| Author |
Message |
woody48348 (66.208.219.185)
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Friday, December 12, 2003 - 1:34 pm: | |
Okay, this is an ethics issue, and I would like some feedback. I know of another busnut that has been converting a bus himself, and is near completion. The kitchen, and forward entertainment areas have not been completed but everything else is done. The coach has been insured for a set amount of money, and do to an unfortunate accident, the interior has suffered damage to the floor, refrigerator, washer/dryer, and cabinetry, and bulkheads. There has been an estimate of repairs supplied by a professional coach builder, to totally rebuild the entire interior, and the price includes completing the kitchen, and front entertainment areas that had not been done yet. Of course, the price to have this completed professionally, is valued near the insured price of the entire coach, and there is talk of having it scrapped. The ethics issue is this, is it okay to installed a "home brewed" interior, and when damage is done, call in the professionals to totally remodel, and bill the insurance company this price? Is it insurance company policy to pay replacement value, or is someone pulling a scam here? This seems fishy to me.
BW |
Peter Broadribb (Madbrit) (65.37.91.159)
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Friday, December 12, 2003 - 1:54 pm: | |
If you build your own house and it burns down, do you expect to build it again for free?
Ofcourse it is ok to have a professional give an estimate and do the repairs, why should you do it all again. Insurance is there to replace what was damaged, no more no less.
Most "home brewed" interiors are built better than some professional ones and with a lot more care.
Now if the insurance company is being asked to pay for things which are not damaged such as a Hi-Fi and TV which were not there, then that is fraud and a scam.
Peter. |
jim mci-9 (209.240.205.60)
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Friday, December 12, 2003 - 2:18 pm: | |
when i finish my conversion, it will compete in luxury and style (i hope) to the level of a $100k coach... but will have cost me in real outlay of $$$ much less.... i'll attempt to insure it for the replacement value... and if i suffer a loss, i expect to be paid....i have my holiday rambler insured for $14k... cost was less than that, but i'm paying premuims on the agreed value of $14k.... so if i have loss or damage i'll be covered... to answer your question, it is unethetical to be reimbured for something that didn't exist... propbably illegal too.... |
DaveD (142.46.199.18)
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Friday, December 12, 2003 - 2:36 pm: | |
There is a principle that insurance is intended to replace what was lost, and at best restore it to its condition before the loss. The insured party has an obligation to mitigate damage. Whatever is reasonable should be done to prevent further loss.
If only part of the vehicle was remodeled, then that's the part that should be repaired, keeping in mind that there may also be other damage that needs to be repaired under the insurance coverage to bring the vehicle back to the point where it was.
Good insurance adjusters know how to assess what should be covered and what shouldn't. Attempts to get more can result in the insurance company considering the claim to fraudulent and they have been known to refuse to pay anything. That said, it may be necssary to be tough with the insurance company as well to make sure you get what you have paid for.
Just my two cents
Dave Dulmage |
Gary McFarland (Gearheadgary) (209.128.79.46)
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Friday, December 12, 2003 - 2:37 pm: | |
I would submit your outlay is more than your cash costs--your talent, skill and time are valuable.
In any case, replacement value--do they do "Agreed upon" value for coaches?
Gary |
DaveD (142.46.199.18)
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Friday, December 12, 2003 - 3:12 pm: | |
An appraisal and an agreed on value could be very important. I have agreed on value now, but really need to have a competent appraisal done. I couldn't replace it for what the current agreed on value is.
DaveD |
woody48348 (66.208.219.185)
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Friday, December 12, 2003 - 3:17 pm: | |
Thanks guys,
I would agree that the insurance is there to replace, and or repair (Professionally) to bring the coach interior back to the state it was before the accident. But as you stated Dave, it is fraudulent to have the insurance company pay for interior that was never completed before the accident, reguardless on the amount the coach was insured for. |
John Feld (Deacon) (150.199.209.21)
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Friday, December 12, 2003 - 4:02 pm: | |
The issue as I read it was, what is ethical, ie: moral. Whatever the outcome of the settlement is has nothing to do with the moral issue, even if the insurance is immoral.
Right and wrong has nothing to do with the other party, it has everything to do with ones self.
To encourage someone to 'get all they can' to make them whole is OK, to get anything beyond being made whole is wrong, immoral, maybe illegel. Insurance is a business, abuse that business and its cost is passed on to others, you and me, is that moral? And then we talk about the good old days when morality and goodness existed.
My nickles worth,
John |
Gary McFarland (Gearheadgary) (209.128.79.46)
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Friday, December 12, 2003 - 4:07 pm: | |
"Insurance is a business, abuse that business and its cost is passed on to others, you and me, is that moral? And then we talk about the good old days when morality and goodness existed."
I agree with your principal, however, it would be great if Ethics were bidirectional.
Insurance companies, in my opinion, are the lowest order of crooks.
Gary |
woody48348 (66.208.219.185)
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Friday, December 12, 2003 - 4:12 pm: | |
Correct John,
The question has nothing to do with whether the insurance company will or will not pay the full, quoted, replacement interior price. It has everything to do with SHOULD the professional coach company be told to quote a complete interior replacement to the insurance company, when there was never a complete interior in the first place.
The answer has to be NO, from a moral and ethical standpoint, reguardless of the amount the coach is insured for. In my view this is fraud, and this is one reason all of our insurance costs continue to increase. I think it's called selfish greed??
My pennies worth.
Bob. |
ChuckMC9 (Chucks) (69.3.75.22)
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Friday, December 12, 2003 - 5:43 pm: | |
"...it would be great if Ethics were bidirectional."
Now THAT, Good Sir, is the best quote on this board to date.
So can you hook up a transformer to ethics but not to insurance co's.? ;) |
Gary McFarland (Gearheadgary) (209.128.79.46)
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Friday, December 12, 2003 - 5:57 pm: | |
I have contribute something to offset the pissing contests I seem to start.
You line up all the insurance wonks, I'll find a BIG 'OL Transformer to hook-em too.
Gary |
jim mci-9 (209.240.205.60)
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Friday, December 12, 2003 - 6:52 pm: | |
mine's bigger than yours.. mci that is... but i guess you got me on the roamers.... |
Gary McFarland (Gearheadgary) (209.128.79.46)
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Friday, December 12, 2003 - 7:10 pm: | |
I got everyone beat on roamers.
That, my friend is a dubious honor.
Gary |
degojo (68.35.160.19)
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Friday, December 12, 2003 - 10:31 pm: | |
this clearly insurance fraud and is part of the reason why insurance rates are higher than they should be. no one is entitled to no more than fair market value at time of loss or reasonable replacement value. You get your timex stolen and claim a rolex?? |
Gary McFarland (Gearheadgary) (64.134.135.51)
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Friday, December 12, 2003 - 11:03 pm: | |
that's almost a "Chicken or the egg" discussion, in my mind.
Which came first, the Insurance companies getting over on us or us tryihng to get the better of them.
I don't advise or practise insurance fraud, but many of the practices of insurance companies would be criminal if put in another context.
Gary |
gary Stadler (68.7.217.217)
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Saturday, December 13, 2003 - 12:08 am: | |
Insurance companies have BIG buildings. Nice ones. We have busses. Their executives have BIG EXPENSIVE motorhomes if they want one at all. We have to build our own.
Let 'em fix the bus. It's their game... play it within the rules.
Cynical? YES! |
FAST FRED (63.234.23.207)
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Saturday, December 13, 2003 - 5:47 am: | |
The hassles with insurance claims is never the agreed value , that the max they "might" pay .
The question is always new for old , or fair value.
Say someone has a genset fire .
The unit was $10,000 list new , dealer cost was about $7,200, but that was 10 years and 3,000 -4,000 hours ago.
Do they "owe " you a new $10,000 unit or is market value the day it died maybe, $1200 OK?
This is all burried someplace in the policy , and should be a BIG consideration of IF you carry "value " insurance, rather than just liability.
FAST FRED |
Larry (208.18.102.1)
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Saturday, December 13, 2003 - 10:29 am: | |
1,200 if you can find exactly what you had for that.
If it costs 10,000 to get exactly what you had, then that is what you should get.
You weren't in the market to sale and don't want to be forced into the market to buy. Maybe spending money you don't have for that purchase, then you would have kept the unit you had right?
The point being why shouldn't you have exactly (or close) to what you had. The headaches are not worth it.
You will lose in the long run dealing with insurance companies.
Larry |
Jeff (172.148.7.8)
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Thursday, December 18, 2003 - 11:22 pm: | |
Whey you pay for insurance, you pay for several things. Of course, the first is the actual expected cost of a legitimate loss experianced by you. You also pay for the marble insurance headquarters building, you pay the folks who work there, you pay to send the agent's kid to college, and you pay the costs of fraudulant claims (and there are MANY). If you can afford to pay the loss yourself, better to just put away the premium in the bank and "self insure".
JJ |