Any rhyme or reason?

Got a call from a client today, the insurance co. (he said) rejected the wind mit I conducted on his property. They are reinspecting it. He’s upset partially with me, he thought maybe they found something wrong with mine. I explained the reinspection program to him and his attitude was well then why did I pay you? I explained that they weren’t paying the inspector to give him the credits ( I did that ) they were paying him to dispute my findings.

Good luck, when I got home I pulled up the report. All the pictures are perfect, everything in the report is 100% accurate and I can’t for the life of me figure out why they would send out a reinspect on this one. Do they throw the addresses in a hat and pull them out at random? Or, are some firms reinspecting every one. If they are going to do that why not just do it and tell the homeowners not to waste their time and money on us?

I tell all of my clients that the insurance companies may send out an auditor. Ins. companies do what they want, they’re the new mafia.;-):smiley:

It bothers me that a client of mine was left with the impression that the report was “rejected” and that was why another inspection was being performed. I don’t know what was said so I can’t be certain he didn’t misunderstand. I hope those doing reinspections are not deliberately casting aspersion on fellow inspectors and conduct the inspections without any predisposition to find fault.

Most of them doing the reinspections are just going out to do a wind mit and get paid. My only fear of them is that they were some of the ones in the first place that we keep finding did them wrong on the two page form.

Brian, some companies are reinspecting most everything. When did you do your wind mit? When was the re-inspection done? Perhaps it is a casualty of the form change?

Hey Michelle, February 2011. Company is Safe Harbor? The home was built in 2007. Just seemed to me to be the least likely of all to be the reinspected. Clear photos and no ambiguous findings (no flat roof, identified as other than hip, only glazed openings covered etc. ). I guess they know how to waste money as well as how to attempt to save it. The client called because the inspector was trying to schedule an appt.


This is a double edged sword. The insurance company is requiring the client to have an inspection to get the discounts. If you call the agent he has one inspector. Then the Insurance company decides to send out their own inspector to re-evaluate it. This guy is on a different list because he refuses to whore himself out for however much they are paying for these. It will probably eventually come down to only these guys getting the inspections, for a fee of course, and we will be squeezed out of the process. Even if we are doing them correctly it will not matter because of those who originally did them wrong and made all that money.

Here is the info I got from my source:
“, they are one of the few AM Best companies left and they are SUPER strict on what they will insure… they inspect everything”

So, I wouldn’t take it personally :slight_smile:

That is the intent of the “re-inspection program”. Eliminate the retail wind mitigation inspection and drive traffic to the “preferred providers”.

The impression my client was left with by the inspector for the insurance company was that my inspection was rejected. That I take personally. I told the client that if in fact any part of my reporting was not “up to snuff” with regard to their requirements I would be pleased to return free of charge. That is not the case it is simply a reinspect.

I hope those calling to schedule reinspects are not causing a problem by casting aspersion on the other previous inspectors on the property. I appreciate your proffessionalism and am certain that your firm would not act in such an unscrupulous manner. I have no such certainty as related to others, nor do I trust their intent or honesty.

I will defend the homeowners best interests however and should a difference of opinion arise the reinspector had best be prepared to conduct an addittional reinspection.:cool:

We have not done any re-inspections

Like I said I trust your firm not to act that way. I wasn’t singling you out just answering Michelles post. Point is if this is actually happenning to others I think it would be best to handle it internally in the industry by proffessionals in the industry through direct contact. If in fact they had a problem with my inspection or report the insurance company should have contacted me. If they are going to inspect every property then they should provide it as a fee paid service to their insured.

The gloves are off and this guy had best be prepared to go back if he wants to argue with the original inspectors findings.

I agree 100%

I wouldn’t take it personally, especially if you had photo documentation of your findings as required. I always explain to a client that the insurance company has the right to reinspection, in fact, that’s why we have to be so thorough with documentation and photos to present the best case for them; our effort to do so is what they are paying for.

When all is said and done, unless you missed it by a mile, which I doubt, if your client is disappointed, it will be with their insurance company not you.

I agree that the re-inspection program has the potential to be used by insurance companies to elimate ‘non preferred’ inspectors from doing insurance inspections. But just like some less than honorable real estate agents push ‘preferred’ inspectors to benefit themselves, the smart consumer will still realize it is in their best interest to choose someone they have personally screened, and who is unbiased in the transaction.