Water damage scope of work question

[dan mabes]

I am doing work for a customer that has suffered water damage in a rental property they own.I hope someone may be able to confirm or correct some understandings I have about the responsibilities of Insurance Companies.

It is my understanding that the Insurance Company may determine if there is or is not coverage, but they cannot determine the scope of the work, the manner in which the work is done. That is the responsibility of the contractor.

Also, another clarification
Nowhere in the contract with the homeowner, nowhere do the terms "cheapest, leasdt expensive or lowest priced " contractor are in the policy

Comments and clarifications would be appreciated.

Thanks
Dan

 

[Desk Jockey]

Dan the only thing I would say about insurance claims handling it that it "depends".

It depends on how big your policy is, who you are and the relationship you have with your agent and his clout with the company as to how your claim will be handled.

There are lots of areas left for interpretation by the adjuster. The Scope is generally agreed upon. Not left for you to determine, you can show them the scope of damage as you see it with pictures, diagrams, a soot sponge but them must agree on what you've found and the plan for repair.

You are right they do not have to use the cheapest, but all the insurance company is expected to pay is for the repair at a competitive rate, anything higher could be the responsability of the homeowner.

*This is the game that is usually played. "We can pay our vendor and you will have no out of pocket other than your deductible. However if you chose to use someone else you may, BUT you will have to pay any difference from what it would cost to use our vendor." They scare them to the direction they want them to go. They will also say your comany is on certified by them or that they will not warranty the work since you are not their vendor.

 

[John Buxton]

I did a fire job last year at a rental and the insurance co. hired the low bidder. The owner of the property gave me the other bid so I could get the job.

I find it depends on the adjuster.

 

[Hoody]

Dan you are correct with both simply put. Ultimately it is the homeowners choice, and the insurance company is the payee. I had one adjuster try that crap in front of me. One call to the state insurance commissioner solved that really quickly.

What it comes down to is, how much work do you want from that adjuster, and how big a fight do you want for what is right. I've done both depending on the situation. By doing both I've gave into the adjuster a little bit to save face, and when they've been way out of line using scare tactics in front of me I've called them out on it.

 

[kmdineen]

The IICRC S-500 is the bible of the industry; and, now that the S-500 is approved and accepted by the American National Standards Institute (ANSI), the "S-500 Standard and Reference Guide for Professional Water Damage Restoration," 2006 Third Edition, becomes the standard everyone inside and outside our industry references, including government, attorneys and insurance adjusters. (Professional Sewage Cleanup and Remediation) by Patrick Moffett, copyright 2008.

Use the S-500 to justify what procedures you are using. Only the owner or owner's agent, not the restorer or others can impose limitations on the performance of a project. Limitations placed on any project that are inconsistent with the S-500 standard can result in conflict. Conflict resolution should be documented in writing and releases and disclaimers should be reviewed by a qualified attorney.

Have the insured ask the adjuster for a copy of their policy that states that the lowest priced contractor will be used.