Contractor did not keep Dry Log now might come after us

[cobrashells]

Hello! We had a tree go through our son's bedroom ceiling back in August and a mitigation contractor was contacted. Mitigation work officially completed as of Oct 8th 2024. They are still attempting to negotiate with insurance as of 12/21/24 because they had their dehumidifier and air purifying units running for 41 days with no supporting dry logs to substantiate legitimate reason for running equipment that long. Insurance is paying out 13 days and is willing to offer more if dry logs are submitted. They don't exist. I was here every single day of the equipment running and not a single person came to obtain readings. I can see in the emails between the contractor and insurance that the contractor has threatened to come after us for the balance not paid out by insurance. They cannot threaten a mechanics lien due to 60 days having already passed, but I would love to know my rights should I need to take it to court. From my readings of the IICRC S500, dry logs are required. They haven't contacted us yet; I'm just preparing for the worst ($20k they are attempting to collect) but hoping for the best.

 

[Cleanworks]

Hello! We had a tree go through our son's bedroom ceiling back in August and a mitigation contractor was contacted. Mitigation work officially completed as of Oct 8th 2024. They are still attempting to negotiate with insurance as of 12/21/24 because they had their dehumidifier and air purifying units running for 41 days with no supporting dry logs to substantiate legitimate reason for running equipment that long. Insurance is paying out 13 days and is willing to offer more if dry logs are submitted. They don't exist. I was here every single day of the equipment running and not a single person came to obtain readings. I can see in the emails between the contractor and insurance that the contractor has threatened to come after us for the balance not paid out by insurance. They cannot threaten a mechanics lien due to 60 days having already passed, but I would love to know my rights should I need to take it to court. From my readings of the IICRC S500, dry logs are required. They haven't contacted us yet; I'm just preparing for the worst ($20k they are attempting to collect) but hoping for the best.

Some companies use remote monitoring for their drying equipment. No need to personally come to the job. 41 days seems quite excessive unless it was still receiving moisture or there was a reason they couldn't remove wet portions. Sounds more like you need some legal advice. Things like, did you hire the restoration company or did the insurance company hire them. That may make a difference.

 

[Living The Dream]

Hello! We had a tree go through our son's bedroom ceiling back in August and a mitigation contractor was contacted. Mitigation work officially completed as of Oct 8th 2024. They are still attempting to negotiate with insurance as of 12/21/24 because they had their dehumidifier and air purifying units running for 41 days with no supporting dry logs to substantiate legitimate reason for running equipment that long. Insurance is paying out 13 days and is willing to offer more if dry logs are submitted. They don't exist. I was here every single day of the equipment running and not a single person came to obtain readings. I can see in the emails between the contractor and insurance that the contractor has threatened to come after us for the balance not paid out by insurance. They cannot threaten a mechanics lien due to 60 days having already passed, but I would love to know my rights should I need to take it to court. From my readings of the IICRC S500, dry logs are required. They haven't contacted us yet; I'm just preparing for the worst ($20k they are attempting to collect) but hoping for the best.

As @Cleanworks mentioned above companies like Drieaz and Phoenix both offer remote monitoring.

It's also not uncommon for insurance companies to try and screw water damage companies out of money. You almost always have to fight for your money.

Any idea if the water damage company was using Xactimate?

 

[BIG WOOD]

Is there a charge to monitor the drying equipment every day? If there’s no charge for that service on the invoice, they have no evidence to charge for 41 days. You have the authority to pay them for just the 13 days the insurance company offered.

 

[Nomad74]

Chavez would be helpful here.

 

[cobrashells]

As @Cleanworks mentioned above companies like Drieaz and Phoenix both offer remote monitoring.

It's also not uncommon for insurance companies to try and screw water damage companies out of money. You almost always have to fight for your money.

Any idea if the water damage company was using Xactimate?

Yes, they used Xactimate. The only argument my insurance makes is for supporting documentation which would be the dry logs. The problem is they DID NOT keep dry logs. I know this because I was present every day the equipment was ran. There was no remote monitoring, and no one came to physically obtain moisture readings. Insurance is happy to pay out whatever is due based on supporting documentation being submitted.

 

[cobrashells]

Is there a charge to monitor the drying equipment every day? If there’s no charge for that service on the invoice, they have no evidence to charge for 41 days. You have the authority to pay them for just the 13 days the insurance company offered.

What was submitted to insurance has the following description associated with the line items specific to dehumidifier and air scrubber - Dehumidifier (per 24hr period) - 70-109 ppd - no monitor and Neg. air fan/air scrub - Large (per 24hr period) no monitoring.

From what I can read in the emails between contractor and insurance, the contractor is trying to justify their 41-day usage based on the time it took for scheduling and approval for asbestos testing through abatement approval. The insurance replied with there was no support for delaying mitigation to wait on coverage as mitigation should not be delayed while waiting on coverage. I myself can also provide proof that time was wasted by the contractor from when they received the asbestos test results to submitting the results to insurance. Ten days passed before submission to insurance for abatement approval even happened.

 

[BIG WOOD]

What was submitted to insurance has the following description associated with the line items specific to dehumidifier and air scrubber - Dehumidifier (per 24hr period) - 70-109 ppd - no monitor and Neg. air fan/air scrub - Large (per 24hr period) no monitoring.

From what I can read in the emails between contractor and insurance, the contractor is trying to justify their 41-day usage based on the time it took for scheduling and approval for asbestos testing through abatement approval. The insurance replied with there was no support for delaying mitigation to wait on coverage as mitigation should not be delayed while waiting on coverage. I myself can also provide proof that time was wasted by the contractor from when they received the asbestos test results to submitting the results to insurance. Ten days passed before submission to insurance for abatement approval even happened.

When they need to leave drying equipment without monitoring, it is for the purpose of maintaining the environment to prevent it from getting worse. And when that happens, there's a small fraction of fans and dehumidifiers, not the entire amount if drying equipment used to dry it in 4-5days. And if they were in good contact with the adjuster, he would've either approved it or denied it. I would get that confirmation.

But if they’re charging for a full dryout for 41 days doesn’t seem right. I don't think they can justify the reason because that time used seems too long and if it's brought to court, they're gonna have a hard time justifying it

 

[kmdineen]

Big Wood makes a good point about being in contact with the field or desk adjuster. Restorers should have an understanding of the issues cobra shells mentioned and his restorer should have communicated these issues to all appropriate parties when they presented themselves, not when his bill was being questioned. Chapter 11, of the IICRC S-500 Fourth Edition, Limitations, Complexities, Complications, and Conflicts, may be helpful to understand industry standards when suspected asbestos materials are present.