Protecting Yourself from Claims Predators After a Disaster

Don’t sign ANYTHING.

A fire has just torn through your home. The flames are still being beaten back by firefighters. Hoses snake across your lawn. Smoke fills the air and your eyes sting from the heat. Your family is standing in the street in whatever you managed to grab on the way out. You don’t know yet what you’ve lost, what’s left, or where you’ll sleep tonight.

And then someone walks up and hands you a contract.

It sounds almost unbelievable. Unfortunately, for far too many Missouri homeowners, it’s a scene that plays out all too often.

Who Are These People — and Why Are They at Your Fire Scene?

Some public adjusters — mostly from out of state who work claims here, but a few licensed and working in Missouri — hire paid local solicitors specifically to drum up business at disaster scenes. These solicitors are often the first non-emergency personnel to arrive at a loss. They scan police scanners, monitor fire department radio frequencies, and show up while smoke is still rising from the rubble, clipboard and contract in hand.

Their job is simple: get your signature before you have a chance to think.

Public adjusters are professionals who represent policyholders in insurance claims — and legitimate ones can provide real value, especially in complex losses. But the tactics used by the predatory fringe of this industry are a different matter entirely. When someone approaches a grief-stricken, disoriented homeowner at the scene of a disaster and pressures them to sign a legal contract, that’s not advocacy. That’s exploitation.

The Problem with Signing Under Duress

In the immediate aftermath of a fire, flood, or other catastrophic loss, you are not in a position to make clear-headed legal and financial decisions. That’s not a character flaw — it’s simply human nature. Trauma, shock, and fear are powerful forces, and they impair judgment in ways that even intelligent, capable people don’t always recognize in the moment.

Public adjuster contracts are legally binding agreements. They typically grant the adjuster the authority to communicate with your insurer on your behalf and entitle them to a percentage of your settlement — often between 10% and 15%, sometimes higher. Signing such a contract at the scene of a loss, before you even know the full extent of your damages, means you are committing a significant portion of your recovery funds to someone you met minutes ago, under circumstances no reasonable person could call voluntary.

Many homeowners who signed these agreements later reported feeling they had no choice, that the solicitor implied it was necessary to get the claims process started quickly, or that they were simply too stunned to push back. Some didn’t even fully understand what they had signed until weeks later.

A Legislative Gap That Leaves Policyholders Vulnerable

You might expect that showing up at an active fire scene to solicit business from disaster victims would simply be illegal. In many states, it should be. But legislators have often been reluctant to outright prohibit this kind of solicitation, instead attempting to address it through disclosure requirements, waiting periods, and contract cancellation rights.

While those protections have some value, they rely on policyholders knowing their rights and having the presence of mind to exercise them at one of the most disorienting moments of their lives. That’s a fragile safety net at best.

Until stronger protections are in place, the burden of self-defense falls largely on you.

How to Protect Yourself

The single most important thing you can do in the aftermath of any disaster is this: do not sign any contract, agreement, or authorization with anyone until you are ready.

That means waiting until you are somewhere safe and calm. It means waiting until you have had time to assess the full scope of your loss. It means waiting until you have spoken with your insurance company, understood what your policy covers, and had the opportunity to consider every option available to you.

You have time. Despite what a pushy solicitor may imply, your insurance claim will not be lost or compromised because you took a few days — or even a few weeks — before hiring a representative. Your insurer is legally obligated to work with you. Your rights as a policyholder do not expire.

Here are a few practical steps to take immediately after a loss:

  • Call your insurance company directly to report the claim and begin the process. You don’t need a third party to initiate this.
  • Ask for identification from anyone who approaches you at the scene claiming to represent your interests. Get their name, company, and license number.
  • Never feel pressured to make decisions on the spot. Any legitimate professional will respect your need for time.
  • Consult someone you trust — a family member, attorney, or financial advisor — before signing anything.
  • Know your cancellation rights. Missouri law gives policyholders the right to cancel a public adjuster contract within a set period after signing. But it’s far better not to sign under pressure in the first place.

The Bottom Line

Disasters are devastating. The recovery process is long, complicated, and emotionally exhausting. There are honest, ethical professionals who can genuinely help you navigate an insurance claim — and if you decide you need one, you should have the time and clarity to choose one wisely.

Don’t let anyone take that choice away from you in the chaos of the worst day of your life. Put the contract down. Step back. Breathe. The decisions you make in the days and weeks ahead will shape your recovery for years to come — and you deserve to make them on your own terms.

James H. Bushart, Licensed Missouri Public Adjuster
MO License #8207067 | SCLA | NAPIA
314-803-2167 | missouripublicadjuster.org

Missouri Insurance Claims and Politicians Don’t Mix Well

map of missouri

The Great State of Missouri

 

There is a disconnect between legislative promises and regulatory reality in Missouri property insurance claims. Here, what THEY don’t know can hurt YOU.

In the world of property insurance, the language we use to set consumer expectations matters. Currently, Missouri’s proposed Senate Bill 1543 is attempting to change, among other things, how consumers interact with public adjusters. There are some good provisions in this bill, but a close look at the bill’s mandated language reveals a massive gap between what legislators are promising and what state regulators can actually deliver.

The Legislative Promise: “Free Help”

Missouri SB 1543 proposes that public adjusters must include a very specific, bold-text disclaimer in their contracts. It requires them to tell the consumer: “YOU DON’T HAVE TO HIRE A PUBLIC ADJUSTER TO FILE A CLAIM WITH YOUR INSURANCE COMPANY… IF YOU NEED HELP WITH YOUR CLAIM, THE MISSOURI DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE AND INSURANCE WILL HELP YOU FOR FREE”.

It is true that a policyholder does not have to hire a public adjuster to assist with their insurance claim, just as a taxpayer does not need to hire a tax preparer or CPA to prepare their taxes.  Particularly, when the firetruck is still at your home spraying water on the fire and a public adjuster or solicitor is there trying to get you to sign a contract for representation before you have had a chance to consider your entire situation (yes, unfortunately, this happens), this warning is certainly valid and useful. I enthusiastically endorse it. However, when you have already filed a claim and are seeking help with it, is the Missouri Department of Commerce and Insurance able to represent you in the same way I can for free? 

In the context of the bill, which tightly regulates who is allowed to “negotiate” a claim—defined as discussing or exchanging offers with an insurance company to reach a settlement amount—this mandatory disclaimer strongly implies that the Department of Insurance will step in and act as a free alternative to a hired public adjuster.

The Regulatory Reality: “No Authority to Determine Loss”

However, if we look at the actual letters sent by the Missouri Department of Commerce and Insurance when consumers today request this “free help,” a completely different reality emerges.

When responding to consumer complaints regarding property claim disputes, the Department explicitly clarifies the strict limits of its power. A standard response from a Department complaint investigator plainly states: “I do not have the authority to determine the amount or extent of loss you have incurred”.

Instead of negotiating the dollar value of the damage or debating the scope of repairs with the insurance company, the Department outlines a strictly regulatory role:

  • Finding out the current status of the claim file.
  • Evaluating how the insurance company is handling the situation.
  • Assisting in claim resolution if possible, primarily by ensuring “the company is compliant with Missouri insurance laws”.
  • Cannot address property claim denials or partial denials.
  • Cannot establish the facts regarding any other disagreement between you and another party.

How much “help” can they really provide without determining or negotiating the amount of the loss, the scope of the damage, or the merits of the claim they are presumably helping with for free when the claim has been denied or underpaid?

The Danger of Overpromising

The difference between these two documents is staggering. The proposed contract language suggests to consumers that they can forgo professional representation because the state will step in and “help” them resolve their claim for free. Yet, when the state actually arrives, they legally cannot evaluate the damage, determine the cost of the loss, or negotiate the financial settlement.

If an insurance company relies on an engineer to deny structural damage or limit a roof replacement, the Department of Insurance does not have the authority to argue the engineering merits or negotiate a higher payout on the consumer’s behalf. They merely check to see if the insurer followed the statutory timelines and processes. When they have finished helping you for “free” and informed you that the insurer who has denied or underpaid your claim has violated none of the particular rules they govern, is not the insurer who denied or underpaid your claim even more solid in their partial or full denial of your claim? What can you do at that point other than sue?

Conclusion

For property owners facing devastating losses, clarity is essential. Suggesting that a regulatory body can replace the active negotiation and valuation services of a public adjuster is not just misleading; it leaves the consumer fundamentally unprotected during the most critical phase of their claim.

In short, while the state will offer its regulatory review for free, they will not—and legally cannot—act as a free public adjuster to negotiate the financial value or factual merits of either a residential or company’s commercial insurance claim.

Legislators must ensure that the statutory notices they force upon professionals accurately reflect the actual powers of the state agencies they promote. If those lobbying for this bill to become law are successful, Missouri policyholders will need to know that the promise of “free” help in this contract language may not be true.

James H. Bushart, Licensed Missouri Public Adjuster
MO License #8207067 | SCLA | NAPIA
314-803-2167 | missouripublicadjuster.org

Missouri Policyholders and Missouri-Based Public Adjusters

The Great State of Missouri

Why Missouri Policyholders Are Better Served by a Missouri-Based Public Adjuster

After a significant property loss, the decisions a policyholder makes in the first few days can shape the outcome of the entire claim. One of the most consequential of those decisions is who to hire to represent them. Public adjusters from outside Missouri sometimes work claims in this state, and some hold valid Missouri licenses. But licensure alone doesn’t make someone the right advocate for your claim. Where a public adjuster lives, works, and has built their career matters — and for Missouri policyholders, hiring someone with deep roots in this state carries real, practical advantages that an out-of-state adjuster simply cannot match.

Missouri Law Is a Specialty of Its Own

Insurance is regulated at the state level, and Missouri has its own statutes, administrative rules, and regulatory history that govern how claims must be handled. The Missouri Department of Commerce and Insurance sets the rules carriers must follow — including how quickly they must acknowledge a claim, respond to communications, and issue payment decisions. Missouri courts have interpreted policy language and insurer obligations in ways that are specific to this jurisdiction.

A public adjuster who primarily works in other states may hold a Missouri license, but that doesn’t mean they have a working command of Missouri’s regulatory environment. Knowing when an insurer is out of compliance with Missouri’s prompt payment requirements, understanding how the Department of Commerce and Insurance handles complaints, and being familiar with how Missouri arbitration and appraisal processes tend to unfold — these are things that come from sustained experience working Missouri claims, not from passing a licensing exam.

They Know the Market — Your Market

One of the most important functions a public adjuster serves is helping to create an accurate, well-supported estimate of what it will actually cost to restore your property. That estimate needs to reflect real-world costs in your area, not national averages or figures derived from markets hundreds of miles away.

A Missouri-based public adjuster who has worked claims across the state understands what licensed contractors charge in your region, what materials cost in your local supply chain, and what code upgrades are commonly required by Missouri municipalities during restoration work. They’re familiar with the contractors who do quality insurance restoration work and can identify when an insurer’s estimate falls short of what the job will genuinely require.

An adjuster who primarily works in coastal markets or high-population metros may rely on estimating software defaults that don’t translate well to Missouri conditions. Those discrepancies can cost policyholders real money.

Relationships With Missouri Carriers Matter

Missouri’s insurance market has its own cast of carriers, third-party administrators, and independent adjusting firms. A public adjuster who has worked this market for years knows how different companies approach claims, which carriers tend to engage constructively and which ones require more pressure, and which individuals within those organizations are empowered to make decisions. That institutional knowledge informs strategy at every stage of the claim.

Out-of-state adjusters encounter Missouri carriers as relative strangers. A Missouri-based public adjuster walks into that negotiation with context that shapes how the conversation goes.

Accessibility When It Counts

Property claims can move quickly, especially in the early stages. An adjuster who can be on-site promptly — to document damage before it’s disturbed, to meet with the carrier’s representative during inspections, or to walk through the property with a contractor — provides a level of engagement that’s hard to replicate remotely. A Missouri-based public adjuster can be there. Someone operating primarily out of Florida or Colorado cannot offer the same responsiveness.

This matters not just at the start of a claim but throughout it. Claims often require follow-up site visits, reinspections, or additional documentation as new damage is uncovered during demolition or repairs. Ongoing, in-person engagement is part of thorough claim representation, and proximity makes that possible.

Accountability That Outlasts the Claim

An adjuster with an established Missouri practice has professional reputation and community standing at stake in every claim they handle. They work in this market year-round — not just after major storm events — and they depend on referrals and repeat business from Missouri policyholders, attorneys, and contractors. That ongoing accountability shapes how they work.

An out-of-state adjuster operating in Missouri on a temporary or opportunistic basis has fewer long-term stakes here. If a dispute arises after the claim is closed, or if supplemental issues emerge months later, a locally rooted adjuster is far more accessible and motivated to see things through. Their reputation depends on it.

The Long Tail of a Claim

Many policyholders don’t realize how long a property claim can remain active. Supplements arise. Disputes over scope or pricing can extend negotiations. Repairs reveal hidden damage that wasn’t visible during the initial inspection. The policyholder’s need for representation doesn’t always end when the first check arrives.

A Missouri-based public adjuster is positioned to stay engaged through all of it. They’re a phone call and a short drive away, not a flight and a time zone difference.

Choosing the Right Advocate

When you hire a public adjuster to represent your Missouri property claim, you’re not just hiring a license — you’re hiring a person’s knowledge, relationships, and commitment to your outcome. A public adjuster who has built their career in Missouri brings all of that to the table. One who is passing through brings a credential and a plane ticket.

For Missouri policyholders, the choice is clear.

 

James H. Bushart, Licensed Missouri Public Adjuster
MO License #8207067 | SCLA | NAPIA
314-803-2167 | missouripublicadjuster.org

Public Adjuster Hannibal, Missouri

Welcome to Hannibal, MO

Hannibal and Marion County sit along the Mississippi River in a region that sees its share of severe storms, hail, flooding, and high winds every year. Property damage claims in northeast Missouri are often disputed by insurers — and many policyholders don’t realize they have the right to push back.

I’m James H. Bushart, a licensed Missouri public adjuster serving Hannibal and the surrounding area. I represent policyholders, not insurance companies.

Free Hannibal area claim review: 314-803-2167

Who I Represent

Hannibal homeowners and business owners whose claims have been denied, underpaid, or disputed after storm, hail, wind, fire, water, or flood damage. If the insurer’s offer doesn’t cover your actual losses, that number may be negotiable.

What I Do

I review your policy, independently inspect all damage, document what the insurer missed, and negotiate on your behalf. SCLA designation. NAPIA member. Missouri-licensed since 2012. I’ve handled disputes with all Missouri insurance providers, including Allstate, Nationwide, State Farm, Church Mutual, Shelter, Columbia Insurance, and others across Missouri.

No Fee Unless I Recover More

Contingency basis — you owe nothing unless I recover more than the insurer’s offer. See all Missouri areas I serve.

James H. Bushart, Licensed Missouri Public Adjuster
MO License #8207067 | SCLA | NAPIA | 314-803-2167
missouripublicadjuster.org

Mistakes To Avoid When Filing an Insurance Claim


 

James H. Bushart, Public Adjuster LLC

 

Insurance claims for property damage can be a complicated process and avoiding mistakes can be a challenge. It requires proper documentation and timely submission of relevant paperwork. Any mistake in filing the claim could result in delayed or denied coverage, leaving the policyholder to bear the entire cost of the damage. Therefore, it is essential to understand the do’s and don’ts of filing an insurance claim for property damage and to know when to get help. In this essay, we will discuss the mistakes that policyholders should avoid when filing an insurance claim for property damage.

Failing to Document the Damage:

The first and most common mistake that policyholders make is failing to document the damage properly. It is essential to take pictures and videos of the damaged property as soon as possible after the incident occurs. This documentation will serve as evidence for the insurance company to determine the extent of the damage and the amount of coverage required. Without proper documentation, it can be challenging to prove the damage, and the insurance company may deny the claim. 

Photographs or video of the hailstones that struck the property, for example, are valuable evidence since some weather reports might report the nearest hailstorm to have been miles away on the date of loss.  Photographs of interior water damage taken before clean-up measures began help preserve evidence of fresh damage.  Proving your claim is YOUR responsibility.  Leave it up to the insurance company to prove it for you and you are likely to be disappointed in the result of their half-hearted efforts.

 

Waiting Too Long to File the Claim:

Another common mistake that policyholders make is waiting too long to file the claim. It is crucial to report the damage to the insurance company as soon as possible after the incident occurs. Most insurance policies have a specific timeframe within which the policyholder must report the damage. Failing to report the damage within this timeframe could result in a denied claim. Additionally, waiting too long to file the claim could result in delays in the claims process, which could cause further damage to the property.

Failing to Provide Accurate Information:

When filing an insurance claim for property damage, it is essential to provide accurate and detailed information about the incident. This includes the date and time of the incident, the cause of the damage, and the extent of the damage. Providing inaccurate or incomplete information could result in delays or denials of the claim. Additionally, it could result in the policyholder being accused of insurance fraud, which could result in legal consequences.

Not Reviewing the Insurance Policy:

Before filing an insurance claim for property damage, it is essential to review the insurance policy to understand the coverage and exclusions. Many policyholders make the mistake of assuming that their insurance policy covers all types of damage, only to realize later that the damage is excluded from the policy. Therefore, it is essential to review the policy and understand the coverage and exclusions before filing the claim.  Your insurance policy is a contract worth hundreds of thousands (sometimes millions) of dollars.  READ IT.

Attempting to Repair the Damage Before Filing the Claim:

Some policyholders make the mistake of attempting to repair the damage before filing the claim. It is essential to notify the insurance company before making any repairs to the property. The insurance company will likely send a claims adjuster to assess the damage and determine the amount of coverage required. Failing to notify the insurance company before making repairs could result in a denied claim, as the insurance company will not have the opportunity to assess the damage.

Failing to Mitigate Further Damage:

When property damage occurs, it is essential to take steps to mitigate further damage. This includes taking steps to prevent water damage or securing the property from further damage. Failing to take steps to mitigate further damage could result in a denied claim, as the insurance company may view the policyholder as negligent in protecting the property.

Not Understanding the Claims Process:

Filing an insurance claim for property damage can be a complicated process. It is essential to understand the claims process and follow the guidelines provided by the insurance company. Failure to understand the claims process could result in delays or denials of the claim.  If you need help with this, contact a licensed public adjuster or attorney for advice or assistance.

Not Following Up on the Claim:

After filing an insurance claim for property damage, it is essential to follow up with the insurance company regularly. This includes following up on the status of the claim and providing any additional documentation required. 

Not Seeking Assistance from Unbiased Sources:

When you find your insurance provider putting more effort into denying your claim than paying it or you feel that you are getting unfair resistance or treatment, consult a licensed public adjuster or an attorney to assist you.

Missouri Law and Your Insurance Company

Not everything that is unethical is illegal.  There are ways of stepping right up to the line without crossing it and no one can do it better than some insurance companies with their vast financial resources and lobby power at the state government level.

But how far is too far? 

This is how the statute reads …

Universal Citation: MO Rev Stat § 375.1007.

Improper claims practices.

375.1007. Any of the following acts by an insurer, if committed in violation of section 375.1005, constitutes an improper claims practice:

(1) Misrepresenting to claimants and insureds relevant facts or policy provisions relating to coverages at issue;

(2) Failing to acknowledge with reasonable promptness pertinent communications with respect to claims arising under its policies;

(3) Failing to adopt and implement reasonable standards for the prompt investigation and settlement of claims arising under its policies;

(4) Not attempting in good faith to effectuate prompt, fair and equitable settlement of claims submitted in which liability has become reasonably clear;

(5) Compelling insureds or beneficiaries to institute suits to recover amounts due under its policies by offering substantially less than the amounts ultimately recovered in suits brought by them;

(6) Refusing to pay claims without conducting a reasonable investigation;

(7) Failing to affirm or deny coverage of claims within a reasonable time after proof of loss statements have been completed and communicated to the insurer;

(8) Attempting to settle a claim for less than the amount to which a reasonable person would believe the insured or beneficiary was entitled by reference to written or printed advertising material accompanying or made part of an application;

(9) Attempting to settle claims on the basis of an application which was materially altered without notice to, or knowledge or consent of, the insured;

(10) Making a claims payment to an insured or beneficiary without indicating the coverage under which each payment is being made;

(11) Unreasonably delaying the investigation or payment of claims by requiring both a formal proof of loss form and subsequent verification that would result in duplication of information and verification appearing in the formal proof of loss form;

(12) Failing in the case of claims denial or offers of a compromise settlement to promptly provide a reasonable and accurate explanation of the basis for such actions;

(13) Failing to provide forms necessary to present claims within fifteen calendar days of a request with reasonable explanations regarding their use;

(14) Failing to adopt and implement reasonable standards to assure that the repairs of a repairer owned by or required to be used by the insurer are performed in a workmanlike manner;

(15) Failing to promptly settle claims where liability has become reasonably clear under one portion of the insurance policy coverage in order to influence settlements under other portions of the insurance policy coverage.

 

Fighting the Good Fight

Fighting the good fight

Photo by Pavel Danilyuk on Pexels.com

 

     I recently read a touching and inspiring tribute written by an attorney who advocates for policyholders and who had recently lost a valuable partner and fellow advocate to cancer.  Together, they would fight the good fight. There are not enough fighters like them in this arena, and in his tribute to his partner, he described her drive and enthusiasm for battling with insurance companies on behalf of their clients.

     Being one who shares in the same fight (though not at such grand of a scale), I felt a great sense of personal loss.  Even though I did not know her, personally, I know her heart and I have shared similar pain with the clients who had purchased insurance for peace of mind but found, when disaster came to their door, that this peace was only a temporary illusion.

     Though Missouri law tasks an insurance company to provide prompt and fair assistance to its policyholders in exchange for payment of premiums, minimizing risk, and filing a claim only upon sustaining damage – some insurance companies, to protect their own financial interest, inflict more stress and financial harm upon their policyholders than the destructive event that prompted their claim, and at a time when the policyholder is most vulnerable with the least financial reserve.  Instead of providing the warm professional care and assistance projected by their televised mascots, the policyholder is frequently met with fierce opposition and obstruction intended to exasperate, wear down, and break the resolve of the most committed policyholder defending his own rights under the very insurance policy he bought for “peace of mind”.

     Fighting through a barrage of tactics used by insurance companies to delay, deny, and defend against the policyholder is certainly not an enjoyable experience for either the policyholder or his advocate.  It is, however, something that must be done in order to receive a dollar-for-dollar payment for the incurred loss.  That is the reality that is not shown on friendly and warm television commercials.

     We lost a fighter.  Who will take her place?

 

 

 

 

 

Are the Engineer Reports Purchased By Insurance Companies to Deny Claims Accurate and Truthful?

engineer report to deny claim

Photo by Pixabay on Pexels.com

     In search of an expert to provide them with a reason to deny a claim, many insurance companies will turn to the engineering profession. 

     There are highly respected and valued professional licensed engineers who design and build bridges and skyscrapers, who safely and efficiently channel waterways through and around large cities, who design and test the durability of aircraft and automobiles, who meet and overcome construction and building challenges around the globe – and then there are those who market themselves to insurance carriers for the purpose of providing written reports for them to use to deny insurance claims for wind and hail damage to homes and businesses.  There is money in it.  Insurance companies will pay them upwards of $2,500.00 per report.  Most of these reports provide little more than boilerplate narratives regarding simple roofing materials and most of them contain little or no scientific or engineering data – but aside from their apparent lack of relevance, how accurate is the information that is provided?

     As a public adjuster representing business and homeowner policyholders with their insurance claims, I read many of these reports and too often find errors, misrepresentations, and ambiguities salted among information intended to present a “scientific” spin on what are usually simple, routine observations that virtually anyone can make.

     Much of what you will find in these reports, sometimes as much as two-thirds or more of the entire report, is a boilerplate filler of generic information that could be (but not always) relevant to their observations.  It looks impressive at first glance, just as it is intended to, but is it even correct?  Not always.

     An engineer in several of his recent reports used by various insurance companies to deny claims includes the following language:  “According to the National Roofing Contractors Association (NRCA), the lifespan of a roof is 20 years.”  His report was peer-reviewed and stamped by another engineer with his firm – an engineering firm widely used by insurance carriers throughout the country. This claim by the engineer caught my attention because he was writing about a certain type of roofing material that carried a 30-year warranty and, as most people familiar with roofing materials know, various roofing materials have various lifespans – some as high as over 50 years.  

     I did not believe that the National Roofing Contractor’s Association would be so uninformed as to publish what he claimed they did, so I wrote to them and inquired as to where I could find the information from them that this engineer was quoting in his report used to support a denial of a cliam.  The Vice President of Technical Services for the NRCA responded to me, as follows:  “The 20-year figure is not from the NRCA.  Lifespans vary greatly.”  Thus, the engineer was not only wrong in his peer-reviewed statement of fact regarding the lifespan of a roof, but he also misrepresented the source for his errant facts.  

     Some engineers will provide comments and conclusions about the density or speed of hailstones as being less than required to damage roofing material and provide absolutely no information as to how they were able to measure the density or speed of the hailstone that melted away months or years before their observation.  We are to simply take their word for it, like the quotations from the NRCA, perhaps.

     The engineer paid by the insurance company might use ambiguous language that appears to say something but doesn’t.  For instance, did the engineer say that large hailstones did not strike your roof, or did he simply say that he did not observe evidence of large hail strikes?  There is a difference.  Could there be evidence that he did not “see”, such as bruised indentations on weathered asphalt composite material that is soft to the touch?  Did he say this, or did he leave it to the insurance company to use in the manner of their own choosing?

     Insurance carriers, being corporations who have a fiduciary duty to protect the financial interests of their shareholders as well as a contractual duty to fulfill their promises to their policyholders, will often find this conflict of interest resulting in their wrongful actions of grossly underpaying or wrongfully denying their policyholders’ claims.   The misuse of engineer reports is one of the ways they do this.

     Often, insurance companies will knowingly allow the engineer’s errant attempts to interject policy interpretations into his report to be used to deny a policyholder’s claim.  I have personally reversed an attempt by an insurer to deny an insurance claim because the engineer reported that the damage to the roof “could not be seen from the ground” when there was nothing in the policy to exclude damage for that reason, as one of many examples.  

     An expert witness in court must present his credentials, provide his testimony under oath, and be subjected to cross-examination, but insurance companies present biased hired guns as experts in the claims process and deprive vulnerable policyholders of necessary funds to restore their homes and businesses, with impunity.

     The advice to not believe everything you read should be extended to engineer reports paid for by your insurance company to deny your insurance claim.  Have them closely reviewed by your own expert for accuracy, relevancy, and truth before accepting that your claim should be denied as a result of an engineer’s report.  Whatever you do, do NOT let the insurance company’s engineer be the final word on the validity of your claim.

Missouri Homeowners/Business Insurance and the Roof

 

Insurance

     There are two kinds of roofs on Missouri homes and business structures.  There are those that have storm damage and those that will have storm damage.  Understandably, the various insurance companies from all over the country that sell policies in our state will offer a wide variety of coverage options that are not always fully understood by the property owners before disaster strikes.  

     Learning after the roof has been damaged that you have been saving pennies per year by NOT including coverage to match replacement shingles or siding, or learning that hail dents that destroy the appearance of your metal roof is not considered “damage” by your insurance company, can result in costly out of pocket expenses that you thought were covered by insurance.  

     The Missouri Department of Insurance has created an informational and interactive website that helps you to understand your roofing coverage for each insurance carrier.  While I recommend that you visit their site, I urge you to take the time to read and understand your insurance policy, as well.  Have your agent clearly explain to you, when necessary, what it does and does not provide and ask lots of questions.

     Considering that when an insurance company’s claims department is on its absolute best behavior, its job is the same as any corporation that is run by a board of directors.  That job is to put the monetary interests of their shareholders (not their policyholders) at the top of their priority list.  Their duty to you, as a policyholder, is not fiduciary (as it is with their shareholders) but contractual.  Thus, even when you are dealing with a fair and reasonable adjuster, you need to know what your contract with them says.  That contract is your insurance policy.

     Your insurance company is prepared and well-practiced to fight and defend their rights under that contract.  How prepared are you?  Don’t let the first large claim be the first time you read it.  Caveat emptor.

Why Missouri Contractors Cannot Negotiate Your Insurance Claim.

missouri contractors cannot represent your claim

Missouri contractors cannot negotiate your insurance claim on your behalf with your insurance company.  On August 28, 2011, the Governor of Missouri signed into law Senate Bill 101, which prohibits home exterior contractors from representing a policyholder or negotiating with their insurance company for exterior work on their home as a part of an insurance claim.

Here is a link to the law:   It is obvious.  

So why do insurance companies continue negotiating with residential contractors despite this law?  Perhaps it is because, when they do, they can get away with underpaying your claim.

An insurance adjuster can say things to your contractor that he cannot tell you, your Missouri attorney or your Missouri licensed public adjuster because, unlike you (and those who lawfully represent you), the contractor is not a party to the agreement (the policy) between you and the insurance company. 

Insurance adjusters will often withhold certain information from the contractor, misrepresent or not fully disclose your coverage to the contractor, and say things to your contractor such as, “We are not paying that much for that building material … Your estimate is too high for labor, and you need to revise that … We are not going to pay more than such and such dollars for this claim … We won’t pay your overhead and profit” … and so forth because they are not communicating with you or anyone lawfully representing you.

It would be an act of bad faith, and perhaps a vexatious act carrying severe penalties, for the adjuster to say such things to you or your lawful representative.  Why?  Because certain communications and actions between insurance companies, their policyholders, and their lawful representatives are regulated by the Missouri Department of Insurance. Such regulations, however, do not necessarily extend to their relationships with contractors and other vendors.  In their opinion, your contractor represents his interests and not yours. 

For example, when an insurance adjuster makes a statement of fact regarding your coverage to you or your lawful representative, he must respond with supporting language from your policy upon demand.  Not so, however, when your contractor makes the same demand.  Since the contractor is not a party to the agreement or lawfully representing anyone who is, he is not entitled to know all of the critical information the policy contains.  Withholding this information about your specific coverage from your contractor puts him in the dark and the insurance company’s adjuster in complete control. 

Some contractors mistakenly believe that since they have worked with certain insurance companies or adjusters in the past, all policyholders with that company have the same or similar coverage – which is not true.  The same insurance carrier can insure three or four neighbors living side by side on the same street and have different policies with different coverage. Some contractors quote what they believe to be “state law” regarding what an insurance company must pay for, which is also untrue.  In Missouri, state laws do not govern or control all of the information contained in an insurance policy, and policy interpretation disputes are settled in civil court and are generally not legislated.

I hold skilled and experienced exterior contractors in very high regard. They are essential advisors for you and your lawful representatives in settling a claim.  Their skillful and experienced input in determining the full scope of the damage and what they charge for restoration of that damage is often vital in settling your claim.  It is when they extend beyond their valuable construction skills and expertise and go beyond the “low hanging fruit” that the adjuster would pay anyway and (as some contractors advertise) “push” the adjuster toward a larger settlement, complete documentation, communicate with the carrier on your behalf and settle your claim, those and similar actions may not be in accord with the law and their results may not produce all of the money that you are entitled to.

On your own, reflect as to how an independent roofing contractor negotiating a claim for hail damage to shingles is likely to overlook and omit hail damage to windows, siding, screens, wood trim, decks, and HVAC equipment from his estimate as he argues with an insurance company’s adjuster for a complete roof replacement.  Then consider why an insurance adjuster would be willing to negotiate with him even though the law forbids it.  It could be a bargain for the insurance company at your expense.

Most damaging is the harm some do to your claim before you finally bring in qualified and lawful representatives, such as your attorney or licensed public adjuster, to assist you.  While their lack of ability to correctly interpret your coverage or communicate your rights under the policy may have limited their ability to help you fully resolve your claim, what they spoke to the insurance company (correctly or incorrectly) can interfere with a fair resolution and must be identified and resolved before progress can be made.

I work with many exterior contractors and help them operate within the boundaries outlined in Senate Bill 101, allowing them to focus on their areas of skill and expertise to serve their customers’ construction needs fully.  Their customers can recover from their insurers what they require to restore their home to its pre-damaged condition, and the contractor makes what he bids for the needed work.  When done correctly, all parties are served in a win-win position.  However, when done improperly, some or all come out on the losing end.

Not all claims require an attorney or a public adjuster to handle them.  Most can be taken directly by the policyholder with no representation if they understand their rights under their contract with the insurance company and have a skilled contractor they trust to inform them of their damage correctly and what must be done to restore their property to its pre-loss condition.

No one but you, your Missouri attorney, or your Missouri licensed public adjuster should be communicating with your insurance company on your behalf and remember that a “no” from the insurance adjuster to your exterior contractor is not the final word on your claim for damage.

 

 

 

This Blog/Website is made available by James H. Bushart, Public Adjuster LLC, for educational purposes only and to give you general information and a general understanding of the work of a public adjuster, not to provide specific legal advice. The authors and site manager make no representations as to the accuracy, completeness, currentness, suitability, or validity of any information on this site and will not be liable for any errors, omissions, or delays in this information or any losses, injuries, or damages arising from its display or use. Using this blog site lets you understand there is no public adjuster/client relationship between you and James H. Bushart, Public Adjuster.  The Blog/Website should not be used as a substitute for competent legal advice from a licensed professional attorney or for capable maintenance or repair advice from a qualified contractor licensed to perform work in your state.