Everyone in this business knows this was going on. A long, long history of dishonesty precedes. All current employees should be ready for a big surprise
The article is biased throughout, but I’ll just pick on one point. “In July 2016, Norton proposed an appraisal award of $3,061,201.44. Neither appraiser agreed with the umpire’s proposed amount leading to Norton’s advisement that if they couldn’t agree, he would circulate a proposed final award of $2,943,919.72.” The article then includes a characterization of this as “literal extortion by umpires when the insurance company appraiser refuses to sign the umpire’s excessive proposed awards.” If this were true, Keys would have jumped at the first appraisal award, and Norton would have proposed an even HIGHER amount to “extort” the insurance company appraiser, and not a LOWER amount. And just how does getting paid an hourly rate equate to “having a financial interest in the outcome” of the claim or award? First the carriers said appraisers could not be paid a %, and now they can’t be paid an hourly rate – just what do the carriers proposed is “a level playing field”? What a joke.
Knowing these characters, no one is surprised. Br ready for changes iun policies, and laws that will hurt the entire indu7stry. “Pigs get fred; hogs get slaughtered.” Thanks, guys
Mr. Goldwich, you did not read the article clearly or fully understand what happened. After the umpire put out his first award, and neither party signed it, the article goes on to say: “Mr. Norton’s second proposal of $2,943,919.72 was conveyed by an August 4, 2016 email. It stated that if not signed, Mr. Norton would be put “in a position that I do not wish to be that may require a very significant shift upwards.” (Ex. 133.) Mr. Whipple understood this to be a threat directed at American Family – in essence, “agree or the amount goes up.” Mr. Whipple strongly objected to the “significant shift upwards” language, noting that there should be no reason that the proposed final award necessarily would be adjusted upward, and further criticizing “the one-sided negotiation tactics being employed in an attempt to strong-arm this appraisal to a higher award.”
So it was the last ultimatum Mr. Norton, the umpire gave under the threat of significantly increasing the award that the carrier appraiser and judge characterized as basically extortion.
Regarding your questioning how an hourly rate could equate into having a financial interest in the outcome of an award. By putting a limit of 10% in his contract, and the billing what amounted to 9.8% invoice, a week after Keys learned of the award, Mr. Keys submitted nothing more than a one line item invoice. The Court was not fooled by what was essentially a contingency contract, thus making Mr. Keys an “interested party” in the outcome award. If you read the 38 page judges order vacating the award, the court decision was pretty simple given all the facts. Too many errors by both the appraiser and the umpire.
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.
Everyone in this business knows this was going on. A long, long history of dishonesty precedes. All current employees should be ready for a big surprise
The article is biased throughout, but I’ll just pick on one point. “In July 2016, Norton proposed an appraisal award of $3,061,201.44. Neither appraiser agreed with the umpire’s proposed amount leading to Norton’s advisement that if they couldn’t agree, he would circulate a proposed final award of $2,943,919.72.” The article then includes a characterization of this as “literal extortion by umpires when the insurance company appraiser refuses to sign the umpire’s excessive proposed awards.” If this were true, Keys would have jumped at the first appraisal award, and Norton would have proposed an even HIGHER amount to “extort” the insurance company appraiser, and not a LOWER amount. And just how does getting paid an hourly rate equate to “having a financial interest in the outcome” of the claim or award? First the carriers said appraisers could not be paid a %, and now they can’t be paid an hourly rate – just what do the carriers proposed is “a level playing field”? What a joke.
Knowing these characters, no one is surprised. Br ready for changes iun policies, and laws that will hurt the entire indu7stry. “Pigs get fred; hogs get slaughtered.” Thanks, guys
Mr. Goldwich, you did not read the article clearly or fully understand what happened. After the umpire put out his first award, and neither party signed it, the article goes on to say: “Mr. Norton’s second proposal of $2,943,919.72 was conveyed by an August 4, 2016 email. It stated that if not signed, Mr. Norton would be put “in a position that I do not wish to be that may require a very significant shift upwards.” (Ex. 133.) Mr. Whipple understood this to be a threat directed at American Family – in essence, “agree or the amount goes up.” Mr. Whipple strongly objected to the “significant shift upwards” language, noting that there should be no reason that the proposed final award necessarily would be adjusted upward, and further criticizing “the one-sided negotiation tactics being employed in an attempt to strong-arm this appraisal to a higher award.”
So it was the last ultimatum Mr. Norton, the umpire gave under the threat of significantly increasing the award that the carrier appraiser and judge characterized as basically extortion.
Regarding your questioning how an hourly rate could equate into having a financial interest in the outcome of an award. By putting a limit of 10% in his contract, and the billing what amounted to 9.8% invoice, a week after Keys learned of the award, Mr. Keys submitted nothing more than a one line item invoice. The Court was not fooled by what was essentially a contingency contract, thus making Mr. Keys an “interested party” in the outcome award. If you read the 38 page judges order vacating the award, the court decision was pretty simple given all the facts. Too many errors by both the appraiser and the umpire.