The Attorney General for Mississippi is using his office and position to leverage the insurance industry. It is his hope the scope and magnitude of Katrina will void policy terms and conditions to the benefit of the voting public. It is my hope that a very brave judge prohibits his efforts.
If indeed there is found to be falsified engineering reports as alleged in the lawsuit then a criminal investigation and prosecution is warranted for the individuals involved in that endeavor. A criminal conviction would remove those individuals from the insurance industry and leave it to those of us who would never entertain such efforts. That, Mr. Hood, if true, is where you efforts should be concentrated, not the civil arena.
The only loosers if Hood wins will be the insurance consumers. Agents will reap the benefits of much higher commissions from higher premiums. Commissions from books of property business could double or trible in a few years easy. If it were not for greedy lawyers and politicians like Hood premiums would be so low agents could barely make a living.
Is Hood related to Garamendi from good old California? Sounds like it: loves to hear himself talk, makes no sense, does not care if he knows what he is talking about or not, wants the poor and/or lazy people to like him so they will vote for him, wants to be on the front page of the newspapers and on the news, has no idea what is really going on.
If you have not been there dont bother responding.
Spent 6 months on the coast, watching clearly wind damaged property being denied coverage, because of \”Rising water\”
What aout the insured that had wind & flood coverage? Even if the flood was not required because they were above the 100 yr plain. Now we have a 500 yr flood and the rles change?
Why is the wind coverage being challenged when the wind was there 6-8 hrs before any water reached the land?
Wind alone does not do the damage seen in Mississippi. Granted, there might have been some minor damge to buildings (except those already falling down), but flood is the only thing that could have leveled the buildings.
I took supplies to Bay St. Louis, MS after the storm. I am a casualty adjuster who simply wanted to help people in need. What I saw was complete devastation. The memories will be with me forever. What I did see in a couple of areas were houses completely washed away but the roofs on the ground. I don\’t know if it was the roof of the house that belonged on that property or not. In one roof I noticed 6 shingles gone but everything else was in tact except for the house below the roof. The devastation was incredible but in my humble opinion (I am not an expert), it appeared the storm surge simply leveled properties…in some places for miles.
After what I have seen from the insurance companies (I live at gorund zero), I\’d say that the insurance companies are the embarrasment if not downright criminal.
Mike, just remember the next time you have an auto accident or your home/condo/apt is damaged, remember that your insurance company is such an embarrassment and DON\’T submit a claim! Your type really annoys me! I have been an adjuster over 25 yrs. I have served on CAT duty and I have suffered thru CAT losses that affected my town. I have more thank you notes from my policyholder AND CLAIMANTS than Carter has pills. DO NOT put me in that \”embarrassment\” category. Just like there are politicans who stink, bankers & lawyers who stink, computer techs who stink, SOME insurance professional stink. But not us all. I treat people the way I would want to be treated. Most of us do. In this case, there are many fingers to point as to the problems that beset that area. People today think that \”I exist, therefore I am owed\”. And from there, starts the misery that has \”engulfed\” this loss.
that is being done now! As a fraud manager what would you say (now, before the depth of the fraud and collussion in the insurance industry is exposed), if your (I dont know hwo you work for) and several other major companies are found guilty of having reports altered and forged? What would be your stance and what would you feel should be done to prevent it from happening again. Would you condone (or even ask for) a fedederal investigation into this fraud to see how deep and how broad the corruption is?
Brad,
If an engineer is found to have submitted a fraudulent report he should have his license revoked.
If his supervisor or someone above him altered the report and forged his signature the license for that company should be revoked and they should put their E&O carrier on notice.
If it is found (as suggested) that an insurance carrier influenced the engineering report that carrier is subject to Bad Faith and they should (1) have their authority to underwrite within the state revoked; and (2) should suffer the financial ramifications of such reprehensible conduct to include punitive damages for the breech of fiducidiary responsibility to their client.
I have no sympathy for any professional, whether is be insurance, engineering or otherwise, who would not subscribe to a professional code of ethics.
If you really want to see the insurance industry or an engineering firm pay then have a jury of insurance professionals. Those of us who have sacrificed job opportunities and advances in order to maintain a status of being able to look in the mirror at ourselves would be more than happy to volunteer our time to sit on a jury panel for this case.
I will tell you there are insurance companies that I will not work for due to their reputation but I (still) have never heard of such reprehensible actions as those being claimed in response to Katrina.
My sympathies for the insurance professionals who have been misalligned and mistreated as a result of the conduct of others who lacked to integrity to qualify as colleagues.
May the Wrath of God be upon the heads of anyone deemed and proven to be a conspirator or a co-conspirator in these matters. To them, may Katrina be a gentle breeze.
Fraud manager, I appreciate you true convictions. I can tell you there is cold hard proof that a lot of people have sold out their convictions (during this katrina ordeal) and let the ole mighty dollar and their employer pull their strings. I truely wish more of the ones who have seen or are involved in this fraud will step forward and blow the whistle. I know you being an insider realy feel that this fraud does not run as deep and broad as people are suggesting, but we at ground zero are talking to others who have the exact same cases. $100 billion dollar exposure from Katrina will make a lot of people do a lot of thing to limit their exposure. I am sure before it can ever reach the top and reform any corruption in the industry, that money and politics will play its ugly roll in the picture (hopefull not with Senator Gene Taylor, Congressman Trent Lott and his brother-in-law, Dickie Scruggs, U.S Attorneys, federal judges and other key people all lossing their houses and having to sue their insurance companies). I am sure that the people on this side of the fence would appreciate people like yourself trying to root out any information on this fraud and help us expose it, so that you and the other good guys like you, on the other side of the fence can have pride in your industry. Thank you for you suggestions and please dont hesitate to help by brining your convictions and suggestions to the state of Mississippi. This is truely the tip of the iceburge, and we need all the help we can get in exposing the fraud and corrpution.
Fraud Manager,
goto http://www.sunherald.com read the articles in todays edition concerning fraudulent engineering reports. I personally know the person bringing the complaint against Clarendon and I have seen the evidence… undeniable proof that and engineering report was altered after being submitted to avoid paying a $900,000 policy out in full. How prevelant will it end up being…that I dont know, but I believe you will find it more than most would believe.
It appears the common denominator in this matter is Rimkus Engineering. Based upon the reputation Clarendon has enjoyed in this industry I am curious as to whether Rimkus was \”painting all assignments with the same brush\”. If I were investigating this matter I would put Rimkus in front of a grand jury. I just don\’t see Clarendon participating in this type of incident…I\’ve never known them to suffer that type of relationship. As far as State Farm is concerned…they are an insurance carrier that I would not work for and I\’ve been of that opinion of them for years. Not because I have any information that they would do something as alleged, simply because I have heard their staff openly complain about their jobs and situations I would not survive. This would, of course, be one of those situations. If I had such knowledge I would have been in the attorney general\’s office before sundown on the day I found out about it and I would have presented evidence to substantiate my allegations.
The nail has been struck on the head. Having been on the coast for 7 months and worked with someof the firms that were SUBCONTRACTED to Rimkus, looking at the properties with them, and hearing thier evaluations, it is abundantly apparatent that instructions were given as to the cause of the loss prior to inspection. One actually told me the brick veneered home filled with water, (came in thru doors or windows) and pressurized the building causing all 4 walls to fall outward.
Local engineers , on the same block, determined WIND destroyed all of the buildings they inspected (5).
The needle is in the haystack, just follow the $$ and the answers will surface.
…subcontracted with Rimkus and WAS TOLD THE CAUSE OF THE LOSS prior to his inspection and he complied with their prescribed cause of loss rather than do his own investigation he needs to lose his license!
Let\’s not be so quick to state that it is fraud on behalf of the insurance company. It appears at some point in time after the report left the legitimate engineers\’ hands and prior to being received by the insurance company it was altered. If you have PROOF that the insurance company received the report and in some capacity induced someone at Rimkus Engineering to alter that report then you can label the insurance company with that brush however if you don\’t then your comment is slanderous.
I recently had a unique situation that gave rise to concern regarding all of these allegations. I hired an independent adjuster in a western state to investigate a claim. The claim was being presented against a police department. The claimant was screaming they had done something wrong. The claimant was obnoxious and arrogant. He called daily while I awaited the adjusters\’ report. I was polite during every interaction including the one\’s where he talked negatively about my Mother (and if the things he said is true I hope my Daddy never finds out!). I received the adjusters\’ report and found that although the documents attached to the report substantiated the claimants\’ version of the time line of the events his written report had \’erroneously\’ recorded the wrong time which, had the report been the document I relied upon to decide how to resolve the case, would have resulted in a denial to the claimant. It appears the \’independent\’ adjusters\’ attitude toward the resolution of the case was influenced by his disdain for a gentleman who was increasingly more hostile.
I resolved the claim with the claimant because it was appropriate. It took an additional 3 hours to handle this claim because I had to document the discrepancy between the documents and the independent adjusters\’ written report to validate the basis of the payment for underwriters, the Department of Insurance and of course, the file. I had to notify management of \’erroneous\’ documentation by the independent adjuster so they could caution other adjusters to review their reports from this independent adjuster. This was a claim that was worth less than $2,000 and it took far longer due to the efforts of someone who was billing my company and investigating a case on behalf of our mutual client. Needless to say, any independent adjuster that would permit a prejudice (i.e., his disdain for the claimant) to influence a claim decision is neither \’independent\’ nor an \’adjuster\’.
With the volume of claims from Katrina the potential for this to have occurred is markedly increased. You must recall that many of the victims of this storm were without telephones and were devastated by this event. Everyone was yelling \”me first\” and screaming \”I am a victim\”. It is possible that influenced the reports that went to the insurance company more than the insurance company influencing the reports that went to them. I know I didn\’t ask that independent adjuster to tell me what I wanted to hear or to give me a report that would \”get me a denial\”. I simply asked him for an investigation and his findings…
I am not trying to \”blame\” the victims…I took relief supplies to Bay St. Louis myself on 5 different occasions. I saw the devastation and I cannot imagine a more horrible situation as virtually everyone my children and I encountered had lost someone they knew due to Katrina. I am simply searching for something that might explain how something so awful and exploitative could happen…
Maybe I have and maybe I haven\’t… All I know is that an adjuster I don\’t care how a claim resolves as long as the facts substantiate attaching the claim to the policy of insurance. I don\’t make $1 more if I deny a claim nor $1 less if I deny a claim. If there was influence regarding the engineering reports from an insurance company it came from far higher a position than a claim adjuster.
I note the recent resignation of the \”Top Gun\” at State Farm… To leave that company while it is under attack regarding these allegations speaks volumes regarding his character. If it were my company that was being attacked I would \’stay the course\’ until she was \’steadied again\’… Unless, of course, I influenced her demise…….
Well…the kicker is that the Engineer is even claiming fraud and forgery of his document…..it is also his asertation that the insurance company received his report at the same time as the insured… ergo, the report didnt go to rimkus..then clarendon…but straight to the insurance company…
I will also add this as a side note….. the engineer who did the site survey report on my property pulled me aside after his \”visit\”… and said \”Mr. XXXX, please understand that I work for the insurance campany as to how my report will read.\” I found that shocking.
My personal opinion on the matter in general is this….the insurance companies have paid the claims that were cut and dried. Anything with anychance of attributing to water they summarily did, many cases without even dispatching an adjuster. Are they willing to pay claims that can be proven… reluctantly yes… Many of us have gone to tremendous personal expense to prove our cases…some have prevailed… some will not. What disturbed me was that when I first advanced the theory of what happened to my house ( even with eye witness sworn statement ) I was stonewalled and told they would not look at the matter. ONLY when presented with evidence from my experts did they agree to negotiate in good faith. It seems to me THEY the insurance company owe the client the utmost diligence to determine the cause of destruction. So in many instances the bottom line has been that if the insured has willingness to pursue the case and can prove it they will get a settlement but the insurance companies in most cases are NOT going out of their way to prove wind damage.
Fraud…. a little more info. Homeowner requested the engineer send him a copy of the report at the same time he submitted the report to clarendon. He did so…. clarendon then denied for over 30 days that they had the report, then when the did admit to having received it … it was substantially altered. Cause of loss changed from substatially wind… to substantially surge..AND… the ORIGINAL report was signed and sealed by the engineer who did the site visit. The NEW report only listed him as a contributor and was signed and sealed by another engineer………
I would be more than willing to talk about my personal situation in which I was offered $3400 for my home. After many months and expense…insurance company finally aknowledged the tornadic damage from eye witnesses and paid our claim. They were not willing to investigate my claim of tornadic damage… i was forced to pay for that upfront on my own… to my carriers credit they did pay that bill as well in the end…. but the question begs to be asked why they wouldnt pursue this until we forced their hand…???
If your Engineer took an assignment knowing that he was going to compromise his integrity, then he is an opportunist protecting his own pocketbook. Though I am a Democrat I will plagerize a quote from Nancy Reagan that seems appropriate when someone asks that of you…\”JUST SAY NO\”…and if you\’re Southern, add the following…\”No, thank you.\”
Bud\’s case is now in litigation and he told me that mentioning anything about his case on this forum would not help him any, he told me not to talk about his case that the attorneys are handeling it now. You may want to ask him before you say much about his case.
Thanks
Fair enough brad…. when I last talked to BUD he was only concerned to keep it under wraps until it hits the papaers…I dont believe anything I mentioned here wasnt mentioned in the article as well….
That said BUD is a fiesty man full on integrity and I will certianly do as he wishes.
Why can\’t all public officials have common sense such as this?
AMEN!!!!
Jim Hood is an embarassment to the industry and to his state.
The Attorney General for Mississippi is using his office and position to leverage the insurance industry. It is his hope the scope and magnitude of Katrina will void policy terms and conditions to the benefit of the voting public. It is my hope that a very brave judge prohibits his efforts.
If indeed there is found to be falsified engineering reports as alleged in the lawsuit then a criminal investigation and prosecution is warranted for the individuals involved in that endeavor. A criminal conviction would remove those individuals from the insurance industry and leave it to those of us who would never entertain such efforts. That, Mr. Hood, if true, is where you efforts should be concentrated, not the civil arena.
The only loosers if Hood wins will be the insurance consumers. Agents will reap the benefits of much higher commissions from higher premiums. Commissions from books of property business could double or trible in a few years easy. If it were not for greedy lawyers and politicians like Hood premiums would be so low agents could barely make a living.
Is Hood related to Garamendi from good old California? Sounds like it: loves to hear himself talk, makes no sense, does not care if he knows what he is talking about or not, wants the poor and/or lazy people to like him so they will vote for him, wants to be on the front page of the newspapers and on the news, has no idea what is really going on.
If you have not been there dont bother responding.
Spent 6 months on the coast, watching clearly wind damaged property being denied coverage, because of \”Rising water\”
What aout the insured that had wind & flood coverage? Even if the flood was not required because they were above the 100 yr plain. Now we have a 500 yr flood and the rles change?
Why is the wind coverage being challenged when the wind was there 6-8 hrs before any water reached the land?
More to follow……………………..
Wind alone does not do the damage seen in Mississippi. Granted, there might have been some minor damge to buildings (except those already falling down), but flood is the only thing that could have leveled the buildings.
I took supplies to Bay St. Louis, MS after the storm. I am a casualty adjuster who simply wanted to help people in need. What I saw was complete devastation. The memories will be with me forever. What I did see in a couple of areas were houses completely washed away but the roofs on the ground. I don\’t know if it was the roof of the house that belonged on that property or not. In one roof I noticed 6 shingles gone but everything else was in tact except for the house below the roof. The devastation was incredible but in my humble opinion (I am not an expert), it appeared the storm surge simply leveled properties…in some places for miles.
After what I have seen from the insurance companies (I live at gorund zero), I\’d say that the insurance companies are the embarrasment if not downright criminal.
Mike, just remember the next time you have an auto accident or your home/condo/apt is damaged, remember that your insurance company is such an embarrassment and DON\’T submit a claim! Your type really annoys me! I have been an adjuster over 25 yrs. I have served on CAT duty and I have suffered thru CAT losses that affected my town. I have more thank you notes from my policyholder AND CLAIMANTS than Carter has pills. DO NOT put me in that \”embarrassment\” category. Just like there are politicans who stink, bankers & lawyers who stink, computer techs who stink, SOME insurance professional stink. But not us all. I treat people the way I would want to be treated. Most of us do. In this case, there are many fingers to point as to the problems that beset that area. People today think that \”I exist, therefore I am owed\”. And from there, starts the misery that has \”engulfed\” this loss.
that is being done now! As a fraud manager what would you say (now, before the depth of the fraud and collussion in the insurance industry is exposed), if your (I dont know hwo you work for) and several other major companies are found guilty of having reports altered and forged? What would be your stance and what would you feel should be done to prevent it from happening again. Would you condone (or even ask for) a fedederal investigation into this fraud to see how deep and how broad the corruption is?
Brad,
If an engineer is found to have submitted a fraudulent report he should have his license revoked.
If his supervisor or someone above him altered the report and forged his signature the license for that company should be revoked and they should put their E&O carrier on notice.
If it is found (as suggested) that an insurance carrier influenced the engineering report that carrier is subject to Bad Faith and they should (1) have their authority to underwrite within the state revoked; and (2) should suffer the financial ramifications of such reprehensible conduct to include punitive damages for the breech of fiducidiary responsibility to their client.
I have no sympathy for any professional, whether is be insurance, engineering or otherwise, who would not subscribe to a professional code of ethics.
If you really want to see the insurance industry or an engineering firm pay then have a jury of insurance professionals. Those of us who have sacrificed job opportunities and advances in order to maintain a status of being able to look in the mirror at ourselves would be more than happy to volunteer our time to sit on a jury panel for this case.
I will tell you there are insurance companies that I will not work for due to their reputation but I (still) have never heard of such reprehensible actions as those being claimed in response to Katrina.
My sympathies for the insurance professionals who have been misalligned and mistreated as a result of the conduct of others who lacked to integrity to qualify as colleagues.
May the Wrath of God be upon the heads of anyone deemed and proven to be a conspirator or a co-conspirator in these matters. To them, may Katrina be a gentle breeze.
Fraud manager, I appreciate you true convictions. I can tell you there is cold hard proof that a lot of people have sold out their convictions (during this katrina ordeal) and let the ole mighty dollar and their employer pull their strings. I truely wish more of the ones who have seen or are involved in this fraud will step forward and blow the whistle. I know you being an insider realy feel that this fraud does not run as deep and broad as people are suggesting, but we at ground zero are talking to others who have the exact same cases. $100 billion dollar exposure from Katrina will make a lot of people do a lot of thing to limit their exposure. I am sure before it can ever reach the top and reform any corruption in the industry, that money and politics will play its ugly roll in the picture (hopefull not with Senator Gene Taylor, Congressman Trent Lott and his brother-in-law, Dickie Scruggs, U.S Attorneys, federal judges and other key people all lossing their houses and having to sue their insurance companies). I am sure that the people on this side of the fence would appreciate people like yourself trying to root out any information on this fraud and help us expose it, so that you and the other good guys like you, on the other side of the fence can have pride in your industry. Thank you for you suggestions and please dont hesitate to help by brining your convictions and suggestions to the state of Mississippi. This is truely the tip of the iceburge, and we need all the help we can get in exposing the fraud and corrpution.
Fraud Manager,
goto http://www.sunherald.com read the articles in todays edition concerning fraudulent engineering reports. I personally know the person bringing the complaint against Clarendon and I have seen the evidence… undeniable proof that and engineering report was altered after being submitted to avoid paying a $900,000 policy out in full. How prevelant will it end up being…that I dont know, but I believe you will find it more than most would believe.
It appears the common denominator in this matter is Rimkus Engineering. Based upon the reputation Clarendon has enjoyed in this industry I am curious as to whether Rimkus was \”painting all assignments with the same brush\”. If I were investigating this matter I would put Rimkus in front of a grand jury. I just don\’t see Clarendon participating in this type of incident…I\’ve never known them to suffer that type of relationship. As far as State Farm is concerned…they are an insurance carrier that I would not work for and I\’ve been of that opinion of them for years. Not because I have any information that they would do something as alleged, simply because I have heard their staff openly complain about their jobs and situations I would not survive. This would, of course, be one of those situations. If I had such knowledge I would have been in the attorney general\’s office before sundown on the day I found out about it and I would have presented evidence to substantiate my allegations.
The nail has been struck on the head. Having been on the coast for 7 months and worked with someof the firms that were SUBCONTRACTED to Rimkus, looking at the properties with them, and hearing thier evaluations, it is abundantly apparatent that instructions were given as to the cause of the loss prior to inspection. One actually told me the brick veneered home filled with water, (came in thru doors or windows) and pressurized the building causing all 4 walls to fall outward.
Local engineers , on the same block, determined WIND destroyed all of the buildings they inspected (5).
The needle is in the haystack, just follow the $$ and the answers will surface.
…subcontracted with Rimkus and WAS TOLD THE CAUSE OF THE LOSS prior to his inspection and he complied with their prescribed cause of loss rather than do his own investigation he needs to lose his license!
Period…
finally settle, how do you know the people in Long Beach?
Let\’s not be so quick to state that it is fraud on behalf of the insurance company. It appears at some point in time after the report left the legitimate engineers\’ hands and prior to being received by the insurance company it was altered. If you have PROOF that the insurance company received the report and in some capacity induced someone at Rimkus Engineering to alter that report then you can label the insurance company with that brush however if you don\’t then your comment is slanderous.
I recently had a unique situation that gave rise to concern regarding all of these allegations. I hired an independent adjuster in a western state to investigate a claim. The claim was being presented against a police department. The claimant was screaming they had done something wrong. The claimant was obnoxious and arrogant. He called daily while I awaited the adjusters\’ report. I was polite during every interaction including the one\’s where he talked negatively about my Mother (and if the things he said is true I hope my Daddy never finds out!). I received the adjusters\’ report and found that although the documents attached to the report substantiated the claimants\’ version of the time line of the events his written report had \’erroneously\’ recorded the wrong time which, had the report been the document I relied upon to decide how to resolve the case, would have resulted in a denial to the claimant. It appears the \’independent\’ adjusters\’ attitude toward the resolution of the case was influenced by his disdain for a gentleman who was increasingly more hostile.
I resolved the claim with the claimant because it was appropriate. It took an additional 3 hours to handle this claim because I had to document the discrepancy between the documents and the independent adjusters\’ written report to validate the basis of the payment for underwriters, the Department of Insurance and of course, the file. I had to notify management of \’erroneous\’ documentation by the independent adjuster so they could caution other adjusters to review their reports from this independent adjuster. This was a claim that was worth less than $2,000 and it took far longer due to the efforts of someone who was billing my company and investigating a case on behalf of our mutual client. Needless to say, any independent adjuster that would permit a prejudice (i.e., his disdain for the claimant) to influence a claim decision is neither \’independent\’ nor an \’adjuster\’.
With the volume of claims from Katrina the potential for this to have occurred is markedly increased. You must recall that many of the victims of this storm were without telephones and were devastated by this event. Everyone was yelling \”me first\” and screaming \”I am a victim\”. It is possible that influenced the reports that went to the insurance company more than the insurance company influencing the reports that went to them. I know I didn\’t ask that independent adjuster to tell me what I wanted to hear or to give me a report that would \”get me a denial\”. I simply asked him for an investigation and his findings…
I am not trying to \”blame\” the victims…I took relief supplies to Bay St. Louis myself on 5 different occasions. I saw the devastation and I cannot imagine a more horrible situation as virtually everyone my children and I encountered had lost someone they knew due to Katrina. I am simply searching for something that might explain how something so awful and exploitative could happen…
Maybe I have and maybe I haven\’t… All I know is that an adjuster I don\’t care how a claim resolves as long as the facts substantiate attaching the claim to the policy of insurance. I don\’t make $1 more if I deny a claim nor $1 less if I deny a claim. If there was influence regarding the engineering reports from an insurance company it came from far higher a position than a claim adjuster.
I note the recent resignation of the \”Top Gun\” at State Farm… To leave that company while it is under attack regarding these allegations speaks volumes regarding his character. If it were my company that was being attacked I would \’stay the course\’ until she was \’steadied again\’… Unless, of course, I influenced her demise…….
Well…the kicker is that the Engineer is even claiming fraud and forgery of his document…..it is also his asertation that the insurance company received his report at the same time as the insured… ergo, the report didnt go to rimkus..then clarendon…but straight to the insurance company…
I will also add this as a side note….. the engineer who did the site survey report on my property pulled me aside after his \”visit\”… and said \”Mr. XXXX, please understand that I work for the insurance campany as to how my report will read.\” I found that shocking.
My personal opinion on the matter in general is this….the insurance companies have paid the claims that were cut and dried. Anything with anychance of attributing to water they summarily did, many cases without even dispatching an adjuster. Are they willing to pay claims that can be proven… reluctantly yes… Many of us have gone to tremendous personal expense to prove our cases…some have prevailed… some will not. What disturbed me was that when I first advanced the theory of what happened to my house ( even with eye witness sworn statement ) I was stonewalled and told they would not look at the matter. ONLY when presented with evidence from my experts did they agree to negotiate in good faith. It seems to me THEY the insurance company owe the client the utmost diligence to determine the cause of destruction. So in many instances the bottom line has been that if the insured has willingness to pursue the case and can prove it they will get a settlement but the insurance companies in most cases are NOT going out of their way to prove wind damage.
They are neighbors of mine….and members of our church. I have seen the documents…out right forgery and fraud on the part of the insurance company.
Fraud…. a little more info. Homeowner requested the engineer send him a copy of the report at the same time he submitted the report to clarendon. He did so…. clarendon then denied for over 30 days that they had the report, then when the did admit to having received it … it was substantially altered. Cause of loss changed from substatially wind… to substantially surge..AND… the ORIGINAL report was signed and sealed by the engineer who did the site visit. The NEW report only listed him as a contributor and was signed and sealed by another engineer………
I would be more than willing to talk about my personal situation in which I was offered $3400 for my home. After many months and expense…insurance company finally aknowledged the tornadic damage from eye witnesses and paid our claim. They were not willing to investigate my claim of tornadic damage… i was forced to pay for that upfront on my own… to my carriers credit they did pay that bill as well in the end…. but the question begs to be asked why they wouldnt pursue this until we forced their hand…???
If your Engineer took an assignment knowing that he was going to compromise his integrity, then he is an opportunist protecting his own pocketbook. Though I am a Democrat I will plagerize a quote from Nancy Reagan that seems appropriate when someone asks that of you…\”JUST SAY NO\”…and if you\’re Southern, add the following…\”No, thank you.\”
Bud\’s case is now in litigation and he told me that mentioning anything about his case on this forum would not help him any, he told me not to talk about his case that the attorneys are handeling it now. You may want to ask him before you say much about his case.
Thanks
Fair enough brad…. when I last talked to BUD he was only concerned to keep it under wraps until it hits the papaers…I dont believe anything I mentioned here wasnt mentioned in the article as well….
That said BUD is a fiesty man full on integrity and I will certianly do as he wishes.