Get the latest on Wind Mits, FL cont ed, inspector marketing, insurance inspections..

Local Inspection Issues Florida and SUNachi Inspectors
21

[quote=“jshishilla, post:16, topic:63579”]

I have and idea:

Everyone who is questioned on a wind mit sends me the facts, including emails, report and picts. I will give you my honest opinion(including some input form others) in writing. You can then forward it to the agent, customer or underwriter. If you do not like my answer ignore it and do nothing.

I will then collect the info, including those you do not need or want an opinion on and use it for future meetings with the OIR anyone else that would like to hear it. We turn the tables and collect the data on the insurance companies.

We can then have solid evidence of what the insurance companies are doing incorrectly.

Goverment’s purpose is to protect the people, not the industries. I have to go but I will get back to this.

The Declaration of Independence: A Transcription
IN CONGRESS, July 4, 1776.
The unanimous Declaration of the thirteen united States of America,
When in the Course of human events, it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another, and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature’s God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation.

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.–That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, --That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness. Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shewn, that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security.–Such has been the patient sufferance of these Colonies; and such is now the necessity which constrains them to alter their former Systems of Government. The history of the present King of Great Britain is a history of repeated injuries and usurpations, all having in direct object the establishment of an absolute Tyranny over these States. To prove this, let Facts be submitted to a candid world.

22

What do I want NACHI to do regarding the wind mits?

Formally designate a board to speak on the wind mit issues (eg. A/E, HI, Contractor, Code Official, attorney)

which will:

Produce surveys of the membership regarding concerns

Do research, case studies…

These are some of my observations;

Speak up when the industry or governing body is having the inspectors make question interpretations that may place the inspector liable (eg. question # 6, SWR, on the proposed draft and original, goes directly against the FBC and how do you provide pics).

How can an insurance survey form conflict with the FBC, and reference the code as a source.

How can the governing body take stats from the industry it is regulating, not come to the south part of the state (HVHZ), not seek data from sources with no special interest (Universities), not have the Fl Bldg Commission involved, reject a NACHI’s members valid concern(Russell asked about verification on shutters) with a conflicting answer about shutter wizards that will certify pictures?

Allow the question if anyone has been hurt trying to take pics in an attic unanswered without conducting a survey. The majority of the members never read the message board.

Speak up when factual concerns are presented in an open public hearing (eg. the change of roof geometry from 50% major wall to 10% of perimeter).

The governing body should provide an appeals system when a re-inspection conflicts with the original inspection and the inpector wants to appeal. (this is perfect place for NACHI to be as an appeals board). **The homeowner should not have their rates increased until due process is allowed. **(eg. straps have rust, 7d nail vs 8d nail, shutters, etc…)

The draft again has the inspectors answering questions that the underwriters will not address. (eg the opening protection question, underwriting only has A, B, C, or none) Again the 1802 revision 07/07 was perfect for this question.

NACHI, come to have a meeting in South Fl, the Fl Keys, catch a Sailfish .

The picture requirements are sensible in some areas, but wrong in others
(eg. the roof to deck attachment with a metal detector that is inaccurate at best, SWR)

To John and all those trying to bring consistancy to this process,

Thank you for your efforts to improve and voice your right of free speech.

These are only my opinions as all my posts are, but having seen the hardships in the home and seen the stress that this process is bringing to our homeowners I feel compeled to bring up concerns.

23

Nick you said " The picture requirements are sensible in some areas, but wrong in others
(eg. the roof to deck attachment with a metal detector that is inaccurate at best, SWR) "

What about the 5 million dollar home I inspected built in 1996 at gables by the sea?

It would be very difficult to say the least and I would have had to climb thru 3 foot spaces with a/c duct work and fiberglass insulation to try to find a hurricane wrap that must be there by code.

It is neither visible or accessible safety and common sense states they are there.

GET RID OF THE PICT REQUIREMENTS. They prove nothing, people do and will get hurt trying to get them. Crooks and guys less honest then me just put a picture of a wrap from another inspection in place when they cannot get to them and they KNOW they are there. You could never prove it was done when the inspector assumes correctly.

24

You are correct, with the computer programs today any pic can be altered. The license should be the stamp on the insp form

25

Nick H,
If you haven’t already join the Florida Home and Insurance Inspectors chapter, be active and help us get the things you suggest. John, Russle, Preston and Jay were there to represent us as well as them selves, that’s what we’re here to do.
Hope to see you in Melbourne this week end.

26

I don’t know of a “letter” but maybe this is what you’re talking about…

http://www.leg.state.fl.us/statutes/index.cfm?App_mode=Display_Statute&Search_String=&URL=0600-0699/0627/Sections/0627.711.html

627.711 Notice of premium discounts for hurricane loss mitigation; uniform mitigation verification inspection form.—
(1) Using a form prescribed by the Office of Insurance Regulation, the insurer shall clearly notify the applicant or policyholder of any personal lines residential property insurance policy, at the time of the issuance of the policy and at each renewal, of the availability and the range of each premium discount, credit, other rate differential, or reduction in deductibles, and combinations of discounts, credits, rate differentials, or reductions in deductibles, for properties on which fixtures or construction techniques demonstrated to reduce the amount of loss in a windstorm can be or have been installed or implemented. The prescribed form shall describe generally what actions the policyholders may be able to take to reduce their windstorm premium. The prescribed form and a list of such ranges approved by the office for each insurer licensed in the state and providing such discounts, credits, other rate differentials, or reductions in deductibles for properties described in this subsection shall be available for electronic viewing and download from the Department of Financial Services’ or the Office of Insurance Regulation’s Internet website. The Financial Services Commission may adopt rules to implement this subsection.
(2)(a) The Financial Services Commission shall develop by rule a uniform mitigation verification inspection form that shall be used by all insurers when submitted by policyholders for the purpose of factoring discounts for wind insurance. In developing the form, the commission shall seek input from insurance, construction, and building code representatives. Further, the commission shall provide guidance as to the length of time the inspection results are valid. An insurer shall accept as valid a uniform mitigation verification form signed by the following authorized mitigation inspectors:
1. A home inspector licensed under s. 468.8314 who has completed at least 3 hours of hurricane mitigation training approved by the Construction Industry Licensing Board which includes hurricane mitigation techniques and compliance with the uniform mitigation verification form and completion of a proficiency exam;
2. A building code inspector certified under s. 468.607;
3. A general, building, or residential contractor licensed under s. 489.111;
4. A professional engineer licensed under s. 471.015;
5. A professional architect licensed under s. 481.213; or
6. Any other individual or entity recognized by the insurer as possessing the necessary qualifications to properly complete a uniform mitigation verification form.
(b) An insurer may, but is not required to, accept a form from any other person possessing qualifications and experience acceptable to the insurer.
(3) A person who is authorized to sign a mitigation verification form must inspect the structures referenced by the form personally, not through employees or other persons, and must certify or attest to personal inspection of the structures referenced by the form. However, licensees under s. 471.015 or s. 489.111 may authorize a direct employee, who is not an independent contractor, and who possesses the requisite skill, knowledge and experience, to conduct a mitigation verification inspection. Insurers shall have the right to request and obtain information from the authorized mitigation inspector under s. 471.015 or s. 489.111, regarding any authorized employee’s qualifications prior to accepting a mitigation verification form performed by an employee that is not licensed under s. 471.015 or s. 489.111.
(4) An authorized mitigation inspector that signs a uniform mitigation form, and a direct employee authorized to conduct mitigation verification inspections under paragraph (3), may not commit misconduct in performing hurricane mitigation inspections or in completing a uniform mitigation form that causes financial harm to a customer or their insurer; or that jeopardizes a customer’s health and safety. Misconduct occurs when an authorized mitigation inspector signs a uniform mitigation verification form that:
(a) Falsely indicates that he or she personally inspected the structures referenced by the form;
(b) Falsely indicates the existence of a feature which entitles an insured to a mitigation discount which the inspector knows does not exist or did not personally inspect;
(c) Contains erroneous information due to the gross negligence of the inspector; or
(d) Contains a pattern of demonstrably false information regarding the existence of mitigation features that could give an insured a false evaluation of the ability of the structure to withstand major damage from a hurricane endangering the safety of the insured’s life and property.
(5) The licensing board of an authorized mitigation inspector that violates subsection (4) may commence disciplinary proceedings and impose administrative fines and other sanctions authorized under the authorized mitigation inspector’s licensing act. Authorized mitigation inspectors licensed under s. 471.015 or s. 489.111 shall be directly liable for the acts of employees that violate subsection (4) as if the authorized mitigation inspector personally performed the inspection.
(6) An insurer, person, or other entity that obtains evidence of fraud or evidence that an authorized mitigation inspector or an employee authorized to conduct mitigation verification inspections under paragraph (3) has made false statements in the completion of a mitigation inspection form shall file a report with the Division of Insurance Fraud, along with all of the evidence in its possession that supports the allegation of fraud or falsity. An insurer, person, or other entity making the report shall be immune from liability, in accordance with s. 626.989(4), for any statements made in the report, during the investigation, or in connection with the report. The Division of Insurance Fraud shall issue an investigative report if it finds that probable cause exists to believe that the authorized mitigation inspector, or an employee authorized to conduct mitigation verification inspections under paragraph (3), made intentionally false or fraudulent statements in the inspection form. Upon conclusion of the investigation and a finding of probable cause that a violation has occurred, the Division of Insurance Fraud shall send a copy of the investigative report to the office and a copy to the agency responsible for the professional licensure of the authorized mitigation inspector, whether or not a prosecutor takes action based upon the report.
(7) An individual or entity who knowingly provides or utters a false or fraudulent mitigation verification form with the intent to obtain or receive a discount on an insurance premium to which the individual or entity is not entitled commits a misdemeanor of the first degree, punishable as provided in s. 775.082 or s. 775.083.
(8 ) At its expense, the insurer may require that a uniform mitigation verification form provided by a policyholder, a policyholder’s agent, or an authorized mitigation inspector or inspection company be independently verified by an inspector, an inspection company, or an independent third-party quality assurance provider which possesses a quality assurance program before accepting the uniform mitigation verification form as valid.

27

Michael,

That is not what I remember but the last line is perfect.

I suggest anyone who has any trouble with an agent sends that last line and references the whole thing.

Thanks again, you are the man :slight_smile:

8) At its expense, the insurer may require that a uniform mitigation verification form provided by a policyholder, a policyholder’s agent, or an authorized mitigation inspector or inspection company be independently verified by an inspector, an inspection company, or an independent third-party quality assurance provider which possesses a quality assurance program before accepting the uniform mitigation verification form as valid.

28

It would be an honor to be associated with the individuals in your message, this week is difficult, I will try to make at least 1 day. Thank you for the compliment. I was there Sept 2010 at the 1st OIR meeting and spoke regarding issues I believe in…

29

Nick, feel free to contact me anytime about any of these issues or thoughts on how we should proceed. If you can make it to the meeting(at all) maybe we can chat. I do read all of your posts though.

I will be having a questions and answer session at the conference.

For the record, I sent over 350 emails about the last 1802 meeting and received three responses. A few did make comments here though.

30

Agree 100%.

31

I still like this idea…

32

We started it with the wind mit class. I will have an announcement/opportunity along these lines that will be announced at the conference this weekend.

33

Thanks, John. Looking forward to it!

34

We need to meet and bat around a whole host of matters at the conference.

35

I am looking forward to it.