Perhaps if the insurance companies paid out properly, or conducted proper investigations and made good faith, well reasoned denials they would not be sued. Much of the litigation is a direct result of poor legal advice of the Defense Bar for the purpose of putting money in the pockets of attorneys like yourself Mr. Wolf. If the law was well-settled since 1917, why has the insurance industry been advised to make unsupportable arguments that would never prevail upon appellate review. Also, all orders recently issued were, upon the date of this article, final orders. I’m the trial counsel for the One Call opinion you find so distasteful.
Scott Millard, your first statement is asinine. First of all, insurance companies pay out properly. I have 5 friends who are PA’s and after the dust settles in appraisal or suit and after their 20% fee, the insured can completely remodel their home, even in areas that were not damaged or had “matching issues” an end up in a better than before situation. A direct violation of the principal of indemnity. I also have 4 friends who have water mit companies. The invoices they generate are completely inflated. they double charge everything, list things they have not done and with an AOB, nothing or no one can stop them. You and your ilk are the worst of the worst, and costing everybody serious money in ridiculously high insurance premiums. But hey, you are rich now, that’s all that matters.
Fascinating reading, but the article implies that insurers are unable to deny claims that are not covered. How/why does that happen?
Also, except, perhaps, for true emergency repairs, doesn’t the company have the right to appraise the damage, or at least see a detailed repair invoice, in order to see if materials or labor have been properly utilized?
Article raised some decent points on one hand but on the hand Mr wolf presented few concepts that are misleading!
First; for the reader that has a perpensity to believe that all emergency contractors over bill the respective insurance co. is grossly misleading!..i assure you you will find more fluff in your Attorney”s bill then you ever will with you restoration contractor!
let me present the environment for the few contractors that do…its really simple…Contractors have learned that no matter what the $$$ submitted to the ins co. the ins co. will try and cut the bill in half just to see if the contractor will bite.
if that does not work they will refer the bill for third party review to further “beat up on the bill!” hoping the the longer they put the contractor off the more likely they are to settle for “Quarters on the dollar!”
most of the contractors in this industry use the same software to create their bills…EXACTIMATE…so if a contractor in Maine and a contractor in Fl (for example) both do the same type of work its easy to use that standardized software for ins co. to know what the job should cost…when the ins co. Adjuster come out to asses your damages guess what software they use?… Exactimate! point is they know what the real cost should be in most situation…but choose to play the discount game creating the environment for litigation! so please reserve you tears for them.
The AOB issue is your best friend! its like the second Amendment for your policy…without it you would not get your emergency mitigation repairs started unless you have lots of cash and a crystal ball…no contractor can estimate the true repairs with regards to a major water loss… which is why the above described software was created!!!
I love how you indicate that it is “grossly misleading” to indicate that all mitigation contractors over bill the insurance company but then go on to state that every insurance company tries to cut the mitigation bill in half or not pay on the other side. This most likely happens to every one of your bills because you think you are entitled to it simply because you found a close line item in Xactimate (you know… the estimating software name that you cannot spell but expect the insurance company to pay you off of). Like your $750.00 check processing fee? Of course the insurance company should pay you $750.00 to have to meet the insureds at the bank to sign a check over. Don’t worry that $750.00 does not include gasoline either, they also owe you $250.00 for the $6.12 worth of fuel on your fuel surcharge.
I submit mitigation bills to the insurance company on behalf of mitigation companies and homeowners every single day that get paid in a reasonable amount of time without question and without deduction. The only time I recommend peer review or recommend the insurance company negotiate a water mitigation bill is when it includes 6 hours of drive time because you decided to do a job on the other side of the state and now they should also pay you for that privilege on top of fuel surcharge, van charge per day, check processing fee, emergency service charge, and of course a charge for writing the estimate in the estimating software you can’t spell and don’t know how to use. Not just any estimate preparation fee either, you are evidently worth $250.00 for the 15 minutes of Macro work. You just keep raking in other people’s money while continuing to misinform the public and ruining the insurance market.
Am I correct that when an AOB is signed to a contractor for repairs, it is the contractor who represents their request for payment in a court trial and not the insured party.
The P&C insurance industry has only themselves to blame by taking months to pay our bill, failing to return phone call or emails. Security First and most other insurance companies is so guilty of this. We all have bills to pay but insurance companies operate on the contractors money. If you don’t pay your property insurance bills on time, your policy is cancelled but its OK to take months to pay our bills. Try going to see a doctor without signing an AOB, the doctor will not see you. We will not do any job without an AOB
We have updated our privacy policy to be more clear and meet the new requirements of the GDPR. By continuing to use our site, you accept our revised Privacy Policy.
Perhaps if the insurance companies paid out properly, or conducted proper investigations and made good faith, well reasoned denials they would not be sued. Much of the litigation is a direct result of poor legal advice of the Defense Bar for the purpose of putting money in the pockets of attorneys like yourself Mr. Wolf. If the law was well-settled since 1917, why has the insurance industry been advised to make unsupportable arguments that would never prevail upon appellate review. Also, all orders recently issued were, upon the date of this article, final orders. I’m the trial counsel for the One Call opinion you find so distasteful.
Scott Millard, your first statement is asinine. First of all, insurance companies pay out properly. I have 5 friends who are PA’s and after the dust settles in appraisal or suit and after their 20% fee, the insured can completely remodel their home, even in areas that were not damaged or had “matching issues” an end up in a better than before situation. A direct violation of the principal of indemnity. I also have 4 friends who have water mit companies. The invoices they generate are completely inflated. they double charge everything, list things they have not done and with an AOB, nothing or no one can stop them. You and your ilk are the worst of the worst, and costing everybody serious money in ridiculously high insurance premiums. But hey, you are rich now, that’s all that matters.
Fascinating reading, but the article implies that insurers are unable to deny claims that are not covered. How/why does that happen?
Also, except, perhaps, for true emergency repairs, doesn’t the company have the right to appraise the damage, or at least see a detailed repair invoice, in order to see if materials or labor have been properly utilized?
Article raised some decent points on one hand but on the hand Mr wolf presented few concepts that are misleading!
First; for the reader that has a perpensity to believe that all emergency contractors over bill the respective insurance co. is grossly misleading!..i assure you you will find more fluff in your Attorney”s bill then you ever will with you restoration contractor!
let me present the environment for the few contractors that do…its really simple…Contractors have learned that no matter what the $$$ submitted to the ins co. the ins co. will try and cut the bill in half just to see if the contractor will bite.
if that does not work they will refer the bill for third party review to further “beat up on the bill!” hoping the the longer they put the contractor off the more likely they are to settle for “Quarters on the dollar!”
most of the contractors in this industry use the same software to create their bills…EXACTIMATE…so if a contractor in Maine and a contractor in Fl (for example) both do the same type of work its easy to use that standardized software for ins co. to know what the job should cost…when the ins co. Adjuster come out to asses your damages guess what software they use?… Exactimate! point is they know what the real cost should be in most situation…but choose to play the discount game creating the environment for litigation! so please reserve you tears for them.
The AOB issue is your best friend! its like the second Amendment for your policy…without it you would not get your emergency mitigation repairs started unless you have lots of cash and a crystal ball…no contractor can estimate the true repairs with regards to a major water loss… which is why the above described software was created!!!
TJ
I love how you indicate that it is “grossly misleading” to indicate that all mitigation contractors over bill the insurance company but then go on to state that every insurance company tries to cut the mitigation bill in half or not pay on the other side. This most likely happens to every one of your bills because you think you are entitled to it simply because you found a close line item in Xactimate (you know… the estimating software name that you cannot spell but expect the insurance company to pay you off of). Like your $750.00 check processing fee? Of course the insurance company should pay you $750.00 to have to meet the insureds at the bank to sign a check over. Don’t worry that $750.00 does not include gasoline either, they also owe you $250.00 for the $6.12 worth of fuel on your fuel surcharge.
I submit mitigation bills to the insurance company on behalf of mitigation companies and homeowners every single day that get paid in a reasonable amount of time without question and without deduction. The only time I recommend peer review or recommend the insurance company negotiate a water mitigation bill is when it includes 6 hours of drive time because you decided to do a job on the other side of the state and now they should also pay you for that privilege on top of fuel surcharge, van charge per day, check processing fee, emergency service charge, and of course a charge for writing the estimate in the estimating software you can’t spell and don’t know how to use. Not just any estimate preparation fee either, you are evidently worth $250.00 for the 15 minutes of Macro work. You just keep raking in other people’s money while continuing to misinform the public and ruining the insurance market.
Am I correct that when an AOB is signed to a contractor for repairs, it is the contractor who represents their request for payment in a court trial and not the insured party.
The P&C insurance industry has only themselves to blame by taking months to pay our bill, failing to return phone call or emails. Security First and most other insurance companies is so guilty of this. We all have bills to pay but insurance companies operate on the contractors money. If you don’t pay your property insurance bills on time, your policy is cancelled but its OK to take months to pay our bills. Try going to see a doctor without signing an AOB, the doctor will not see you. We will not do any job without an AOB