Nick
For some reason I don’t think I would Ever tell an Agent or anyone they should hire me because I’m a master inspector with a Zero E&O Deductible…man that is just Crazy! …Real Crazy!
No, what is crazy is thinking that the disadvantage of potentially attracting a client that wants to sue you solely because you carry insurance isn’t offset 30 times by the marketing advantage of being able to tout that you are insured.
That is crazy. It isn’t even close to a wash.
I am insured, why in gods name would anyone in their “right mind” brag they have a zero deductible?
That is beyond crazy, it’s insane.
There is an advantage to a CMI under this program, compared to other insureds. He does not have to bite the bullet when his insurance company decides to settle a frivolous case. They are paying for it, not him…
The guy with the $1000 deductable is the one hurt when a frivolous claim is settled for $995.00. This is a benefit for CMIs who are already carrying the insurance, for sure.
Sounds like a bull’s eye getting painted on a CMI’s back to advertise it - or even disclose it.
On the surface, it sounds like a great CMI bennie. I’ll have to check if their rates have come down any. One would think that if insurance is an industry where you have lower payments with a higher deductible, that the reverse would also hold true.
I’m currently paying $1,885.06 a year for my $500k E&O, and I “front door” that with NACHI’s ADRS system.
Even with a CMI designation, I look for the lowest cost with the intention of never getting tapped (That’s why I preach to stay within our SOPs - it is the armor in our shield!).
Would Nigel consider a “meet or beat” pricing? Personally, I’d rather see a CMI discount that 0 deductible.
Maybe I’m just looking at this the wrong way, but it’s the view from snow-covered Idaho . . .
Same reason an inspector would tout that he is insured. It says that he is insurable and touts that his uninsured competitor isn’t because he’s uninsurable.
The reasons the benefit was granted to only the best (CMIs) creates a marketing opportunity in terms of touting how one qualifies for it.
Strongly agree, that part was not thought through.
Jim I got a quote from FREA before I renewed with Allen, they were $2000.00 higher, so what is the savings.
I have never heard of anyone who has FREA insurance that is paying a decent rate, just buying insurance from them is crazy enough without a deductible.
The target that one wears on his front that says hire me, I’m insured and am a Certified Master Inspector that qualifies for zero deductible E&O is 30 times larger than the bullet one wears on his back that says sue me, I’m insured. That’s a target we all wear anyway.
One must offset the price of the premiums.
:shock: You’re right.
CMI Creative Marketing for the Insane…??
Anybody who uses insurance as a reason to hire me is playing Russian Roulette with that “bullet”.
Why are you always the smartest Kelly, Ben???
Its because I am #1
Folks
Forgive me if I ahve got it wrong as I have scanned this post. It appears from my scanning that there is some confusion as to why we negotiated a zero deductable.
The argument we put forward to FREA for a zero deductible was that CMI’s have far fewer claims. I don’t know many, actually any, veteran inspectors that have been sued! The benefit is for the inspector individually not a marketing tool! FREA can afford this zero deductible if it applies to true CMI inspectors!
Just got back from being with Nick and the gang, so its late and I’m ready to sleep.
Will update more tomorrow.
Michael
Dale, no one is going to hire you on the sole basis that you are insured, just like no one is going to hire you because you put pictures in your report or because you are a CMI or anything else solely.
It is only when you package them all together and market yourself as a superior product offering a superior service relative to your potential client’s other choices… do more clients begin to choose you.
No one buys a car just because it has mag wheels, yet they still put them on cars.
"Forgive me if I ahve got it " . . . .
Hey, Michael-
A distinctly Guiness twist to your words there, my friend!
Delete the bold and your all set Nick.
But…FREA’s insurance is so out of whack price wise, it wouldn’t make sense to have it unless they paid you $2,000.00 per claim and then paid the claim also…!
There prices are bizarre to say the least.
Michael , what about the “not so” veterans that joined immediately? Do you remember all the threads?
I use FREA and they are $1000.00 cheaper then their competetor. and i carry their commercial coverage