/diy/ - Do It Yourself

All insurance companies are culturally and philosophically Jewish, which means they hire liars, sodomites, swamp creatures, and the enemies of mankind for agents.

>>2439363
Yup. Insurance is the biggest scam in the world. Fuck em.

>>2439367
insurance is pretty worthless, my dad had insurance with USAA for like 45 years, has probably gave those fuckers over 2 million dollars, and the one time he makes a claim this was their response

>your policy doesn't cover damage from named storms

That's what they actually said. Once a storm gets strong enough to deserve a name and not just a number, they don't cover damage to it. Which means pretty much every storm strong enough to cause damage isn't covered. At least in VA. What the fuck even is that shit?

>>2439406
LOL WTF

>>2439407
yeah he dropped em pretty quick after that. I also dropped them for auto insurance because allstate had a lower premium, for better coverage which also covered my 12 ft trailer. So basically, fuck USAA.

>>2439412
should have sued them instead

>dood just build roofs that need to be inspected after every high wind and replaced every 10 years

>>2439445
>Poor people: metal roofs
>Middle class: shingles
>Wealthy: metal roofs

>>2439094
The most accurate statement here is "This is going to the lawyers". The roofer knows what's up.

>>2439448
He had the patience of a saint. Not sure I could have kept my cool even if it wasn't my house

>>2439406
>insurance is pretty worthless
I'm pretty fucking happy with State Farm. I got t-boned in a parking garage, and they did a fantastic job getting my car repaired, it was over $7k in bodywork. (dumb bitch who hit me crumpled a working air vent on the side.) No paperwork, just dropped off the car at their approved shop (which l later found had excellent reviews, has for years), and they dropped a rental off for me, for the two weeks it took to repair. Not fucking bad for $73 a month.

>>2439448
Huh ?
That insurance guy is his fucking client, he's the one who would hire him and pay him, what do you think lawyers are gonna do?

>>2439452
The homeowner is going to sue because of a bad appraisal, retard. Try to keep up with the adults talking.

>>2439453
I didn't watch the video, too autistic for me, yelling at some new insurance employee

>>2439456
Then don't run your retard mouth about something you don't know anything about, retard.

>>2439406
Your dad paid over $3700/month for 45 years? Gonna guess he paid more like $1000/year for maybe 35 years, maybe 40 (since you've already established you're an idiot that can't count)? So maybe $40k? And in 35-40 years he never read his policy? Don't get me wrong, I hate insurance as much as the next guy, but half of your problem is just pure idiocy.

>>2439439
I mean technically somewhere in a 10,000page contract that my father had signed it was written that this was the case. Too bad my dad isn't a insurance lawyer. Im sure it was not brought to his attention.

>>2439451
yeah I guess its hit or miss, I got to admit when I Was younger I had a truck swalloed by a hurricane and USAA did pay me more than the blue book. I forgot about that, so right now its overall :USAA being good 1 and :USAA sucking total ass 2

>>2439508
Insurance policies are not 10k pages, you dumb lying faggot. Stop posting shit you don't have a clue about. Go downstairs and tell your dad to kick himself in the ass for raising such a faggot like you.

>>2439499
hes got a big ass farm several thousand acres so yes he paid that much in insurance because that's what it costs, you fucking sperg. When you've got a few million in tractors laying around it pays to bundle, so his house was in the same plan.

Have you ever sat down and read a 1,000 page insurance policy? dont even lie and act like you have, Its full of so much legal jargon nobody can make it through the first page. Not even lawyers.

>>2439451
>for $73 a month
>Happy that they covered you for an accident you were not at fault of.
>$7k of bodywork.
Chances are that they both negotiated with the bitche's insurance and the bodyshop, ultimately paying fuckall.

>>2439513
yeah I know the little 50 page document you are used to reading and signing on the post it nots you speak of. That isnt the entire thing, the entire thing is several volumes of books. and deep within those books it went something like this.

>Book 44, chapter 30, section 3 page 8, subsection 8 paragraph 12 (in reference to an entire different book so read that too)

and there it is.

>>2439513
>Every couple of months.
>We've updated our terms and conditions.
>100 pages long.

>>2439510
That's the thing, State Farm has never fought me on anything. They never raised my rates, either - I was getting my windows smashed constantly because CA, and my agent said they didn't care if I claimed every month. My homeowners is through them, and while I'm lucky to never had to claim anything (knock wood), I don't expect hassles, according to other people I know who have them and have claimed. A friend of mine had her house cleared out by joggers who pulled a moving van up during the day and emptied her house, they just cut her a check for the full policy amount and paid for the wrecked doors (they crowbarred through the front door and the garage door.) She was more pissed that the cops just sent paperwork instead of cops, didn't even take a statement from her. (Because, Los Angeles.) She was more pissed at her neighbors, who saw it happen and didn't call the cops.

This is now a bad lawyer advice thread

>>2439514
You don't insure farms with homeowner's, retard. But keep digging that hole deeper, retard.

>>2439518
Did you have an actual point? Because I looked, and your post doesn't have one.

>>2439520
thank you anon. and all those pages are kept locked away in a office somewhere so that at some point some laywer can pull out some shit that changed 100 years ago and be like

>ooh yeah you see where that comma is? well thats on the wrong side so your fucked.

>>2439524
yeah you are correct, but you can add a house onto a land policy. As well as tractors and whatever the fuck else you want, pretty much anything on that land is covered so long as you declare the value.

Until they fuck you that is.

>>2439526
My point is beyond dealing with you and bearing the initial cost of repairs, who ultimately covered your expenses was the dumb cunt's insurance.
It's a different story when there's no other party to invoice for the damages besides themselves.

>>2439526
What sort of shithole do you live in and/or how bad is your driving record.

my state farm is $14 a month on my shit vehicle and $22 on my nice vehicle.

>>2439548
he probably got full coverage. ya fucking dope.

>>2439520
Funny, I get those like, once every 2 years, and they are literally one page. The trolls are just winning this thread, I guess.

>>2439451
i have a similar experience. but the insurance companies need customers like this: >>2439406
to compensate for all the payouts they are making.

>>2439094
report both to osha for not having fall protection watch the fun

>>2439548
Full coverage, CA, with a new (then) 5.0 Mustang.
But you keep assuming I was doing something wrong, retard. Not my fault you can't afford a nice car.

>>2439591
Oh, and in before your mealy mouth "that's not a nice car hurrrrr" response. Nobody cares.

>>2439568
You can also go online and read the full, updated policy any time you want. But 'hurr dey locked up in da laywers office and you can't da read it!"
I love it when retards triple down. Best free entertainment going.

>>2439591
>>2439593
It is not about how nice it is, it is about what kind of vehicle it is. If you bought a nice sedan or a similarly appointed minivan that retailed for the same price range as the muscle car your insurance would be lower. People that go out and get Mustangs or Camaros, that kind of thing, generally have more accidents than people that get high priced 'normal' cars. Similarly, people that buy low-end shitboxes also tend to have more accidents so their insurance is often higher.

My first vehicle was a Tacoma. When my brother got his first car, a Nissan Versa (the cheapest car available at the time), his insurance way higher even I paid several thousand more for mine. A few years later he upgraded to a Honda Fit, which is similar to the Versa but higher end, and his insurance went doing quite a bit. If you had a higher trim package Civic or a Corolla your insurance would be much less.

>>2439591
>Mustang
>nice
Hope that insurance covers, well, everything

>>2439596
What does any of this have to do with anything? We all understand that sports cars have higher insurance rates. I was replying to the assumption that I had a lot of tickets. You're literally tardsplaining obvious known things.

>>2439613
It did. See the $7k repair bill when it got t-boned. Car was only around 3 years old at that point, I hadn't even paid that much in yet.

>>2439617
>3 years
>car still not paid off

you were upside down so hard in that loan you dont even realize it the crash was a blessing

>>2439094
jeff is an actual retard and is gonna get state farm sued for a new roof + damages.
>inb4 hurrrrrr damages durrrrr youre wrong
no, im right
i had a very similar situation with state farm, and sued the shit out of them. the judge awarded damages because they fought so hard to not do the right thing. its called a bad faith lawsuit because its when the insurance company acts in bad faith when covering the claim

>>2439576
>the insurance companies need customers
insurance companies make almost no money through consumers, they make almost all their money through playing stocks

>>2439618
Paid more into insurance, retard. And, new 5.0 Mustangs are just a TEENSY bit more new than $7k.

>>2439619
Sounds like they have a reputation

>>2439623
its funny actually. its a long drawn out story, but basically i was a prick to thier insurance lawyers through 3 depositions. i was a dick for my wifes 2 depositions. lost my temper and all sorts of shit.... intentionally. so when i was on the stand for the bad faith portion of the lawsuit the bitch badgered the shit out of me to the point that it made her look like a complete cunt to the judge (theres no jury for this kind of shit) that when he declared we won the case he made a point to chastise the fuck out of that fucking cunt

>>2439621
and whose money do they invest?

>>2439453
>12 years in field
>new
Shut your retard mouth if you can't watch the video.

>>2439627
that is pretty funny, almost nothing is more entertaining than seeing some jagoff lawyer try to go all hard and get their choke chain yanked in front of God and everybody.

>>2439406
USAA banking was awesome up until they started serving people that weren't soldiers and federal employees. All of their programs went to shit after that

>>2439447
The need to make metal roofs with painted designs on them, like make a metal roof that looks like different kind of shingles or slats...stuff like that instead of just monotone color pallets. That would be neato

>>2439412
Calling total BS on this. Your father must've gone out of his way to cut coverage to reduce his premium for something like this to happen. You can call them at any time, speak to a specialist for your state and go over line by line your exact coverage in the policy.

I have first hand experience with dealing with USAA for damage from "named" storms and not once did anything remotely similar happen. Their insurance arm is top notch and very accommodating. Yes, they can cost a bit more, however the reliability and stability of their product makes up for it.

I opted to pay the extra $500/yr on my homeowners policy to use USAA. I could've gone with many cheaper options. Right now, all the cheap companies are jacking people's rates 80-90% and dumping anyone with a roof over 5yrs old due to all the fraud. They are now paying double what I am. Me? Had a 5% increase this year and lost a 10% bundle discount on multicar bundle due to a wreck write-off, which more than makes up for what I'm not paying to insure that car anymore.

Their financial products on the other hand are total dog shit. Stay away from those.

>>2439094
Jeff gets his boots on the ground.

>>2440516
they do

My roof was leaking and 30+ years old, 2 layers of shingles. I was getting quotes from $8000-$12000 to replace, plus any wood underneath that could need replacement.
I opened up a claim with Travelers
They did a "virtual" appraisal of having me take like 100 pictures and a 3d modeling software stitched it all together.
Within 1 day they approved a total replacement and ACH deposited over $13000. Talked on the phone *1* time to my claims person who couldn't have been more chill
Couldn't recommend them enough

>>2440397
it is a great feeling
i forgot to mention in >>2439627 that as part of the settlement (at least in my state/case/whatever) we got the oppositions files and shit and we got to go through it all while waiting for that sweet fat fuck you check to come in. in the cunt lawyers notes she specifically stated multiple times that i was quick to anger and she would use that against me at trial to make me look super bad and shit like that.
so when that stupid bitch was badgering the shit out of me all super aggressive i was polite as fuck and super respectful. she lost her shit during cross examination of me, and looked even worse doing it to my epileptic wife on permanent disability.
we made out quite well on that and invested wisely so basically im already semi-retired... though i still do a good bit of sidework to pad the bank statement.
>t. electrician

>>2439518
You're right, it would be way cheaper to simply run my own insurance company and use that leverage to bring down my repair cost the two times in my life I am ever in an accident.

like a good neighbor

>>2439508
>I mean technically somewhere in a 10,000page contract
We've told you a million times: don't exaggerate.

>>2439519
>I've never seen an insurance policy
You're so fucking retarded its like a 20 page document, slightly more with endorsements. Not to mention nearly half of that 20 page contract half is for property damages, half is for liability claims such as someone suing you because their son is retarded and left his legos at the bottom of the stairs.

I'm an adjuster who used to work for state farm. That adjuster is not very experienced in dealing with dickhead roofers. He missed so many opportunities to tell the roofer to fuck off, and definitely should not have agreed to be filmed.

Roofer doesn't want to do a $400 repair, small house but wants a $10000 replace job. Hmm, lets try and figure out his motive here.

>>2440597
Did you get them through Geico?

What are those cute little booties they have on?

>>2443935
They are called "cougar paws", they're a generic leather boot, but the sole is velcro that you put a soft rubber pad on that grips roofs really well.

>>2441803
that methhead was malding

>>2443976
Yeah the roofer handled it poorly. Any time they try ending a meeting with "well the attorneys will handle this one!" great. The claim gets moved away from the adjuster, and either the attorneys pay it, or they don't. Doesn't fucking matter, you haven't won some significant victory. That roofer will forever be the "this guys an asshole" roofer next time he meets with any adjuster. Not a reputation you want because every claim is just a battle.

>>2444248
We've established you're a character expert. How is he supposed to perform the repair?

>>2444255
Depends on department of insurance regulations for the state; if lifting a single damaged shingle causes creases to nearby shingles because they're so fucking old and worn out, it may not be possible to replace 1 in the middle of a field. I bring up regulations because some states' department of insurance say the insurance only owes for the actual damages, regardless of the consequential damages or appearance. Some states will point out if a repair isn't possible then yes full replacement is then owed which a roofer can easily prove by taking a video or showing with great care and caution the nearby shingles are so badly deteriorated a repair cannot be performed. The adjust can also support this in the file to their manager.

There is some consideration for the total exposure as well, sometimes management will look at a $1000 repair versus a $20000 replacement. Similarly a $5000 repair versus a $100,000 repair to see how hard they want to fight it and find experts saying it is still possible to do a repair.

At the end of it all, its not necessarily what the roofer was saying, its his attitude and how he was saying it that I disagree most with. I have no idea if thats a new adjuster, or if he was too pissed off already because the roofer is such a monumental dickhead.

>>2444266
I don't believe the adjuster understands the regulations or roofing as well as you do. It should not be up to him whether he's recorded or not, but that's another ball of red tape to argue about.

Simply put, the guidelines for what he needs to see need to be laid out. Don't give the homeowner or roofer room to argue.

That roofer can walk around the block anywhere and find 4 more jobs, so I think the argument of vested interest is moot. The adjuster doesn't allow them to move the shingle 1/2" so they expect the entire roof to be repaired by nursing out every nail through the thinnest possible space.

Threatening to get attorneys is a waste of time because most parties will take you up on the offer. Unless legal fees get you off, I agree that's a stupid thing to say. But if the adjuster is using his ego and position of power to screw over the homeowner and roofer then that's pencil pushing faggotry that deserves to be punished.

It amazes me that society will constantly pander to educational authority for all things but you're going to slap the hand of a 12 year roofer the second he goes to replace a shingle.

>>2444248
Wh the adjuster was the one saying everything the roofer touched was more/new damage because he was doing it wrong.

So the adjuster is both:
An expert on the job and the proper way to do ot
Unable to articulate how to do the job to his specification without damaging the roof more.

If the roof is so old and fragile no repair can be made, it sounds like it's time for a new roof.

>>2444282
It is up to the adjuster; I've had several contractors and homeowners pull their phone out and explain my inspection will be recorded. Before entering their house I simply tell them I don't agree to be recorded and if they want the meeting to proceed they'll have to end recording and put the phone down. I'm not a cop and i'm not in a public place. But you're right, the adjuster should say exactly what should and shouldn't happen, as well as what can and can't happen.

Some roofers don't care if they can get another easy replacement job in the hours they spend arguing with an adjuster, some are so egotistic they just have to be right. I've had some send letters and make phone calls as if they're attorney all over a $4000 issue. The crazy ones will trip over dollars to pick up pennies all day long. The relaxed ones i've dealt with will give up $1000 in profit so they don't have to argue for several hours knowing that time is better spent just securing another job.

And yeah, sometimes repairs have to be made extra slow. If a competent roofer can swap out a shingle in 2 minutes, and this roof is already trash, maybe he needs to spend 5 minutes. Insurance isn't there to maintain the property through aging and weathering; yeah roofs are expensive, so is owning a house. Insurance Doesn't exist because your roof is old and the roofer doesn't want to do a $400 repair job.

I can't tell you how many times I've had someone declare they're getting an attorney and never see or hear from them again. Like you said, most people start hearing they'll have to pay more in attorney fees just to look at the claimthan what they're trying to recover from insurance. The scumbag attorneys will inflate and try to add punitive damages as a demand saying legal action will be costly to the insurance company. And it is, however Every insurance carrier has a literal army of attorneys on retainer, it also has billions of dollars to keep operating.

>>2444289
cont'd
The adjuster wasn't doing a great job himself but insurance carriers hire just about anyone even if they don't have any construction or insurance knowledge. Training gets them up to speed, and if you can pound into them a few key phrases to parrot back to what every roofer will parrot, you've got an adjuster capable of dealing with 85% of claims all at the low price of about $38k/year.

>>2444288
its true, just walking on your roof 'damages' it. If you do it once a year you'll never be able to tell but if you have a roofer, adjuster, and homeowner walk up common traffic areas like up a valley, it'll show up especially if you're wearing hard soled shoes.

If an adjuster is telling a contractor how to complete the job, that contractor is either an asshole trying to paint the adjuster into a corner, or genuinely doesn't know how to do the job.
>If the roof is so old and fragile no repair can be made, it sounds like it's time for a new roof.
I don't disagree with you, but the policy doesn't necessarily owe for a new roof. Its like if your '93 shitbox is so rusted and worn and someone rear ends you, insurance won't get you a '22shitbox to replace it.

>>2444289
>I'm not a cop and i'm not in a public place.
You have no reasonable expectation of privacy when performing an insurance or warranty claim assessment, mealy-mouthed wannabe lawfag insurance whore.

>>2444314
>You have no reasonable expectation of privacy when performing an insurance or warranty claim assessment
Sure as fuck do. Theres no requirement that I be filmed for reasonable inspection of the damages. You wanna film me? Cool, watch me walking back to my car as I drive off.

what's going on here? what's the owner hoping to get the insurance to cover?

>>2444444
Checked

What a waste

>>2444416
Nobody said you have to stay, but that doesn't change the fact that you have no right to an expectation of privacy when you are performing that kind of assessment in your official capacity as an agent of an insurance company or warranty provider.
Go and leave because you dont want any record of the interaction that you dont control, it will just lend weight to the allegation that the insurer isn't operating above board and in good faith.
Especially in light of the fact that insurance companies share customer claim history data with each other a d consumers who dispute those reports have a right to contest and explain any negative reports.
I'd love to see your weasel ass in court explaining that you have a right to work in secrecy and a homeowner has no right to make a fixed record of the assessment process on his own property without *your* permission and the court just has to take your side of the story as the official record of what happened in a dispute. LOFL.

>>2444457
>Go and leave because you dont want any record of the interaction that you dont control, it will just lend weight to the allegation that the insurer isn't operating above board and in good faith.
No it doesn't. It means the adjuster doesn't want to be filmed in any capacity. That isn't bath faith at all. And if you're going to contest a prior claim with another carrier by showing a video of what the adjuster said and did, you're clearly a moron who has never actually contested a claim outcome.

Nobody said the right to work in secrecy, but I do have the right as an individual to not agree to be recorded. If the claim is investigated and handled in good faith but still denied and the policy holder only claim is that the adjuster refused to be video or audio recorded, then you sound like a crying idiot who didn't get their way. There are so many rules and regulations around good faith handling of claims, than it must be documented. This documentation is primarily notes within a claim file which are not released to the policy holder unless compelled in litigation, but there generally is documentation that goes out to the policy holder. One of at least 3 ways a summation of an inspection is recorded through photos, a letter to the insured, and file notes. If you have no idea how those can help or hinder an insurance carrier (or adjuster for that matter) then you clearly are talking out of your ass.

>>2439406

not limited to usaa, and named storms is referring to catastrophe level damage, meaning hurricane coverage.

its not exceptional that 'general' insurance doesn't cover damage thats particularly so common it belongs in a different risk pool.

>>2439453

you don't sue for a bad appraisal, you get a competing appraisal and negotiate.

lot of people with no idea how property insurance works up in here...

>>2444248

this, and not only this, unless you are at the point of a contractual dispute, you as the insured have just fucked yourself in terms of timeframes.

the entire communication chain for that insurance company must now flow through their legal dept.

>>2444282

shit is absolutely rampant in florida.

>>2439094
Not watching the video, is this the bag of dicks that's cost Florida homeowners a few billion in premium hikes?

Them and their lawyer cohorts need a bullet to the head in the public square. The whole lot of them are worse than ambulance chasers.

>>2444465
>if you're going to contest a prior claim with another carrier
nobody said anything about another carrier...only three explanations for you acting like this was the argument, you are either an illiterate moron, an obfuscating shyster, or all ofcthe above

>Nobody said the right to work in secrecy, but I do have the right as an individual to not agree to be recorded.

As was was acknowledged

>If the claim is investigated and handled in good faith but still denied and the policy holder only claim is that the adjuster refused to be video or audio recorded, then you sound like a crying idiot who didn't get their way.
Again you are either a mouth breathing cretin or a scammer, where on earth did you get "the policy holder ***only claim*** is that the adjuster refused to be video or audio recorded"...?
The policy holder might have all manner of other damning evidence to support his allegations ...what a retarded and/or mendacious premise to base your argument on.
The representative acting like he has something to hide when doing his job and trying to premptively CONTROL what evidence might be used againt him in the event of a dispute and insiting that that was his "right as an individual" would speak to the degree of bad faith involved.
The same way Jeff insisting that the roofer was doing everything wrong while refusing to say why or how he wanted it done and then absolving himself of any responsibility to explain himself by claiming to not have any qualifications to dictate procedure shows his level of bad faith dealing.
Everyone knows that *that* is why you dont want a video record, and why you make up a retarded legalistic rationale to hide *that* motivation.

>>2444477
>Especially in light of the fact that insurance companies share customer claim history data with each other a d consumers who dispute those reports have a right to contest and explain any negative reports.
You said it, I just pointed out how retarded it was.

What manner of damning evidence do you think there possibly could be where a cell phone recording would turn the claim upside down in favor of the insured in the eyes of any layperson? If the policy holder has serious allegations there are so many avenues in which the policy holder can take that have nothing to do with video or audio recordings.

Just the way you've replied to my posts shows you're either a roofer or a public adjuster. Which is it? Because if you haven't figured out how to dispute a claim without video recording a novice adjuster and pointing out he doesn't know what he's doing then show it to youtube, then I'd take a guess you're a meth head roofer just like the one in the video.

>>2444476

itt: people who don't know about the AOB abuses in florida for years..

>>2444486
I'm not in florida nor have I ever handled a claim there, can you give a QRD?

The only things I heard was every carrier was asking for some incredible increase in rates (on top of already high rates compared to other states) of like 150%, state said no so all the carriers fucked off saying it wasn't profitable with the population booming and property damages increasing every year from regular hurricanes so the state took over the hurricane insurance. Last I heard Floridians for base homeowners coverages (excluding hurricane and tornados) were paying like 400% more than california policies.

I know the CEA was formed because almost all carriers wanted astronomical rates to insure against earthquakes in california, government got involved and are charging lower prices than previously estimated and boast how they could cover the 94' Northridge quake like 6 times over, disregarding inflation, construction costs, and other shit since then.

>>2444484
>What manner of damning evidence do you think there possibly could be where a cell phone recording would turn the claim upside down in favor of the insured in the eyes of any layperson?
I see you are going to stick with the strawman argument despite having it explained to you.

Make sure to tell the judge hearing your case who makes the final decision re: bad faith even though he's not a hotshot claims adjuster that he's just a layperson or a meth head for questioning your insistence on controlling what negative evidence of your dealings might be collected.

You do realize he's going to ask you if you declined to be filmed because you didn't want there to be a video record if everything went right and the customer was happy, don't you?

>>2444490

basically, assignment of benefits abuses have been pretty rampant. A contractor hired to appraise a loss smooth talks an insured about how they can start work the next day or any other number of promises once they sign on the dotted line. The contract they sign wasn't a work agreement, but a transfer of the right to collect the payout on an insurance claim that the insured filed. Sometimes they weren't even telling insureds thats what they were signing.

Also, they would ask to see the insurance policy declarations to know what the limit of coverage is (just to be helpful to explain to the insured whats covered, of course)

Then some contractors (and sometimes independent adjusters helping) would run up the work repair invoices conveniently to the policy limits, sometimes beyond. It would be stacked with services not necessarily called for, like extra diagnostics, or different build materials, you name it. When the insurance would delay payment or try to investigate with their own adjusters, the contractor sued and took them to court. Multiply this behavior by the 1000s across the entire state, and you can see even a 'big' insurance co is having problems keeping up.

Florida state has been trying to fix it because it really is the reason premiums go up in this case, its not just lip service as near as anyone can tell.

>>2444493
My man, I see you ignored my question on being a PA or struggling contractor. Its not a strawman if I'm asking for you to explain it because you haven't. Your entire argument is "if you have nothing to hide why decline a video recording?" Because I don't want to be recorded, nor do I have to be recorded. In dealing with people who want to record me, they figure out real quick an honest inspection can take place. A good roofer understands mistakes happen and different adjusters have different levels of experience. Its not if a mistake in coverage is made, its when a mistake is done and how a contractor eals with it. If they want to berate the adjuster and run around like a town crier saying they have a mistake on tape then its clear they're an asshole and just want to act like a tough guy pointing out others mistakes.

Defense counsel will likely ask why a recording felt necessary if they weren't in any danger and had never met an adjuster before. in my own depositions prosecution has asked why the homeowner felt uncomfortable answering my questions regarding the loss. Because of their stonewalling the claim wasn't able to be investigated and they incurred so much in legal fees all because they didn't want to tell the truth.

Again, the adjuster is clearly new at the job without much tenure getting painted into a corner. The roofer could have saved so much time by sending a single email to the claim explaining why a repair wasn't possible, instead they snorted some meth, got another face tattoo, and wanted to intimidate someone in person. I've lost count of how many times a contractor wanted to yell and scream at me over the phone, then immediately apologize asking for a handshake and to start over once I get out of my truck. Everyone has bad days but contractors are usually retards that convince a homeowner to buy something only when insurance is paying for it.

>>2444490
Even with the rate hikes most can't continue to do business. All the increases were approved, as far as I know, it's a spreadsheet problem/justification.

Aob is a large part of it, some of the other rules add fuel to the fire. Louisiana is setting themselves up to be Florida junior with this problem. They just passed a ridiculous bill stating if your shingle is discontinued the insurance company has to pay for replacement.

No one wants to do repairs when they can game a system for a 20-25k job. Claim gets rejected, they shuttle off to the lawyer. The laws are framed in such a way that it's a lose lose game for the insurer. We have something like 85% of all insurance lawsuits in the country.

They need to scrap the current laws entirely and start over. Any lawyer that takes a case for the offenders needs to be disbarred.

>>2444500
>Any lawyer that takes a case for the offenders needs to be disbarred.
Agreed, the only winners in insurance claims are lawyers. I saw a case where the prosecuting attorney took 45% of whatever the insurance carrier paid out. Sure they tripled the original settlement, it was negotiated down to about 2.5x original, and 3 years later the attorney got paid, and the insured took home the exact same amount before contacting the attorney.

For some insider numbers, your garden variety homeowners claim -costs- the carrier about $400 just to file it and have it inspected. There are some people that file claims just to have an official opinion from a carrier to do something else with it like needing a "your roof is fine" letter for a realtor or HOA. Every major carrier has hundreds of attorneys they pay weather or not they handle any claims, more if they go over a certain number of claims litigated. By nature, insurance carriers MUST be profitable, if they're not they cannot pay out covered claims. So every time some asshole files a claim for some dumb shit not covered or just barely over the deductible, their rates necessarily must go up in order to keep the machine running.

Its the equivalent of idiots putting in insurance claims because a mechanic says they need new brake pads. Claim is denied, then when they crash for lack of brakes act surprised and offended insurance didn't buy new brakes. spoiler alert: homes need maintenance, and policies don't cover everything you need to pay for.

>>2444499
>Because I don't want to be recorded, nor do I have to be recorded
sounds badass on the interwebs, not so much with "your honor" after it.

>Defense counsel will likely ask why a recording felt necessary if they weren't in any danger and had never met an adjuster before.

Defe se cou s asks all kinds of stupid shit intended to cast aspersions on people who are doing nothing wrong and ascribe devious motives to them in the process, and judges know it.

Hilarious that you think a court will simply accept "because I don't have to!" to why you refuse to be filmed but will somehow side with the defense insinuating that a homeowner wanting a video record of the interaction MUST be the result of some kind of nefarious or irrational motives, especially when it could just as easily prove that the adjuster did nothing wrong and exonerate his part in the process.
You may not be a cop, but just like when they get filmed without being kept from doing their job there's literally no legitimate reason to make an effort to prevent it, and all kinds of legitimate reasons to question it as a blanket policy, because its an attempt to hide potentially damaging evidence, period.
Good cops get exonerated by body cam footage more often than it is used successfully against them, it's the ones who like the option of not doing what's right who don't like them and attempt to hide the footage.

Is this thread real? Or are these bots arguing with one another?

>>2444505
>i've never been deposed or on trial
The post. Okay, just go ahead and fantasize what you think happens when attorneys get involved with claims.

Seriously, your entire argument for being filmed is "if you have nothing to hide why don't you want to be filmed". If you don't understand how easy of a dismissal of that line of questioning is then you've clearly never handled contentious claims.

>>2444505

That reasoning cuts both ways.

even if they have bad faith reasons for not being recorded, the contractor can just leave, and the adjuster can just not speak to you about anything, and if you don't cooperate when it comes to the appraisal, that will be on you.

All the adjuster will have to say is that they are here to prepare an assessment of the loss relating to X, and thats it. They can't stop from being recorded, but they don't have to say shit to you about the claim to get hung out on later, they arent the desk adjuster.

>>2444505
And how many cops are in prison today because they were filmed dealing with savages

>>2444507
KEK, your willingness to make up fake quotes to present as evidence speaks to your honest and forthright good faith dealings how, exactly?

You have no fucking clue what kinds of claims and depositions I've been involved in, and are pure bluff and bluster.

>>2444470
he means the claim/adjustment, and yes you absolutely can sue your insurance company if they pull shit to deny you coverage.

>>2444545

something that wasn't said for $500, alex...

besides, you can sue a tuna sandwich, but like Chris Rock says, doesnt mean its meant to be done.

>>2440516
>>2440553
They go beyond painting them, some companies laser designs.

>>2444586
The entire discussion of lawsuits itt is in regards to suing your insurance company if they pull shit to deny you coverage, you massive douchetard.

And a sheisty adjuster who goes in with the intention of justifying denial of coverage even if it is warranted falls under "shit they pull".

>>2445173
If a roof is well passed its life span, why is insurance required to replace it for you?

>>2445173
Its usually difficult to prove an adjuster goes to inspect a claim with the intention of denial. The only times attorneys have said they've lost claims because adjusters intended denials was because of flagrant disregard for the policy and documenting the intent to deny it. Now sometimes a policy holder will explain the facts which over the phone sounds like a denial, but during an inspection some new info may come up or clearly the homeowner is fucking retarded and don't words good. Regardless, its very hard to prove an adjuster intended to deny the claim based on zero information.

"shit they pull" isn't a legal term nor is it quantifiable or descriptive. You're going to have to do better than "i didn't get my way".

>>2444506
Maybe the insurance companies sent someone to argue in their favor. As if their general mode of behavior were not the more compelling evidence.

>>2445235
>flagrant disregard for the policy and documenting the intent to deny it.

An adjuster on video that documents him insisting that every attempt by a professional to even look at the roof is creating damage that isn't covered when that's a bald faced lie, while simultaneously declaring that he isn't a roofer so he can't describe how that assessment might be done in a manner he *would* deem proper would be exactly the kind of documentation that would support a claim that he always intended to deny the claim and was acting in bad faith.

Which is why the insurance company shill itt doesn't want *any* video made. Everyone with half a brain understands this and knows that this is why his stated "reasoning" begins and ends with "because I don't have to" and "muh rights".
Even that is a tacit admission that it is PURELY a matter of what HE wants and CONTROLLING what documentation of the event exists.
There is no circumstance where this could ever be anything but 100% self serving on his part and no way that preventing a video record being made could ever be of any benefit to the client, and he knows it.

>>2445214
Nobody said that, water muddying shill.

>>2445358
If you're saying the insurance company doesn't owe for a worn out roof, what purpose does the video serve? To show someone new at the job makes mistakes?

>>2445521
You are talking to more than one other poster, genius.

You are also pretending that there's no question that the roof is "worn out" when that's precisely what the dispute in the video is about...because the go-to position from which to argue in bad faith against any insurance or warranty claim is to declare that the damage is due to factors stipulated as outside of the coverage whether that's true or not.

>>2445544
What are you alleging caused the roof to get to be in that condition then?

>>2445558
LOL, it's stated in the first minute of the video.
Right around the same time that the adjuster makes clear that he's already decided what his final decision is even as the assessment is in progress and he thwarts every attempt by the roofer to do it by claiming that the process itself is responsible for any and all damage that is found...
but don't ask him why or how because he's not a roofer, and only "an expert on the policy".

>>2444444
Impressive very nice

Another good one where the adjuster does everything in his power to prevent a fixed record of the interaction being made and won't ever give a straight answer; this mealy mouthed MFer wont even state how long he's been at the site
> how much time did you personally spend in this building?
> (long pause)... inside?
> yeah
>it's hard to say...
> 30 minutes?
> ....uhhhh. we looked at-
> how much time did you personally spend on this property?
> ya know, I didn't time it
> an hour?
> uhhhhhhh, I didn't time it
> you've been here less than an hour, would you agree?
> (long pause).............no....I wouldn't agree
> how much, how much would you say?
> (whining) it's hard to say, man...
> huh?
> it's hard to say, man...it's hard to say...

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=qZBWGBcInhs

>>2445583
They will pay for the repair of the damaged roof section, nothing more. It is not the insurance company's fault the homeowner didnt maintain or replace a failing roof.

This is what these hucksters do, they claim hail damage or brittle shingles or this or that and try to get a full job. In an aob, they go ahead and do the work and simply sue right away when the claim is denied. The homeowner is not involved at any point past the aob being done.

>>2446242
>it is not the insurance company's fault the homeowner didnt maintain or replace a failing roof.

Thanks for illustrating once again just how easily insurance industry shills make up "facts" to suit their self serving agenda and defame people making claims as a first line of defense as if all that needs to happen for THEIR allegations to be true is for the words to come out of their mouths.
They don't even bother to qualify their assessment of a video that is the totality of the available evidence in a specific case by acknowledging that they haven't inspected it...they just go right ahead and call the homeowners "hucksters" who are 100% at fault.
Then they act like victims when people hire legal representation and want to document their interactions with lying weasel insurance shills.

>>2446253
You keep pretending like its the need of the world for insurance carriers any time a homeowner hires an attorney to represent them in a dispute of coverage. The reality is the homeowner doesn't really win by paying an attorney all that money.

>to qualify their assessment of a video that is the totality of the available evidence in a specific case by acknowledging that they haven't inspected it...
You know how much a sperg you sound like?

>>2446269
>You know how much a sperg you sound like?

Funny that you think your endless passive aggressive approach of belittling and name calling alternating with feigned reasonableness while never, ever allowing the idea that an insurance company might be in the wrong to stand without that response isn't a patently obvious shill tactic.

I get it, people like you rely on the fact that most people (thankfully) have no direct experience with insurance besides paying the premiums and haven't learned just how shitty they can be when it's time to hold up their end of the contract. That, and the fact that insurance companies rely on an implicit threat of dire consequences if you challenge them in any way as a means of manipulating people into giving up.
So go ahead and run your script and call your names, all you are doing is confirming what experienced people already know.

>>2446278
Well I've got multiple people in this thread pointing out it at least sounds like I know what I'm talking about with cogent arguments, and several people pointing out you're a doofus saying the only way to work with insurance carriers is to sue them. I can tell you out of the thousands of customers i've worked with and the thousands of contractors, at least 99% of them didn't have to call an attorney to get their claim paid satisfactorily. Of the remaining 1%, some admitted they just wanted to win against an insurance company because they had "paid so much over the years" and wanted that money back. Just admit it man, you're a sociopath roofer who doesn't know when to accept "no" as a result.

>>2446278
Your insurance company already knows how old your roof is. If they don't, you're an idiot. They give discounts for new roofs using newer styles of wind abatement.

Roof is damaged in one particular spot, they will pay to fix that spot. The adjuster already knows the roof is 15/20/30 years old, the insurance company wouldve given him the details. He simply doesn't care of the complications or the state of the non damaged roof. Insurance isn't an installment plan for a roof, it's insurance.

Yes, they can be dicks however there is usually a reason for it. The single biggest reason is the damage is not covered by the policy. This is usually the complaint with floods. Flood insurance is a national policy and unfortunately not everyone is eligible for it, this is the biggest flaw. They've expanded the program to allow more people into it, but frankly just about anyone can be a victim to flooding.

>>2446269
>You keep pretending like its the need of the world for insurance carriers any time a homeowner hires an attorney to represent them in a dispute of coverage

Once again, your reflexive approach is to grossly mischaracterize other people's words and assign negative motivations based on that strawman to serve your desire to "win" at all costs.
Utterly typical behavior that anyone who has faced an insurance dispute knows all too well. Textbook, even.

https://blog.cvn.com/insurer-blasted-with-4.5m-class-action-bad-faith-verdict-punitive-phase-to-follow

https://www.saxongilmore.com/ninth-circuit-affirms-bad-faith-verdict-against-insurer/

"Bamford held a commercial auto liability policy with Regent with a policy limit of $6 million.

...Communications in Regent's files noted that Regent felt no case was worth more than $2 million in Nebraska.

...Bamford presented sufficient evidence from which a reasonable jury could conclude that Regent acted in bad faith in failing to settle the Davises' claims within the policy limits."

https://www.insurancelawhawaii.com/insurance_law_hawaii/2016/06/bad-faith-jury-verdict-upheld-after-insurers-failure-to-settle-within-policy-limits.html

>>2446079
Asshole with a camera trying to get people in trouble....

>>2446384

>>2446387
Typical fucking American retards crying because they want someone else to pay and they'll never fix the issue themselves

Hurricanes should be exempted from insurance claims, what a joke, a fucking beach front property complaining about roof and water damage

>>2439451

State Farm basically fisted me without lube when I had a claim during the COVID hoax, so YMMV.

>>2446402
Tell us the details of the loss and what state farm told you.

>>2446287
Nobody should be eligible for FEMA

>>2446778
It's not some FEMA handout, you have to pay for it annually in a lump sum. Since no insurer really wanted to handle flood insurance and it raised premiums for everyone, it became a federal program. The problem is that everyone in it is at a high flood risk and you can't get into it unless you have a medium to high risk of flooding. Anyone can get flooding and when you do, then find it isn't covered and you can't even get it because you're low risk - it's a kick in the teeth. It happened in Pittsburgh with the remnants of hurricane Ivan, the storm that hit a couple weeks before Katrina. Places that have never flooded got flooded badly and the homeowners were totally fucked.

>>2446778
>>2446891
yeah any time theres a natural disaster, FEMA doesn't show up with an armored car of cash throwing it at people to fix their shit out of charity. Its essentially a 0% hardship loan that you still have to pay back. Wildfires, earthquakes, tsunamis, tornadoes, hurricanes, heavy flooding, FEMA shows up and locks people into these loans.

>>2439514
>zoomers own nothing and hate anybody who does

State Farm must just be all retards. My friend got his double wide flooded by a washing machine pipe exploding and running into the house all day. They told him they wanted to do $50k in repairs on a mobile that was probably only worth $10k. It took a bunch of arguing, but he eventually convinced them to total it so he could put a new mobile. The modular home place was backed up and they ended up staying in hotels and rentals for 8 months on the insurance company's dime. At one point, the guy asked their adjuster how long they could get their rent paid. They said everything was fine as long as they didn't go longer than 2 years. His brother laughed at him the whole time and said they could have done a stick house for the same time and money.

>>2446979
That's just how big organizations work, it's never your money and everything you do is filtered through a dozen supervisors
Why didn't your friend let them do repairs?

>>2446979
Yeah that was an adjuster just running the paces of what would normally be owed. Additionally, he could have had a complaint if he said "hey your house is a fucking dump of a trailer, here's $10k, but haul off and delivery fees". Because that'd just generate a complaint to the supervisor or department of insurance. Yeah its retarded but your friend is living the high life and pretty much getting his trailer renovated for the low cost of a few hundred per year that the policy costs. Whats he complaining about again?

>>2446990
They didn't let them do the repairs because they would have been out of their house for at least that amount of time. When they originally ordered the new house, it was going to be 2 months.

With big organization, I'd guess that the cost of repairs vs new vs putting them up in a hotel/rental for 8 months each come out of different budget accounts. The owner of each budget is interested in foisting the costs off on one of the other ones if they can't deny the claim altogether.

>>2447007
At the end of the day, he doesn't have any complaints other than that it took a lot of browbeating to get the adjuster to come around to the option that was better for him and didn't cost the company any more than their original option.

>>2440516 >>2445125
i pressure washed an aluminum textured roof, looked like shingles, but caved in if you stepped wrong and left dents , it had a rubber like texture like a running track, kinda rubbery

>>2447016
Yeah, thats the "hard" part about adjusting mobile homes; either you total them out and tell the owner good luck with the tens of thousands of dollars, or you pay a silly amount to repair those shoddily built trailers and manufactured homes and hope the contractor doesn't tack on 20% in supplements. It basically doubles the work of a claim for the adjuster when you're nearing "totaling" a trailer or manufactured house because now you have to compare the cost of hauling off the old one, and buying a new one plus hookups, furniture moving, etc, versus repairing.

>>2447024
I see the appeal of a mobile home, but after growing up in one, I'll never go back. There's just too much that can go wrong. Even the newer ones that are more robust are shit.

>>2446891
>Subsidize flood insurance
>WhY iS EvErYoNe LiViNg In A hIgH RiSk ArEa?
Morons like you ought to be culled

>>2448242
Sadly the concept of insurance has escaped that steel trap of a mind you have.