1.) During my work on various hurricane claims, I witnessed many lawyers, with financial investments in restoration, remediation and/or assessment companies, handling claims that their sister companies (i.e., those restoration, remediation and/or assessment companies) were hired – sometimes by the law firm, itself. This is, obviously, a conflict of interest, and has led to predatory requests  by these lawyers. When such requests come in, Insurers rightfully question the validity of those requests and have a right to have the claim investigated by competent persons to determine which of those requests are legitimate and which are not. This has the effect of (1) prolonging the beginning and end of the claim, (2) increasing the cost of the claims handling process (an increase that is passed on to Policy Holders in the form of increased premiums and/or an increase in policy exclusions (i.e., less policy coverages)), (3) potential risk to occupants of being exposed to environmental stressor (e.g., mold and bacteria) during the mitigation and settlement processes, as they may be asked to remain in the home or office during these processes, (4) on-going building degradation (i.e., secondary damages), (5) out of pocket expenses for the Insured to prevent secondary damages (e.g., mold colonization and building degradation) and relocation costs (e.g., staying in a hotel while waiting on a settlement), and (6) other negative outcomes. 

3.) I’ve been hired by lawyers to consult them through the process of handling a case regarding property insurance claims for over 18 years. Some of these cases were for the Plaintiff’s lawyer and others for the Defendant’s; some were for Insurers, others for Insureds, and others for contractors. During these cases, I get access to discovery and deposition files. I'm, usually, asked by the lawyer to review the files in relation to current federal, state, and local regulations, codes, and ordinances, as well as industry standards of care, then consult I consult with the lawyer on my findings. These cases have involved simple questions of estimate validity to wrongful death cases. During this time, I’ve read communication logs between the insurance adjuster(s) and assigned contractors (e.g., structural drying technicians or water damage restoration technician) that (1) ignored recommendations by the assigned contractor, (2) dictated that the assigned contractor disregard their recommendations and proceed as per the adjuster’s recommendations, (3) instruct the assigned contractor not to communicate their recommendations or the adjuster's recommendations with the Insured, and (4) instructs the assessor to describe their findings in this or that format, regardless the assessment’s findings. 

So, as you can see from these examples, the threat of fraud and abuse isn’t something that singularly exists from out of state contractors or opportunistic lawyers. And this doesn’t address other issues that exist during claims handling/processing. In future installments I’ll cover some examples of those. In the meantime, I want to express something that’s very important to me regarding the subject matter: These things exemplify why Cyndie and I organized Gulf Coast Center for Indoor Air Quality Services the way that we did. We don’t sign onto contracts that may compromise our ability to provide honest, scientific analysis or limit our ablity to report our findings; we adhere to the AIHA and ACAC code of ethics; and, we have a strict no conflict of interest policy that will not be ignored by employees or infringed upon by outside parties. We did this to provide Floridians a source for reliable, honest, scientific assessment and consultation services – because that’s what every one of us in this great State deserves, whether Insurer or Insured or contractor, etc. If you have questions about how we can serve you, contact us for a no-obligation review of your circumstances.