|
Jim,
By the way your mentioning of the Peter Principle is interesting in this case. If the Peter Principle is a rule of organizations that states, “In a hierarchy, every employee tends to rise to his level of incompetence.” how does this apply to a new employee in a new vocation that has never been promoted? According to Francis Heylighen the generalized Peter principle states that in evolution systems tend to develop up to the limit of their adaptive competence. Many new CAT adjusters are very adaptive therefore how does the Peter Principle apply?
A case where the Peter Principle could come into play is where a carrier or vendor promotes a great CAT adjuster to a CAT field manager's position and it not working out very well. I bet more than one CAT adjuster could tell a horror story about this happening and what it was like to have to work under this new CAT field manager that was in over his head.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: How do the vendors stack up? - 3/15/2005 9:30:58 PM
|
|
|
Gale
Posts: 739
Joined: 4/19/2004
Home base: Murray, KY
Status: offline
|
Clayton, your above post was the source for our weekly marketing meeting today after it having been made required reading for the entire staff and briefly discussed in a full staff meeting last week. It helped us see the features needed from the examiner’s point of view. Does it make any difference to the examiner if price was increased or decreased from that contained in the reference pricing database or just the fact that it was changed? What do you find your thought processes to be when you see a “flagged” price?
It was very meaning to the staff to read your remarks especially in the areas that need attention from your point of view. Your positive remarks are also very encouraging because typically we only tend to mention the negatives we see in life so getting the pros along with the cons adds creditably to the cons. Without a question price plays a roll in most purchases and adjusting software is no different. What price will not do is to keep someone renewing with an adjusting software vendor if it does not help the adjuster, not the software vendor to be more profitable.
Easy-of-use, quality support and full functionality we find are the key factors that leads adjusters to both renew and tell others about our adjusting software. Many from the old CADO days (late 90’s) know that I made some big claims about what we were going to bring to the adjusting industry in the way of quality tools at fair and reasonable prices when there was little (no) tangible reason to believe it could or would happen. We have changed the level of expectation of adjusting software. Over time I have come to accept that the “impossible” is “possible” but it just takes longer.
Clayton thanks for being a positive force in the claims handling industry.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: How do the vendors stack up? - 3/15/2005 9:51:58 PM
|
|
|
odenspike
Posts: 14
Joined: 4/19/2004
Home base: Ft. Worth, TX
Status: offline
|
I have only used Simsol, but from what I see it is one of the easier to learn which was good me starting out. At one point our company was going to make a switch to Xactimate, but after much complaining we were finally able to go back to Simsol after a short while. We were asked to figure out Xactimate on our own, which I am as about computer literate and computer friendly as they come, and I was completly lost. I think Simsol is easier to read for people also. But I think Xactimate has a few more details in their restoration items that Simsol lacks. I even use Simsol for mounting photos and diagrams for my casualty files.
Thanks,
Charlie
_____________________________
Claims Manager
The Littleton Group
Ft. Worth, TX
|
|
|
|
|
RE: How do the vendors stack up? - 3/16/2005 4:34:47 PM
|
|
|
michaelmurphy
Posts: 10
Joined: 12/9/2004
Status: offline
|
I am a forum rookie. I wanted to weigh in on all of this. I am a firm believer that the driving force behind carriers adoption of property software is driven by cost, and the quality of management reports (qa/qc) in order to generate "numbers" for senior management. I have used xactimate and simsol and subscribe to simsol. I like the total package concept. I do not like paying large sums of money to learn how to use it and get the most out of it. I think there should be some freebie training to at least get you up and running. Now you have my 2 cents worth.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: How do the vendors stack up? - 3/16/2005 10:36:29 PM
|
|
|
CCarr
Posts: 288
Joined: 4/19/2004
Home base: Toronto, Ontario
Status: offline
|
Gale, I am humbled by your recent remarks.
I'd like the discussion to continue in a few weeks in greater detail of the issues I raised and your further questions. Estimating software is a critical component of the claims process, and I think the time is right to enhance its' integrity and lobby further for stricter conventions of usage. I concede and acknowledge, that like any other type of software, the value added benefit of the product can only be derived through proper usage; which is a different but parallel challenge facing the claims industry.
However, today I handed in my security clearance and door pass key, and after 26 weeks decided to end my current tenure with Citizens. I'll pack this desktop computer at the hotel sometime tomorrow and head for the beach for a couple of weeks of better viewing and clear my mind before I head the truck north.
I'll get reacquainted with CADO in early April and we'll pick up where we left off then.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: How do the vendors stack up? - 3/17/2005 1:42:00 AM
|
|
|
Gale
Posts: 739
Joined: 4/19/2004
Home base: Murray, KY
Status: offline
|
Clayton, 26 weeks was a very long time to be working in a disaster created sitting but I am sure you and others feel it was one way to help those affected by disaster.
We will look forward to picking up this subject next month. Twelve years ago when I worked on the first adjuster’s computer and was trying to help him use his DOS package it was clear that property-adjusting software was well behind the development curve of that day. The two issues I initially noticed was the contractor/adjuster turned developer really had little desire to push the envelope after they personally became pleased with the software for inside use and secondly the prices were way too high to encourage the daily use of adjusting software by the typical adjuster.
The major packages that I noticed at that time were Boeckh, Simsol and Xactimate. Boeckh attempted Windows in the early 90’s but it never quite flew it seemed. Xactimate stayed DOS until Xactimate 97 and Simsol had an early Windows version in the same window of time. In many ways adjusting software is a miracle because it is such a niche market and had not there been for CAT adjusters working off-season on their software packages there may still not be property claims software today. There must of have been 25+ packages that actually were named and marketed to some extent and many more started but never rolled out commercially.
You are correct now is the time to enhance its’ integrity and usage so that more software is properly being used in the claims handling process. In your first post you mentioned how it seemed many new adjusters or adjusters new to software were using our software and that is the case. We have built our customer base to a successful level since 1998 and even today 85-90% of our user base was not using any adjusting software prior to going with us. An example is that we have over 1000 first time adjusting software users from just two of our carrier accounts. While it is only an estimation there is reason to believe there is at least another 19,000 staff property adjusters who still do not have access to adjusting software. Until adjusting software usage moves from the 50% range up to more like the 85% range I question there will be any great convention of usage developing. Getting usage up to the 85% mark is our first objective and might help some to understand our long termed pricing strategy. Once usage is higher the more the current prevailing prices will fall for all property claims handling solutions. I expect $5 per claim file will cover all software, file transfers and storage fees in not the so distance future. Look what happened to long distance rates once the natural marketing forces were permitted to marry with technology. The landscape of players changed seemingly over night but service improved with the noise of falling prices being the norm.
Clayton your point on the need for stricter conventions of usage is so on point and the lack of it today defeats to a large extent the advantage of data mining of property claims data. It is my view if you have 1000 adjusters in the same carrier but each has developed his or her own conventions of usage because most are still effectively self trained then the validity of certain aspects of the management reports created from this data has to be questioned. While clearly accurate reference prices and the easy of use are important factors from my point of view yet the lack of consistent ability to scope by this 1000 adjusters can totally skew the data to the point of being of little use to management it would seem. That is the key element (creating a correct scope) that today’s and perhaps tomorrow’s adjusting software just can’t do.
In auto software one can know how many bundles of wiring will have to be removed and reconnected to remove and replace parts x,y and z but that will never be the case with stick built homes or commercial construction. As long as some adjusters who are adjusting property losses are guessing at the scope of loss and praying the claim stays close the validity of the data mined from this data will be skewed in accuracy it seems. While a carrier can determine the average cost of losses he or she will have a hard time to use the data to deal with severity on a claim-by-claim bases it would seem to me if the scope of loss is the tail that wags the dog. Perhaps I do not really understand severity?
After you get back to where it is air-conditioned :) we will look forward to reading your thoughts on how estimating software’s integrity and conventions of usage can be improved to make its usage more valuable to the carriers.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: How do the vendors stack up? - 3/17/2005 8:36:01 AM
|
|
|
Gustbuster
Posts: 10
Joined: 1/16/2005
Status: offline
|
I believe an estimate Wizard for newbees could help alot. If there were a checkbox in the software that could be turned on or off that would cause a "Wizard" to appear after an estimate was completed that would evaluate the items entered, then it may help to solve some of the issues of scope. e.g., If a roof scope entered that had merely "Remove and replace shingles" was entered, the Wizard would come back and ask "Is it possible that edge metal, valley metal, steep pitch, etc could apply? or in a room where base was replaced it might ask, is it possible the base might require painting, or is it possible the door trim or doors may require painting as a result of the base being painted. The wizard could be configured to the individual carriers criteria. For instance, in the cat i am currently working, we allow labor hours for clean up of roofing or painting. The wizard could identify the lack of the clean up hours after the line item for painting was entered. Perhaps, even further, it could help seasoned adjusters write there estimates by leaving the wizard on and allowing us to write the major items in the estimate and then when the wizard suggests other items, merely put check marks to allow those items to be included. This would be a very simple addition to any of the software packages available.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: How do the vendors stack up? - 3/17/2005 9:59:55 AM
|
|
|
JimF
Posts: 1323
Joined: 4/19/2004
Status: offline
|
Lest anyone wonder why cat adjusting and the quality of cat adjusters has gone to hell?
*************************************************************************
FOOMCBASL (Falling Out Of My Chair Busting A Spleen Laughing)
< Message edited by JimF -- 3/17/2005 11:11:38 AM >
|
|
|
|
|
RE: How do the vendors stack up? - 3/17/2005 10:41:34 AM
|
|
|
CCarr
Posts: 288
Joined: 4/19/2004
Home base: Toronto, Ontario
Status: offline
|
James, your comment doesn't do much to encourage dialogue.
The fundamental underlying problems with the cat claim industry have been identified over and over again.
Solutions can come from a number of directions to improve the product of the industry
If estimating software vendors move quicker than cat claim vendors to improve their products towards helping to achieve a better end product by the user; it will contribute towards the goal.
I happen to believe that there is some merit in the concept of an 'estimating wizard' considering the big picture. If Microsoft and others see the need and benefit of 'wizards' to help and guide the usage of their portfolio of software; there has to be merit in it.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: How do the vendors stack up? - 3/17/2005 10:58:10 AM
|
|
|
JimF
Posts: 1323
Joined: 4/19/2004
Status: offline
|
Clayton, let's be honest here: Gale sells (leases) estimating software and the more he sells and leases his product the more money he and his company makes. So, he is driven most of all by his bottom line. If Gale could figure out a way to sell his product to high school students or even elementary students, likely he would. Capitalism: It's the American way.
I have a friend who sells dynamite for a living. He however is highly restricted in to whom he can sell his products. His purchasers must not only be licensed in order to use his product but have a degree of experience before his company will provide access to a product which can do both incredible good or unbelievable harm, depending on the user.
If my friend sold or allowed access to his dangerous product to someone without license or experience and then horrible damage occurred, he would be held accountable and likely pay out large sums in legal expenses and damages. The liability in harming others would be clear. That is as it should be, and perhaps, consideration should be given to extending the same liability requirements to software vendors providing their product to similar incompetents.
A stick of dynamite in the wrong hands could clearly cause tens of thousands of dollars of damage to a homeowner's residence. Estimating software in the hands of a brand new just off the farm "adjuster" on their first hurricane assignment could cause even greater financial damages to that same homeowner; even far greater than the amount of damage caused by one stick of dynamite. Now isn't that a blast?
So Gale can sell a product which can either cause great harm or good, and which in the wrong hands can cause more monetary damage than a stick of dynamite, yet we restrict the sale and access to dynamite while then continuing to freely make available estimating software to individuals with even less capacity to properly handle it than some of those high school kids we would never trust with access to dynamite.
Perhaps the first step in having a Estimate Wizard for Newbees might be if the estimating program asked the question: "Do you really have enough sense, experience and training to be seriously using this software to adjust claims"?
And if anyone around here ever really believes that there will be price or estimating consistency or conventions and standards of usage in estimating software, then I have some ocean front property out in Arizona I want to sell them. If you want standardization in this industry, then start by standardizing the standards for who can be an adjuster and be called an adjuster before you start tinkering with the software. Can you imagine the explosion of anger and resistance that insisting on a standardization that requires adjusters to really be adjusters might cause?
The estimating software is the least part of the problem we have in continuing to see this (cat) claims industry going straight to hell.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: How do the vendors stack up? - 3/17/2005 11:40:16 AM
|
|
|
johnpostava
Posts: 170
Joined: 4/19/2004
Home base: Orlando, FL
Status: offline
|
Thanks for all the great comments from all the adjusters on this thread. Our software has contained Wizards for as long as I can remember. We first put them in for only flood claims because adjusters simple did not handle enough of them to become good at it. Our software's "little reminders" helped them to not make mistakes when estimating claims for NFIP and WYO carriers. We then expanded the Wizard concept to all types of claims in our "Inside Adjuster" version because typically inside or desk adjusters are not field adjusters and need help estimating over the phone (small losses). Our carriers that are using both our outside and inside systems now want the Wizard capabilities they see in the inside system now in the field or outisde system. I have to agree with them.
Adjusters don't read their estimates anymore. They enter data in the computer, print it out and submit it. We are increasingly seeing stupid mistakes across my examining desks. It the adjuster would just READ the estimate, we would not have to kick them back to be redone. And, these adjusters make the same simple (stupid) misktakes over and over again. So we are adding wizards or internal audit controls to our next release. This, dumbing down, of the software is needed. Sorry to say. Seasoned adjusters will never see the warning prompts because they are doing it right! Less qualified adjusters will see the pop-up warnings much more often until they finally "get it".
Keep the comments comming. I am sure Gale, the silent readers at Xact and MSB and myself are enjoying them.
_____________________________
John A. Postava, R.P.A.
President
SIMSOL Software, Inc.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: How do the vendors stack up? - 3/17/2005 11:46:23 AM
|
|
|
CCarr
Posts: 288
Joined: 4/19/2004
Home base: Toronto, Ontario
Status: offline
|
Good illustration Jim, but I don't share your emphatic conclusion noted in your last paragraph.
However, you raise another issue that is worthy of consideration - software certification.
Many, too many, carriers - State farm, Farmers, USAA - just to name a few require adjusters to have their "certification" before being assigned their claims. That "certification" process and its "meat" varies greatly between carriers not only in its agenda but as well in its end interpretation of its real significance and certainly relevance.
If software vendors chose to create and implement a user certification program for their product before releasing it (sell / lease) to a claims handler / adjuster; it would be a positive step towards the improvement goals. I recognize the "politics" involved in such a step, but carrier pressure for such a program or cat vendor encouragement / lobby for such a program would move that process along.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: How do the vendors stack up? - 3/17/2005 12:24:34 PM
|
|
|
Johnd
Posts: 249
Joined: 4/19/2004
Status: offline
|
Software Certification???????
How about adjuster certification.... Actually software is just a tool for an adjuster to use to present a product (estimate) to the "retaining" company. How about this.... if an adjuster cannot hand write an estimate, which requires common sense and knowledge of craft, then they should not be allowed to participate in the adjusting of claims, which so significantly effect the lifestyle of so many insureds.
If you have a drivers license and an extra $150K to purchase a race car will they allow you to "get on the track" and risk your life and the wellbeing of others???? Same with adjustiing and software.
Try as you may, and it seems many are trying, there is no replacement for training, knowledge, and good common sense. Read some of the previous post(s) and you will see why the adjusting occupation is in such a state of "distress" from these wizards ideas.
< Message edited by Johnd -- 3/17/2005 1:04:42 PM >
_____________________________
Beauty is only skin deep, BUT incompetence goes clear to the bone!
|
|
|
|
|
RE: How do the vendors stack up? - 3/17/2005 3:42:11 PM
|
|
|
JimF
Posts: 1323
Joined: 4/19/2004
Status: offline
|
Kudos John Durham.
I second your motion that if a so called "adjuster" cannot properly hand write a damage repair estimate, then they have no business being allowed to "adjust" or being allowed anywhere near adjusting software. We might as well be handing these same idiots cases of dynamite and a box of matches.
Your suggestion would overnight rid this industry of at least the warm bodies who think and call themselves adjusters. And that would comprise 80 percent or more of the total cat adjusting corps. And until we do that, we simply are driving the insurance carriers to seek alternative means of eliminating our services while attracting the attention of regulators disgusted with the way in which the public is being fleeced.
Every "real adjuster" here and out there should share the same disgrace, disgust and shame with what was perpetrated on the good people of Florida last year not be the few, but by the many. Clearly more than a majority of the warm bodies sent there to "adjust" claims by claims vendors were incompetent and hardly worthy of being described as adjusters. To think otherwise is to continue a dangerous myth lorded on an unsuspecting public by insurance carriers and vendors who knowingly, willingly and obviously don't give a tinker's whit about quality service and professionalism. It's nothing short of an absolute disgrace and I for one, am absolutely ashamed of our and our industry's collective lack of appropriate response.
What happened in Florida in 2004 to insureds is nothing less than a fraud of the highest order. And a high level conspiracy exists where the insurance carriers, claims vendors, and software providers all know that this industry continues to send out untrained, unskilled, incompetent derelicts who have no business being allowed to continue to harm these innocent insureds.
Adjuster incompetence and the resulting fraud is the dirty little, and increasingly, not so well hidden secret of the cat adjusting and insurance industry. And I for one say, that sooner or later it is going to catch up with all of us, and we are all going to pay one hell of a price. And the sooner the better.
Incompetent, unskilled, untrained and unethical cat adjusters, claims vendors and insurance carriers grabbed the money and ran home and left the good people of Florida all covered up with and mired down in nothing less than horse manure and bull droppings. These Florida citizens didn't and don't enjoy the smell and it should be equally offensive to our own noses. These poor folks down there certainly deserved better than that in my humble opinion. Perhaps Tom Gallagher was right all along about how horribly his citizens were treated by the one group who should have been professional and should have cared.
< Message edited by JimF -- 3/17/2005 5:31:02 PM >
|
|
|
|
|
RE: How do the vendors stack up? - 3/17/2005 5:12:01 PM
|
|
|
trader
Posts: 1203
Joined: 4/19/2004
Home base: Houston, TX
Status: offline
|
Catastrophe adjusters who climb on roofs and under houses will be gone in 2-4 years.
The claims will be handled by field inspectors with specific duties on what to do and look for. The inspectors then will send the data and photos back to the home base and old timers will check the "scopes", photos then write the "sheet", call the insured and advise the sheet and check is in the mail, please show it to your contractor and call us back with any questions... I think 80% of the claims handled in this manner will stay closed.
Over 50% of the complex claims in Florida stayed closed that were submitted by new "sdjusters" How much training is necessary to train a person to measure a roof, draw a diagram, shot a front elevation photo, 10-15 long and close up photos on a comp roof with baseball size hail, a photo of each room that has a ceiling stain
and go back to the auto and email this data to the scope supervisor who has the power and auth. to pay the loss as described in paragraph above?
< Message edited by trader -- 3/17/2005 9:27:14 PM >
|
|
|
|
|
RE: How do the vendors stack up? - 3/17/2005 7:15:06 PM
|
|
|
Johnd
Posts: 249
Joined: 4/19/2004
Status: offline
|
>>>> CLARIFICATION <<<<
In my post, above, I mentioned "wizards". This was NOT directed toward John Postava, who has "wizards" in his software. John is a true Gentleman, and is a shining example of everything that is RIGHT with the adjusting industry. AND, IMHO John has one of the best and most comprehensive software programs on the market.
Just wanted to clarify my statement.
_____________________________
Beauty is only skin deep, BUT incompetence goes clear to the bone!
|
|
|
|
|
RE: How do the vendors stack up? - 3/17/2005 8:17:39 PM
|
|
|
Gale
Posts: 739
Joined: 4/19/2004
Home base: Murray, KY
Status: offline
|
Johnd is right perhaps. I have always said and always will stay a person should be required to take their driving test in a car with a manual shift transmission. If we do not get technology squashed and squashed fast in all sectors of our lives we are going to be in a world of hurt. Having to put that orange triangle thang on the back of the buggy perhaps is really pushing the envelope. 
< Message edited by Gale -- 3/18/2005 12:02:38 PM >
|
|
|
|
|
RE: How do the vendors stack up? - 3/17/2005 8:37:55 PM
|
|
|
JimF
Posts: 1323
Joined: 4/19/2004
Status: offline
|
Putting the latest technology (including estimating software such as PowerClaim) in the hands of an individual with no training or experience in estimating and insurance is no more akin to creating an adjuster than handing the same individual a stethoscope and blood pressure cuff and then calling them a doctor and allowing them to practice medicine on humans. The latter would be considered a crime and the former should be.
Estimating software in the hands of the incompetent merely makes the incompetent more efficient and productive in their incompetency and allows them to do more damage faster than if they were 'unarmed' without such technology.
If technology and software estimating programs were indeed the answer to all of our problems in claims adjusting, then there would not be horror story after horror story after horror story coming out of Florida from the clean up crews and carrier examiners about the initial adjuster estimates having to be increased by more than ten fold to adequately and accurately assess and reflect the actual real damages.
Real adjusters don't turn in nor get paid for submitting $25,000.00 computer generated estimates for insured losses in the $300,000.00 to $400,000.00 range. Gale, I would hope that you would personally feel the same shame, disgrace and disgust that many of us here feel about such incompetent and fraudulent actions taken by the larger majority of so called "adjusters" to the detriment of innocent Florida insureds.
Gale, we should all be downright ashamed of what has happened in Florida in 2004. And estimating software in the hands of the incompetent played no small role in this shameful fiasco whether you want to accept any personal responsibility or not.
If our industry can't or won't not step up to the plate and accept responsibility for this incompetency, then may the state legislatures and insurance commisioner regulators step in with all godspeed to protect those suffering insureds who surely deserve better than we have and continue to give them: fraud and incompetence.
< Message edited by JimF -- 3/17/2005 8:59:43 PM >
|
|
|
|
|
RE: How do the vendors stack up? - 3/17/2005 9:23:10 PM
|
|
|
Gale
Posts: 739
Joined: 4/19/2004
Home base: Murray, KY
Status: offline
|
Jim, to be as smart as you are why do you struggle so with the concept of CAT adjusting? Look at CAT adjusting more as triage if you will?
In triage it is not about how pretty the bandage is but that it stops the bleeding ASAP is what counts to the person bleeding to death. So what if the adjuster is weak in policy at first but he or she helps the insured gets an advanced payment for damages so they can do basic repairs or even board up windows for example so they can stay in the house and protect what they have left. Maybe the adjuster is only initially sharp enough to get homeowners their additional living expense check as due per the policy so they can get food and shelter for their family but what is so evil about that in your mind?
While you may not have been a CAT adjuster pumped out overnight many were and this is sure to be repeated, as you know very well will be the case every time a 4 in 04 type situation develops in the future. I am willing to bet I could find one or more vendors that had new adjusters they pumped out in 04 that ended up doing the quality of work of CAT adjusters that have been in the field annually for the past 5 years.
If you agree new adjusters will be pumped out in every major event why do you prefer they be tied up learning less friendly adjusting software usage so as to needlessly slow them down instead of learning policy coverage? If most learn policy coverage’s in practice would not logic dictate the quicker they start turning in files the faster they get to learning. Will not the state insurance commissioners demand an "adjuster" to call on the policyholders in a certain time period?
Would not Trader's thoughts be a possible solution to your concerns?
|
|
|
|
|
RE: How do the vendors stack up? - 3/17/2005 9:44:20 PM
|
|
|
olderthendirt
Posts: 570
Joined: 4/19/2004
Home base: homeless
Status: offline
|
I just want to see the faces of the instant adjusters when they roar off to their first hail cat and see the real fee schedules.
_____________________________
Still sliding down the razor blade of life
|
|
|
|
!! 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.
0.188
|
Printable Version
