Aside from some subtle nuances and semantic inconsistencies, it appears that everyone here is on the same page with regard to an honest effort and good intentions. Most opinions are in agreement that the facts must be collected on the risk and suspicions verbally relayed to the carrier. We really can't speculate what the carrier wants or will want until we have spoken with the examiner assigned to the file.
If anyone were to conduct this investigation Ray's way without discussing their findings with the carrier would end up with an enormous fee bill that would get disputed due to unauthorized activity. If paid, then it would be done with reservations balking at the eagerness of an overzealous attempt to tilt at windmills. Likely, this would be one of the last assignments seen. IMHO, this thread highlights the importance of good communication.
Many property assignments these days have limited information on the examiner available to the adjuster, so it is important to provide the reasons for offering additional services in your report. Don’t just do them.
I’d be happy to inspect other roofs in the area for dcmclaims with T&E billing available, but as a seasoned IA, most of my clients wouldn’t pay for it. Furthermore, this is an extra service that is usually not included in a standard property appraisal fee. Jlombardo is correct in that unless you have photo/video evidence (or a confession for that matter), the claim likely end up getting paid. I will add that to require the insured to sit through a scrutinizing EUO is a great way to scare the guilty ones away. And echoing a previous comment, even if victorious, the mortgagee will still need to be compensated.
I’ll offer this tip; communicating with the carrier must be ‘solution based’- not ‘problem based’. Meaning that your suggestions must include options or solutions- they should never force the client to have to invent a solution to your inability to deliver.
Typically, most adjuster’s don’t have a two (2) story ladder in their back pocket and the following two (2) ways to handle this situation are also typical.
- First, a wrong way: “I couldn’t get on the roof because it was too high/steep. Here are the photos secured from the ground. Thank you for this assignment.”
- The right way involves communication to your mgr. or the carrier’s examiner with a suggestion as to how you propose to solve or accomplish a proper investigation. Some vendors/carriers already have a built-in protocol dealing with this issue so no questions are necessary. Worst case, you go out and buy a two (2) story ladder thanking the carrier for keeping you consistently busy. Best case, the carrier gladly allows the necessary TE to return and inspect the roof with a roofer.