| Author |
 Topic  |
|
|
dadwalker
USA
1 Posts |
 Posted - 01/26/2004 : 21:40:43
|
I have worked with field assistants on many storms. One person was my equal in experience and knowledge, and liked the scoping best, so we worked an arrangement where I did most of the inside work and he did the field scoping on our last storm. These claims were assigned to me, and I was working as an "employee" for the vendor. We thought we were within company policy, because my assistant was also an employee in good standing. He was just not deployed on this particular storm. When managment became aware of our arrangement, they strongly protested, citing all sorts of problems. One of the loudest protests that later came up, is that no one else in the industry does this, and as adjusters, we were way off base. Now, I've also worked this way as an independent contractor with the vendor's blessing. Please help with some feedback: Is anyone else doing this?? Thanks.
P.S. I maintained control of the claims; I made the initial contact calls, set appointments, made all coverage decisions, did the estimate, wrote the checks, and closed the claims. My assistant did talk to the insured in the field, but explained that he was merely measuring the damages and deferred all coverage questions to me, the assigned adjuster. |
Edited by - dadwalker on 01/27/2004 08:16:09 |
|
|
deleted
USA
53 Posts |
Posted - 01/26/2004 : 22:08:12
|
| Why would that be any different than if you were teaming up with your wife?...doesn't make sense to me... |
 |
|
|
ChuckDeaton
USA
373 Posts |
Posted - 01/26/2004 : 23:56:28
|
| The employer sets the workplace rules. My thought is that the vendor would not want a situation where claims are assigned to one adjuster then that adjuster splits the fee and assigns them to another adjuster. It would seem to me that the fear would be that control would be lost with possible diastrous consequences. |
|
|
|
Cecil
USA
35 Posts |
Posted - 01/27/2004 : 07:38:31
|
If the asst. measured, photo'd, mounted photos, and set some appts at your direction and under your direct supervision there would probably be no conflict. If he scoped, interacted with the insured, etc he would be getting into the field you were hired to do and that would be a not be appropriate as you are the employee.
I also echo what Chuck said above.
|
|
|
|
Linda
USA
127 Posts |
Posted - 01/27/2004 : 11:02:22
|
I don't know that there is a right or wrong answer to any of this. Many do team up and sometimes that is a good thing--sometimes not. Many feel it is unfair to the single adjuster working alone. It may be.
Some states allow that if a person talks to the policyholder other than to pass a polite greeting--they are holding themselves out to be an adjuster. In reality they may be an adjuster and possibly one better than the assigned adjuster but they aren't the assigned adjuster. Most of us from time to time have enlisted assistance of one type of another--entering admin, making phone calls, setting appointments, mounting photos, etc. Is it adjusting? I don't think so but that is just my opinion. I see nothing wrong with any of the above and assuming the admin is not full of errors, the only pitfall I see is the person making the phone calls to tell the policyholder too much or even answering a "what do I do until the adjuster gets here?" question. We all know what the stock answers are but should the "assistant" be the one answering? Probably not but if they do tell them to do temporary repairs and keep receipts is that wrong?
Quite possily the most difficult thing is being the "assistant" and being asked a question by the policyholder and having to keep a zipper on it and refer them to the assigned adjuster for their answers. Makes the "assistant" look like the true idiot but it is the right and lawful way. No one wants to wind up in the hot seat raising our right hand and have to tell a room full of people why we didn't mention another person was there at the risk when the policyholder's attorney is asking you questions about what the unmentioned "assistant" did or said. Might never happen but what do you say when it does... Few supervisors want to see their name in the file yet the same thing can happen with them. They can and do answer questions when asked by the policyholder.
Many claims do and should require "assistants." There have been many times when I wish I had one but didn't. Are steep teams in violation of some carrier's or vendor's rule? There is only one assigned adjuster but he does have a helper. I once had a supervisor who demanded a second person be with the adjuster on any multi-story building. Is it necessary--no, but that was his safety rule.
I suppose the real question is could the assigned adjuster swear to each and every entry and word spoken if called upon to do so? Having someone totally perform the scoping may not be the best idea. On the other hand, if the assigned adjuster is scoping the roof and the "assistant" the exterior elevations, it doesn't take a genius to compare the measurements to know if they are correct. How much do you trust the assistant's measurements and scope of damages? Enough to swear they were correct?
The extreme I suppose is that I agree with Chuck that an assigned adjuster has no right regardless of the circumstances to assign the claim to another adjuster. Seems to me there is a vendor who requires a contract to prevent just that situation happening. It is also meant to prevent adjusters from accepting claims from multiple vendors and re-assigning them to others while turning the claims in under their name and asserting that the assigned adjuster actually adjusted the claim when in fact they were never at the risk.
Some carriers want to know if you have an assistant and if so, who the assistant is and what their qualifications are. They don't want to get blindsided by some policyholder calling in and saying that another person other than the assigned adjuster, was there and said, "....." , while the supervisor hasn't a clue of whom they are speaking. Guess who gets the next phone call and probably a special trip to the office when you are 50 miles away!
This topic can go in a dozen different directions and among them is the "trainee" line. I would think that at the end of the day the best and safest thing to do is to tell your supervisor up front on day one that you have an "assistant" or "trainee" and perhaps that could prevent a multitude of problems down the road. If they say no, then you, the adjuster, have a choice. You can either abide by their rules, they have the gold you know, or you can take your chances which is never advised or you can pack it in and go home.
Most carriers don't care if you have an assistant. It just means that you will get the files closed sooner which makes most everyone look good. That brings up the Is it fair to take claims away from him to give to the "team"? It appears on paper that the single adjuster isn't as efficient or competent as the other "assigned adjuster" who has an assistant. The numbers don't indicate one has an assistant and the other doesn't. There are so many varibles and pitfalls in this entire topic that there is no way to address all of them. This is worse than walking through a mine field.
|
|
|
|
Todd Summers
USA
99 Posts |
Posted - 01/27/2004 : 14:37:28
|
| In my experience it is the larger vendors/ carriers that require the assistant to carry their own General Liability and Workers Comp policies. Some may require that they also carry their own E & O. Smaller vendors / carriers mostly don't mind if you use an assistant. But I haven't ever heard of it being prohibited (Unless the asst. is not carrying insurance.). |
|
|
|
Todd Summers
USA
99 Posts |
Posted - 01/27/2004 : 14:43:17
|
| Also, they ALL want the assigned adjuster to be the one that sees the damage and make all contacts. That is probably where they went ballistic , is you were not seeing the damage, if you were in the office and your asst was doing the inspections. |
|
|
| |
Topic |
|
|
|
Team adjusting: OK or not?
Forum Locked
