How good is Safeco for independent agents?

Posted: Fri Mar 21, 2008 08:40 pm Post Subject: As for the content of the story

So if a story taken from a major news source and the entire contents or story is pasted in a blog, that makes it not true. If you want credible news sources they can be found. But the point was made effectively just the same.

Are you freakin' kiddin' me? In that case, Mike you are 'rewarded' for OVER CHARGING people for the work you do on their cars....

Posted: Sat Mar 22, 2008 10:23 am Post Subject:

I believe this is the comment I was referring to that you claimed I was a thief. Thieves overcharge , I do not.

there are some.

Posted: Sat Mar 22, 2008 09:57 pm Post Subject: You know what I really truly believe?

I believe it is the rule more than the exception. Not because low level adjusters and appraisers are evil or bad, it's because of the way in which Insurance management and bean counters have decided to operate. I am speaking in reference to my earlier post regarding the Mckenzy documents which suggest that the insurance industry would recieve greater profits and lower claims payouts by playing tougher and denying claims.

In the state of Washington, denying claims became the rule rather than the exception to the point that legislation was passed that tripled damages on insurers that denied paying claims in which they knew they owed. The insurance industry claimed foul and initiated a petition to have the people vote by referendum. They were so certain that people were being led astray by the collision industry and greedy trial lawyers (your industry's words), that they put over ten million of their collective funds together to overturn the legislation. The people weren't fooled and the legislation is intact for the people.

I believe drp's are veiled illegal arrangements designed to underpay claims by by controling collision shops. These arrangements currently are under examination by more than one state attorney general.

Furthermore, numerous attorney generals are being asked to examine the UPL statutes within each state to determine if an insurer requiring agreed pricing and allowing collision businesses to represent vehicle owners on claims settlements could be construed as the unauthorized practice of law. Insurers want shops to reach agreed pricing, but really do not want shop owners representing consumers on repair issues when they differ from the insurer criteria or investigation. They claim tortious interference when we play body shop adjuster, but turn around and require shops to enter into those negotiations when it's for their enrichment.

If a consumer requested to examine a copy of your company's direct repair agreements or a concierge type agreements, would you allow it? No; Insurers claim those are proprietary documents. Are insurers afraid that if scrutinized in the light of day, that the public may think so as well. Any shop that signs a contract promising to indemnify the insurer for decisions the insurer makes such as clipping a car or using reman wheels or used parts need to have their heads checked. All contracts ask for such indemnification. In reality garagekeepers liability policies have been proven to not cover such willful acts regardless if the insurer specified it.

Most states have or are attempting to pass legislation prohibiting insurers from interfering with consumer choices, commonly referred to as steering. Insurers believe steering to preferred shops should improve quality which it hasn't. However it has improved the insurance industry's bottom line the last four years in particular because of controled costs which many percieve also affect safety and quality of the repair. I personally do not believe legislation will help as it hasn't in any state that now have those laws. Insurers find ways of circumventing the steering laws and are now claiming first amendment corporate free speech rights being denied in California for not being able to tell consumer why they shouldn't use the consumers chosen shop after they have made it clear.

Posted: Sun Mar 23, 2008 10:42 am Post Subject:

Well, once again, totally off topic.....not one time did you address my gripe...I'm not even surprised anymore...

Have you actually read any DRP contract? Because the one I'm looking at right now says nothing at all like you are (once again) attempting to portray....Let me tell you something that the DRP contracts/repairs do help the consumer with....The shop that won't back up their repairs, and just send an owner with a repair complaint packing, (and you know this happens all the time Mike, they shop got their money and now they are done)... that's a huge asset to the consumer....if a DRP shop (in my company) refuses to make something right, they are gone...pure and simple and we (the carrier) will pay to make it right if they shop won't because we are (in the contract and warranty issued) backing their work....I personally would have zero problem showing a consumer the DRP contract if they wanted a copy of it and were repairing their vehicle at one of the shops....I really doubt I would get any flack from the higher ups either, although I would ask because it's not my property...wait, in fact I did give a copy to an insured once....for those who care to know it says I nor anyone from my company is getting nor will get any 'favors' and if an adjuster even hints at such the shop is to call the company (numbers provided) it also says (and they have to prove) the shop carriers blah blah amount of liablity ins...it further states that they are to repair the vehicle based on industry standards, and what EXACTLY is on the AGREED estimate...no discounts, no favors asked of the shop other than taking care of our mutual customer and repairing the vehicle.....

Once more Mike, horrific statements made without proof ........Adjusters are often rewarded for under cutting claims.........same song different verse, do I see a pattern here?

Posted: Sun Mar 23, 2008 04:20 pm Post Subject: Just who do you work for

Once again, Lori, if you can't disprove the message or it is not as you believe, you then attack the messenger. If you are looking for a central theme in my posts it is that insurers have no business in the collision industry business.

Just read some of the stories and editorials from shop owners and the condition of the industry at one of our trade magazines such as bodyshopbusiness.com or autobodyonline.com or abrn.com. There seems to be a common theme that paints the industry as in not so rosy a picture as you portray from YOUR shops.

The problem is not that shops are not willing to repair cars correctly, it is that insurers all to often refuse to pay what is really reasonable and necessary. The internet is full of video news stories about insurers standing behind their shops until poor repairs are uncovered and the insurer or shop buys the car from the owner in an attempt to hide and bury the facts, and that shop stays on the insurer preferred list. Why? Some of the abosolute worst violaters remain on insurers preferred lists. Why? It saves insurers money.

JD Powers reports that consumers are most happy when they select their own repair shop without insurer interference and are not happy when the insurer handles the repairs where the customer does not know who the repairer is.

Shops that sign these one sided agreements can not claim harm because they did not read and understand the contracts.

Posted: Mon Mar 24, 2008 12:18 am Post Subject: DRP Contract

Can you paste a copy of the contract here for me? I am a consumer that will need work done and it would sure be helpful for me to make my decision.

Posted: Mon Mar 24, 2008 10:07 am Post Subject:

Can you paste a copy of the contract here for me? I am a consumer that will need work done and it would sure be helpful for me to make my decision.

Once again, Lori, if you can't disprove the message

Posted: Mon Mar 24, 2008 02:13 pm Post Subject:

Posted: Mon Mar 24, 2008 02:14 pm Post Subject:

Posted: Mon Mar 24, 2008 02:16 pm Post Subject: