| Author |
 Topic  |
|
rr
USA
45 Posts |
 Posted - 05/02/2003 : 16:39:07
|
Please let me know your thinking on this.
Say a small independent landed a contract for some storm work. Contact with 3 mutual companies and they want rock bottom prices to handle wind and hail only with very little bells and whistles involved.
It does include the standard with an easy R/C on the building.
I for one hate the companies that undercut the fee bill leaving no room for the claims adjuster.
As the adjuster can you live with 60 % bottom line of the following for wind and hail?
$0-$5000 $245.00
$5001-$10,000 $350.00
Period ! This includes mileage, photos, telephone etc.
Is this too cheap????
Thank you
Ron
rr
|
|
|
John McMennamy
USA
20 Posts |
Posted - 05/02/2003 : 17:48:20
|
How hungry are you Ron. If they do not want long log notes, many photos, the claims are local and close and the calls are local. That may not be a great deal, but it may be alright. I've been on storms with very little damage in the area assigned to me. Billing was base and less than what you quoted. Then the vender took 60%. $245 in hand is better than being on stand by and waiting. You did not say if you were working through a vender. Three claims a day would make you $735 perday. 6 claims per day would make you $1470 per day. What did you do before you got into adjusting that made you that kind of money? It's your call Ron. Good luck. Johnny Mac
|
 |
|
|
olderthendirt
USA
370 Posts |
Posted - 05/02/2003 : 18:21:35
|
| It take that the $245 is the gross fee. Adjuster would get $147. Define little bells and whistles. Hand written or program of choice on estimating? No more then 4 photos. Log notes? Any other forms. Are the files scattered? It still sounds better then sitting at home watching cnn. |
|
|
|
roger clary
USA
1 Posts |
Posted - 05/02/2003 : 21:08:55
|
| Exactly, what would be required? 60% is hard to live with! Especially 60% of a minimal schedule. Then you take away the photos, like now we have digital we should give them away!!!!! Rooms aren't getting cheaper, food isn't getting cheaper, gas (well it's getting a little cheaper than a month ago) isn't getting any cheaper, equipment isn't getting any cheaper ( and more of it), so when the overhead is taken out of $147.00 that dosen't leave much does it. I remember back years ago when we worked Farmers claims, there were no photos, only an estimate, minimnal diagram, small billing sheet & nothing more. Guess those days are gone for good. Wonder if soon we will be also???? |
|
|
|
CCarr
Canada
1200 Posts |
Posted - 05/02/2003 : 21:43:25
|
Roger's last line kind of chimes pretty clear, at least it is in tune with what I have been humming for some time.
Ron, in your opening post, the "small independent" (vendor) did what he had to do, in his best beliefs, to get the contract you mention.
On the $245 gross - you get $147 for all your required efforts, and he gets $98 for his marketing efforts and supervision of your efforts and management of the overall 'gig'. We have beat that to a near death (with words only) in other forums, in months gone by.
"Too cheap?", that is only a call you can make as the offer is on your plate; and measure it by your specific immediate past, present and anticipated near future.
Be it right or wrong, you are merely filling a "slot", if it is not a 'Ron', it will surely be someone else behind you; should you pass. |
|
|
|
Tom Toll
USA
154 Posts |
Posted - 05/02/2003 : 21:55:53
|
There are too many variables with this question. We need to know more facts before an intelligent answer or comment can be made. How may photos and do they pay extra for them. Any milage involved. How much paper work. What kind of roofs will be inspected, normal or Dallas maze roofs that are as steep as Kilamenjaro and as dangerous. Do you get agreement with insured or a roofer? In order to make a decent living, at $147.00 per pop, you would have to inspect at minimum, 6 to 7 per day. If they are Dallas mazes, you are lucky to inspect 4 to 5 and thats pushing it. Dallas Texas is not a good place to inspect hail damaged roofs. The folks are smart, the roofer are P.A's and adjusters, and the companies are constantly changing procedure. Just my two cents worth!
|
|
|
|
scottposton
USA
28 Posts |
Posted - 09/22/2003 : 01:19:38
|
| Here may lay the answer to most of the problems we all seem to have. What we need is an orginazation that can market our services for us (the guys and gals doing the work). We can always reverse the game and cut the vendors out of the loop. Make ourselves more money and save the insurers some while we are at it. I'd be glad to pay a small percentage of my overall work for a service that could keep me busy and pay me for my experience and professional ability. |
|
|
|
CCarr
Canada
1200 Posts |
Posted - 09/22/2003 : 06:20:58
|
Ghostbuster, rise and shine, there is someone knocking on the "organization's door"!
Yes Scott, we need an organization that can market the services of adjusters.
If we consider the whole basket of issues that surfaced last week, relative to Know Before You Go and other important factors; these are all things that I envision that the organization would focus on throughout the year to attempt to minimize the unknowns.
However, "marketing our services" is one of the premier issues that I see the organization involved in; again as a year round issue. I don't necessarily see the vendor being cut from the loop. But, I do see a mid-term length goal of the organization developing a strong central liaison between vendors and the organization, that would play a strong role in "fitting" the adjuster to a deployment. |
|
|
|
guest_98
USA
17 Posts |
Posted - 09/22/2003 : 09:22:13
|
An organizatios biggest challenge (In my opinion) id the ability to police themselves.
Also a much better rating system would have to be developed, you wouldn't just want all adjusters to be able to be a member and represent your organization. Heck Newbies are much better than bad adjusters.
But for it to fly at all you must be able to show a benefit to the carrier, ???? |
|
|
|
CCarr
Canada
1200 Posts |
Posted - 09/22/2003 : 10:47:13
|
G'buster, look what's happening!
Yes "Guest", it is an organizational challenge to "police" its membership, but the result of that would be a benefit to both the membership and carriers and vendors.
I'm not sure what rating system you are referring to that would have to be "much better". However, a rating or classification system would be a benefit to all involved.
I envision a place within the organization for all those adjusters that meet whatever criteria is established, whether they be newbies or anyone else along the trail as an adjuster with greater acquired skills, training or experience. To accomplish this and incorporate the context of your middle paragraph, that is what I see the attempt at standardizing or categorizing levels of proficiency as doing; as well as the criteria for membership being such that it would not allow whatever "bad" is from soiling the benefits others will see in this group.
Please continue with your thoughts and suggestions. |
|
|
|
scottposton
USA
28 Posts |
Posted - 09/22/2003 : 11:24:48
|
Ccar..I agree with you that Im not sure we will ever cut the vendor out of the loop. But if we utilized a marketing effort contributed to by all who want to participate why should we need the vendors? This is the most basic role they are playing. I guess I should clarify that because I only do auto and I do have a few that actually do a desktop review on your work product. But these are few and far between and once you have worked for them for awhile and build a realationship with them the review process basically comes to an end. They can check all the referenced they like but seeing the ongoing work product and your professionalism is what keeps you working.
Maybe a good solution is a paid organization that once in awhile conducts surveys of the insureds and reviews of your work product would be an effective means of policing the membership. You get enough bad reviews and/or audits and you are gone.
I only say this because a vendor currently take anywhere from 25 to 35 % of the fee and I believe that is alot considering the service they are providing. Just my thoughts and I would love to see others on the subject. |
|
|
|
CCarr
Canada
1200 Posts |
Posted - 09/22/2003 : 12:32:22
|
Scott, planning and development of any plan or goal is always in steps - short range, medium, and long range. Then, each year or so, you look at where you are - whether that be yourself as an independent contractor, an organization, or a large corporate entity - and re-assess the elements of these steps.
In the months past, and this past week, and in the month to come with this storm; we will see and hear of the true colors of many vendors.
In a long range vision I have, perhaps 3 or more years hence, I can see the organization getting directly into a deployment of adjusters role directly with carriers; that step would evolve I think from the organization first getting directly into a deployment of adjusters role with vendors somewhere after our 2nd year of evolution.
I have detailed in the past, in other forums, what I see as the current role of a vendor. Basically and in summary, they are a project manager and facilitator of the claims from a storm event. This is not an impossible task for an organization to perform direct with a carrier or a vendor.
Yes Scott, I certainly agree that part of the ongoing membership criteria and process is the verification from carriers or vendors of satisfactory work and professionalism being performed by the member adjuster.
The 25% to 40% that a vendor takes from a gross fee covers many facets of their organization - overhead, administration, marketing, direct project costs (storm location), and profit. The better they are at managing each of the first four items - the greater their profit would be.
"Our organization", as a not-for-profit entity, would certainly be able to pass this as a benefit onto the member adjuster; measured as a greater percentage of whatever the gross fee is. |
|
|
|
trader
USA
236 Posts |
Posted - 09/22/2003 : 12:44:31
|
My three year predictions: Vendors will get stronger and fewer. The contractual relationship of temp. adjusters/vendors will require heavy capitol and less liability on the carriers. Before deployment vendors must attest for temp. adjusters reguarding background checks etc. First requirement will shift from top closers to top adjustments. Pay scale will be graded and confidential.
Now when we have the confidential list of the top 10 vendors, we can really start recruiting for our organization with the right folks. |
|
|
|
guest_98
USA
17 Posts |
Posted - 09/22/2003 : 14:25:21
|
Third party vendors have a very secure place. They offer the carriers flexibility which is critical to their success. I sell this concept everyday. Hence under my username "Adjuster when needed". The better the adjuster, not as he see's himself, but how effective he is in productivity and customer service, strengthens the relationship between TPA and carrier. When they have a very strong business relationship, more and more capital and funding companies will fund Invoices for the TPA which will allow them to pay the adjuster quicker.
|
|
|
|
scottposton
USA
28 Posts |
Posted - 09/22/2003 : 14:35:39
|
| Guest, I understand TPAs are here and probably here to stay because they do what we can not. They market their services. Not to mean that you or I couldn't but from the carriers standpoint it is much easier to deal with a few TPA rather than 40 or 50 IAs. My question is this though. Do TPAs warrant the 25% to 40% that they take from our fees? Think about it for a second. Who pays your expenses? You! Who pays your INS? You! And on and on... In short is what they provide for us worth what they are charging? Dont take this the wrong way either. I don't have a problem working for TPAs. But im not sure as an industry (us adjusters) if the service they are providing is worth what they are charging us. |
|
|
|
dswink
USA
17 Posts |
Posted - 09/22/2003 : 21:17:29
|
| i just wanna work |
Edited by - dswink on 09/22/2003 21:44:16 |
|
|
|
Topic |
|
|
|
Feedback on Fee Schedule Please
Forum Locked
