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? - 3/20/2005 10:52:38 PM
|
|
|
Gale
Posts: 739
Joined: 4/19/2004
Home base: Murray, KY
Status: offline
|
Thanks Beth. I sure hope they get out of those trailers this summer. Is it true some that were making payments on their homes but had to stop because of other storm related expenses will be foreclosed on as soon as the damages are repairs because they have defaulted on their loans during this time.
This week we will be attending a conference that a flood vendor is sponsoring. One day of it is NFIP training and then the next afternoon we have a part in the technology training time so we are hoping to learn more as we get to hear the software needs from both sides of the coin. While our software has contained the actual NFIP forms since 1999 we this winter have been improving and adding features requested by some adjusting vendors who found themselves in need of more software choices that were geared to handle flood claims and print out the actual completed NFIP reports on the latest revision NFIP dated forms. The fools/angels saying comes to my mind. :)
|
|
|
|
|
RE: How do the vendors stack up? - 3/21/2005 3:34:46 PM
|
|
|
PeterSmith
Posts: 3
Joined: 3/21/2005
Status: offline
|
Hello All,
(new to posting, not to the forums or the business)
Simsol - This is a fine program, but seems to be a little behind newer things. I would consider this an aging product
Powerclaim - I only tried out PowerClaim, it was buggy and flawed. I guess one reason why it is so much cheaper is because they don't have anybody who really understands adjusting, and apparently lacking in good programmers too. However, their support was superb. Question: Would you perfer good support, or a product that doesn't require support?
Integriclaim - Fantastic!! However, before jumping in on them I would like to see what MDA is going to do with this section of MSB. However, if MDA treats this well, I think this is the program to go with.
Xact - I never used; however, from all my friends it seems this was never really intended for us and more for strict construction work and total losses.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: How do the vendors stack up? - 3/21/2005 3:48:17 PM
|
|
|
PeterSmith
Posts: 3
Joined: 3/21/2005
Status: offline
|
Gale,
Seperate from what I think of your product:
I have always considered you and your organization's goals to be inline with the CAT community and the little guy. Fight the good fight, open things up, prevent the control of the carriers by pushing an open standard, etc. However, lately, I have grown concern. I have never said anything to anyone about my views on your product; because, I thought it would grow to become better, and with what I thought your view points were, when it became better, it would be good for us. As you can see I broke my silence.
"The only point to using adjusting software in the first place is to make the carriers more profitable" - Gale
It seems you have seen the gold.
"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?" - Gale
A good adjuster should learn policy first, software second.
I could keep adding quotes, but there is no need. Fact of the matter, you picked up a few smaller carriers and you like the money and now you are going to become like Xactware and MSB, except they are already miles ahead.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: How do the vendors stack up? - 3/22/2005 9:02:20 AM
|
|
|
johnpostava
Posts: 170
Joined: 4/19/2004
Home base: Orlando, FL
Status: offline
|
I have been away from the Forum for a week or so and see that it is prospering in my absence. The thread has morphed into discussions about adjuster competency and away from software. This is a natural progression of this topic, I think.
To paraphrase one of my general adjusters, "More accidents have happened using computers than Tequila and Hand Guns combined!"
I agree with JohnD, adjusters should spend some time hand writing estimates with a 10-key calculator before ever making their first mouse click. However, with only a handful of carriers accepting hand-written estimates, the days of the pen and pencil are going the way of the buggy whip.
Of the thousands of claims we have adjusted during the big 4 in '04, mistakes have been made by new and old adjusters. They may be different types of mistakes (new adjusters trip over policy issues but master the computer, seasoned troopers know the policies like the back of their hands but have some trouble with computer skills). We are human and we all make mistakes and the shear number of property claims (1.4 million) in Florida in '04 mandated that inexperienced (or should I say "yet to be experienced") adjusters were needed to visit with storm victims as soon as possible and afford them at least some level of service (especially by the carriers that tout their claim handling abilities). Mistakes in some percentage of these claims was expected and will be rectified as time goes on.
Spring is the time of year many adjusting vendors put on "adjuster certification" classes (our firm included). Adjusters will be exposed to policies, software, adjusting techniques and better practicies information. If you are new to the business, go to as many as you can. If you have been in the business for some time, go to as many as you can if only to help the new comers learn.
Average adjusters may find all the work they need in some storm events. Good adjusters will always find all the work they need in every storm event. Great adjusters will always find all the work they need in every storm event and train others to follow them in their footsteps after they have gone to the big "closed file" drawer in the sky!
Keep the posts coming....
_____________________________
John A. Postava, R.P.A.
President
SIMSOL Software, Inc.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: How do the vendors stack up? - 3/22/2005 10:32:48 AM
|
|
|
khromas
Posts: 611
Joined: 4/19/2004
Home base: Houston, Texas
Status: offline
|
Since the thread has turned towards the competency side of working with differing software packages, I thought I would offer the following as an example of the pitfalls involved with improperly trained users. (Purposely did NOT say “adjusters”.)
When I started at Allstate back in 1996, they were using a program called AccuPro, put out by Marshall & Swift and the precursor to IntegriClaim. Having come out of a construction background, I was thrilled to have something ‘better’ than the old pen and paper route for estimating damages. The biggest downside to that program was that you had to know EVERY step needed in a repair in order to get all the components in. Example: Painting 1 coat allowed $0.11 per square foot. If you looked at the definition, it explained that it was for painting 1 square foot in the middle of the wall and that was it. You had to add in the functions for removing wall plates, cut-in time, masking, etc. The argument was that the company did not owe for functions that might not be there, which is rightfully so under the terms and principle of the insurance contract. Here is where the issue became cloudy.
The office for the southern half of Texas stretched from Beaumont to El Paso – 880 miles if you go by the mile markers on I-10. That is a massive differential in terms of markets and costs. Most programs are structured to work on a zip code designation to allow for pricing variances with a built in formula to adjust costs. In 1999, the company re-structured the claims department and I was promoted to the position of Quality Evaluator (re-inspector) for the MCO. One of the first things I did was to download about 90 estimates from across the MCO with representative samples from every field adjuster. In those estimates, I targeted 6 different ‘accuracy’ points that each would be graded on. The very basic one of “does the loss zip match with the database zip?” was number 1. Out of the total of 540 target points on those 90 estimates, it was determined that TWO estimates were – ON THEIR FACE – accurate under the terms of the estimating platform, meaning they met all 6 target points. This was in an office with over 50 field adjusters, some with over 20 years experience! The 2 referenced files came from men with a construction background with 3 years at Allstate.
The main point I am trying to make is that there is NO excuse for the lack of proper and extensive training in whatever system you use. You MUST be extremely cognizant of the different idiosyncrasies of a platform and spend a lot of time learning the parameters of the component items. THAT will make you a better estimator! Being a better ADJUSTER takes much more!
_____________________________
Kevin Hromas
_______________________________________
Definition of a LIBERAL: a person who is so open-minded that their brains have fallen out!
|
|
|
|
|
RE: How do the vendors stack up? - 3/22/2005 10:37:56 AM
|
|
|
Medulus
Posts: 367
Joined: 4/19/2004
Home base: Lake Ariel, PA
Status: offline
|
Let me add my two cents worth here, John. And I promise to keep it about the software. I appreciate your analysis, Clayton. Thank you for your considerable attention to detail. I cannot speak to Integra claim, though I have used DDS before it was purchased by MSB and also used Boeckh's for years. DDS was very slick and easy to use, but took longer to input. Beockh's was very adaptable and I could use it with great facility.
Neither can I speak to Powerclaim. I simply have had no occasion to use it yet.
I have used both the State Farm version and regular version of Xactimate. I find it somewhat unwieldy compared to Simsol. With enough use it becomes easier, and many adjusters who use it for a long time start to write their scope notes in Xactimate code. I would consider Xactimate to be primarily a contractor's program. When properly used the adjuster's estimate can look very much like the contractor's estimate of one of the many contractors using this program. This is part of its strength. It is, however, more difficult for an adjuster to use than for a contractor. The cost is also prohibitive for an individual adjuster.
Now, Simsol -- I can make Simsol sing. I can put together a claim file in a fraction of the time it takes on Xactimate. This has been my primary program for the last three years (two on ASU staff and a little more than one year back on my own). I have custom reports and letters I designed that speed up the claim handling, not to mention standard depreciation tables and macros that speed things up considerably. When I put together a package of materials to close a claim (either printing it out or sending it as a pdf file) it looks professional and makes me look good. I had an assignment last year where I spent the first month using Xactware then switched over to Simsol. My production went up 25 to 30% immediately due to the change in software. The ease with which one can include photos, reports, letters, activity logs, and building valuations in the claim is superior to any other program I have used. Also, the cost for this program with the CADO discount is very competitive.
That being said, and because you said you look for ways to improve your product, here are a couple problems: 1) While it is easy to add a custom report, adding a custom form seems to be very difficult and I have been mystified as to how to accomplish this. 2) All programs have their quirks. A couple of the quirks in Simsol include Scrape and Trowel ceiling or wall texture is spelled Scrape && Trowel. I have to take out the extra apersand everytime I use the item. The aluminum gutter price is almost always too high and some roof types - such as architectural shingle - too low for the areas where I have worked. This, of course, requires me to change the pricing on these items to what I know is right for the area. This is not really much of a complaint, however, because I see it as my job as an adjuster to use my knowledge to adjust a claim rather than blindly following the computerized pricing. 3) The good news is that the ability to prepare a building valuation is included with the program and it literally takes minutes to prepare. The bad news is that it radically undervalues replacement costs in certain areas of the country, specifically the northeast. I've had to routinely multiply the building valuation by 1.5 to 2 to arrive at actual new construction costs throughout the New York metro, Boston metro, Connecticut and Massachusetts areas.
I hope this is the type of feedback you were looking for, John. I do like your program and I hope you will continue to offer the CADO discount that makes it affordable.
_____________________________
Steve Ebner
"With great power comes great responsibility." (Stanley Lieber, Amazing Fantasy # 15 August 1962)
|
|
|
|
|
RE: How do the vendors stack up? - 3/22/2005 12:41:46 PM
|
|
|
PeterSmith
Posts: 3
Joined: 3/21/2005
Status: offline
|
This debate is like beating a dead horse. Let me simply sum up what we already know in a few phrases and examples.
"Technology needs no expertise."
"Knowledge is a dangerous thing, a little knowledge is a very dangerous thing."
Because of adjusting programs more people can enter the adjusting industry quickly and the claims can be handled quicker. Producing better service. - Good Thing.
However, this technology brings new problems.
1. Destruction - with data files held on computers, an entire adjusters work could be wiped out because of power outage, or new internet virus.
2. Abuse - with all this data easily accessed people can feasably hack these systems and
run off with all sorts of critical information. Also this data could be gathered by major companies to give them an edge, while screwing everyone else. This data could also be sold.
3. User Error - with the use of computers and the spead a new set of errors develope even in experienced adjusters. A person could simply write a macro wrong and accidently copy something only once instead of three times and miss it.
4. Liability - software always has limitations on what you can and can not do. While freeing you in many ways, it restricts you in others. A program might have some restriction that a person never notices until they need too. I remember when trying out PowerClaim that the dates and the disclaimer sections didn't hold to a claim. This was one of the many flaws I saw with that program, not to say others don't have problems of their own. Now, your work might be called into question this could be a big problem.
5. Incompetence - a given, people now can start producing work by following the lead of the technology and ultimately produce faulty work.
------------------------------
What actually really bothers me is some of the software packages out there.
Most of these products are actually pretty lousy. They don't do anything more then what I can do in Microsoft Word. I can organize, add photos, drawings, documents of everytype, copy, and maintain a list for database. A smaller carrier could easily handle managing claims with a shared computer, a folder, and a windows logon. The only systems I see even worth the money are these new web applications and they are nice for those big boys for easy management, quality, and so on. T
So why pay 1000 dollars for something that often comes free with your computer.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: How do the vendors stack up? - 3/22/2005 1:34:12 PM
|
|
|
Gale
Posts: 739
Joined: 4/19/2004
Home base: Murray, KY
Status: offline
|
Jim, I like your $1000 question but still looking for the answer.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: How do the vendors stack up? - 3/22/2005 1:52:07 PM
|
|
|
johnpostava
Posts: 170
Joined: 4/19/2004
Home base: Orlando, FL
Status: offline
|
Steve, thanks for the kind words, comments, pet peeves and suggestions - I have sent copies of your post to the right people at my shop.
How about some feedback on all the "hoopla" over one big carrier's most recent demand that all adjusters "sketch" the loss so the estimate is generated from, hopefully, an accurate and detailed "sketch" (you all know the software vendor behind this one). Sounds like contractors are not trying to tell adjusters how to prepare their estimates and document their files.
Let me hear the pros and cons on this one because in my 25 years in this crazy business (soley as an adjuster) the "sketch" (aka. diagram) always followed the estimate almost as an afterthought (we are adjusters afterall, not architects or contractors who benefit more from this additional work).
I understand that the carrier pays the adjuster fee and if they want a sketch they get a sketch but honestly, IMHO, adjuster files need only rough diagrams to explain the loss, not to-the-inch, works of art that generate an estimate. Those of you that use this brand of software, is it more of a "bug" or a "can-not-do-without" feature? Adjusters only please respond.
_____________________________
John A. Postava, R.P.A.
President
SIMSOL Software, Inc.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: How do the vendors stack up? - 3/22/2005 3:52:52 PM
|
|
|
trader
Posts: 1203
Joined: 4/19/2004
Home base: Houston, TX
Status: offline
|
Im trying to fade away... but Johns question leads us to the same conclusion, field inspectors will do the field and adjusters will approve thier work, from the office or home.
1. Accurate diagrams to scale.
2. Accurate scope notes
3. Photos to back up both. will be sent in, by 10 inspectors, who inspect 150 to 200 per day, two adjusters will approve the 3 documents and send to the computer persons to input and print the 150 to 200 per day which will require about 4 persons.Employee who works on the file will get paid $20.00 per file and the adjusters will get $40.00 per file.
A file that is closed for $80.00 total direct cost. Ten 16 person teams could close 2,000 per day. The standard today is 6 good files per day x 16 = 960 closed file the old way. You would only need one half as many warm bodys and the carriers would get a more consistant product at about the 1/3 to 1/4 of the present fee schedules.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: How do the vendors stack up? - 3/22/2005 6:38:31 PM
|
|
|
Medulus
Posts: 367
Joined: 4/19/2004
Home base: Lake Ariel, PA
Status: offline
|
Trader,
This idea doesn't even sound good on paper, let alone in implementation. There are weeks I have trouble getting enough claim assignments to keep little ole me busy, let alone a 16 person team. This type of idea would only work for the very largest Cat events and would be an administrative nightmare under catastrophic circumstances. -- my humble opinion.
_____________________________
Steve Ebner
"With great power comes great responsibility." (Stanley Lieber, Amazing Fantasy # 15 August 1962)
|
|
|
|
|
RE: How do the vendors stack up? - 3/22/2005 8:07:27 PM
|
|
|
trader
Posts: 1203
Joined: 4/19/2004
Home base: Houston, TX
Status: offline
|
Steve: I have great respect for you as a person and adjuster , just from reading your post over the years.
We all must face the bottom line facts. The way its done now will and is being changed, and some large or small vendor will roll at some variation this year.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: How do the vendors stack up? - 3/23/2005 8:42:46 AM
|
|
|
okclarryd
Posts: 616
Joined: 4/19/2004
Home base: Oklahoma City, Ok
Status: offline
|
John,
Reference the "sketch" or diagram of the house, building, property or whatever, I provide accurate "sketches" as part of my file. Not works of art or a blueprint but a "sketch". It represents the general layout and proportions but the measurements are accurate. If the file reviewer or manager or whoever has a question regarding anything about the general relationship, it's gonna be on that sketch or diagram. This seems to work especially well on fences as I can identify the damaged areas.
_____________________________
LARRY D HARDIN
|
|
|
|
|
RE: How do the vendors stack up? - 3/23/2005 10:38:58 AM
|
|
|
Medulus
Posts: 367
Joined: 4/19/2004
Home base: Lake Ariel, PA
Status: offline
|
John,
I can only guess which carrier wants the diagram to generate the estimate, but my guess would probably be right. The real point, however, is whether this is a feature one can or cannot do without. Now, I get compliments many times on my diagrams. That's because I do my diagrams most often by using Simsol's sketch function. It takes a fraction of the time that hand drawing does and I then present the customer with a printer generated page rather than a hand drawn one. Apparently a great many adjusters, both on staff and independent, are not yet using computer generated diagrams. So, for some, it looks like I am ahead of the curve. Let's hope everyone doesn't get technology-happy when they finally discover that all diagrams don't have to be drawn by hand and want a diagram of everything.
I have found doing the diagram first and attempting to generate the estimate from it to be far too time consuming to be practical. If I have to do it for an assignment, I will do it like everyone else. Hopefully I will also be paid enough to make the extra effort worthwhile (doubtful). But I won't like it and I hope no other carriers follow suit. Not every room needs to be sketched. What, for instance, is the use of drawing a bedroom that is, for example, 11'3" x 12'7" with no offsets when the measurements are already on the estimate? It simply shows my ability to draw a rectangle. When I worked for Nationwide they had an interesting way to review a file. They "dinged" my file more heavily if I did something I didn't have to do than they would have if I didn't do something I should. Efficiency is important in our business, very important when thousands need us to adjust their claims after a catastrophe. If anyone were to ask me (which none of the carriers will, admittedly), I would say keep it simple, do what needs to be done rather than running a checklist of requirements, and diagramming every room, elevation, closet, flagpole and silo is hardly worth the time and energy when the insured just wants their insurance company to deliver on their promise and provide money to get them started on the road to recovering from a disaster.
_____________________________
Steve Ebner
"With great power comes great responsibility." (Stanley Lieber, Amazing Fantasy # 15 August 1962)
|
|
|
|
|
RE: How do the vendors stack up? - 3/23/2005 2:38:17 PM
|
|
|
johnpostava
Posts: 170
Joined: 4/19/2004
Home base: Orlando, FL
Status: offline
|
I do agree that accurate diagrams show examiners how one room in a home relates to another. For example, in a partial fire loss one would expect to see decreasing amounts of damage as one move further and further from where the fire started or, with roof diagrams, show the direction of the wind/hail to explain why some slopes sustained damage and others did not.
The ability to draw professional floorplans, roofs, elevations does enhance the look of a claim file. Because I examine storm files almost on a daily basis, it comes as no surprise to me that if I see a file with a good looking diagram, most likely the estimate and all other documentation in that file is also top notch. Just another indicator (to me) that the preparer of the file (aka Adjuster), knows his or her stuff.
As a software vendor, I greatly dislike having our users enter data more than once (especially in the same claim) and if a user takes the time to enter room, offset, closet measurements in their diagram (sketch), that data should be transferrable to the estimate - or at least on a limited basis.
In the next release of SIMSOL we have greatly enhanced our drawing module and added some interaction and sharing of information between our new drawing module and the estimator. Ironically, most of our new drawing enhancements originated from discussions with a client of one of our competitors! For those adjusters who use our software, I hope they like the changes.
Thanks for listening. Adjust 'til ya' bust!
_____________________________
John A. Postava, R.P.A.
President
SIMSOL Software, Inc.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: How do the vendors stack up? - 3/23/2005 7:54:14 PM
|
|
|
JimF
Posts: 1323
Joined: 4/19/2004
Status: offline
|
John, Thanks for the update and valuable information. When can we SIMSOL users expect to see the new update?
|
|
|
|
|
RE: How do the vendors stack up? - 3/24/2005 9:41:19 PM
|
|
|
Gale
Posts: 739
Joined: 4/19/2004
Home base: Murray, KY
Status: offline
|
It would seem that the more information the file reviewer has the better it would be. A file that includes a diagram that communicated the most pertinent information possible would seem a plus on the current lost and future losses at that property. Since certain types of losses, especially flood which can be repetitive in nature at the same property the more info the carrier has on file that relates to that risk it would seem to me to be a positive thing. This would also help enable Trader’s view of the future become a reality faster. With the event of at least 50% of staff adjusters now having access to adjusting software it permits the creation of a digital record of each loss so I suspect the we will see more and more ability to profile a risk in an informed way. Even if CAT adjusters handle less than 5% of the property claims in the US their claims file data should be meaningful to a carrier if correctly interpreted. Maybe Clayton will get his tan perfected soon and pick up where he left off. 
|
|
|
|
|
RE: How do the vendors stack up? - 3/24/2005 11:46:19 PM
|
|
|
trader
Posts: 1203
Joined: 4/19/2004
Home base: Houston, TX
Status: offline
|
Does this sound like an inspection in the field ? Underwriters request a vehicle be inspected at a body shop, and email the photos to thier TPA,s office in another state?
The photo,s will verify if the submitted PD estimate of $2,200 is in line.
The answer is if you send out the owner, the EGA or the trainee, all the fee bill will stand is a flat $62.50. The real daily claims world.
< Message edited by trader -- 3/25/2005 8:58:58 AM >
|
|
|
|
|
RE: How do the vendors stack up? - 4/5/2005 12:08:43 AM
|
|
|
Gale
Posts: 739
Joined: 4/19/2004
Home base: Murray, KY
Status: offline
|
Clayton, how are your travels? Back to the home front yet?
|
|
|
|
|
RE: How do the vendors stack up? - 4/5/2005 8:56:15 AM
|
|
|
CCarr
Posts: 288
Joined: 4/19/2004
Home base: Toronto, Ontario
Status: offline
|
Hello Gale, I've been home - in, out and back again - for almost 2 weeks now; occasionally looking into CADO as a 'guest'.
I met a variety of claims people in late March while generally heading slowly northbound, discussing many negative issues that surfaced since August; and how (perhaps) to avoid or help prevent the reoccurrence of those issues.
As is evidenced from the CADO forums, the issues and problems are both many and varied.However, it seems that technology surfaces as a critical component to correct or improve many areas of cat adjusting; both from the vendor and carrier sides of the table.
Technology of course equates usually to software, whether in a 'mechanical' behind the scenes role or as a functional tool for project completion - be that project the completion of a damage estimate, or the full circle of the life of a 'claim', or as a management tool for a vendor or carrier.
When time permits, I'd like to isolate the issues identified in this thread and give them further consideration.
In the meantime, I leave you and others with another question or concept.
We know there are vendors who only allow one brand of estimating software to be used by their field people - whether by their choice or that of their carrier client. I do see merit in that from a management perspective, notwithstanding the ability of XML technology to allow multiple platforms.
Is there, where the above scenario does not exist, "management software" for a brand of estimating software? That is, is there a management module of a estimating software brand that a carrier or vendor can use to import an adjuster report and estimate, where that management module would (quicker and more accurate than a manual review of the estimate) identify scope (estimate item) or pricing anomolies outside of 'standards'? Hence, allowing for vendor or carrier corrections or revisions online of missed, duplicated or otherwise incorrect estimate items; and / or incorrect pricing.
I recognize the common ability of uploading an adjuster's estimate - when using the same platform - and being able to create revisions after a manual review. The key is the management module to automate and create standard protocols of that process.
|
|
|
|
!! 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.
0.187
|
Printable Version
