Re-inspection gone wrong, client forced to pay for an inspection to get credits back

[Jay C. Murray]

An unfortunate homeowner lost her shutter credit because of a poorly performed re-inspection. She was unhappy with the whole process. She was forced to pay for a second inspection to get back the credits she deserved.

According to the Homeowner, the re-inspection company's inspector picked up the pictured shutter. It's for small window and said to her, "I can't do anything with this, There's no sticker".

These photos are used with the homeowners blessing. When she told me the tale and showed me the shutter, I walked over and immediately spotted the shutter identification stamped on the panel.


She got her shutter credit. But, only after she had to pay for a second inspection performed correctly.

[Michael J. Meeker]

No way.

I do not believe it for a second.

What do you want to bet she will get reinspected yet again in the future? There is nothing to stop it. It is asinine.

Its going to get ugly this year

[Dennis J. Bonner]

I see the same thing all the time

[Jay C. Murray]

Originally Posted by mmeeker

No way.

I do not believe it for a second.

What do you want to bet she will get reinspected yet again in the future? There is nothing to stop it. It is asinine.

Its going to get ugly this year

Believe it!

[Christopher B. Thomas]

Thats sad to hear. Make sure you report it to the insurance company.

[Jay C. Murray]

Originally Posted by cthomas

Thats sad to hear. Make sure you report it to the insurance company.

My understanding is, that the agent and homeowner tried. They supplied all the documents to the underwriter and to the reinspection firm.

They refused to amend their report.

[wsiegel]

They need to file a (class action) law suit against the re-inspection company and the insurance company

[Kevin Hunt]

Originally Posted by jmurray4

An unfortunate homeowner lost her shutter credit because of a poorly performed re-inspection. She was unhappy with the whole process. She was forced to pay for a second inspection to get back the credits she deserved.

According to the Homeowner, the re-inspection company's inspector picked up the pictured shutter. It's for small window and said to her, "I can't do anything with this, There's no sticker".

These photos are used with the homeowners blessing. When she told me the tale and showed me the shutter, I walked over and immediately spotted the shutter identification stamped on the panel.


She got her shutter credit. But, only after she had to pay for a second inspection performed correctly.

You understand its not the actual inspectors fault right? Most of those guys are just like us here on these message boards. Its the training they receive which is handed down directly from Citizens and their underwriting dept. Citizens decides what is acceptable and what is not. If Citizens says they need a sticker, then they need a sticker. The guy doing the inspection must follow that rule or his inspection will get rejected by Citizens, thus he will receive no payment.

Now, if hes an idiot and just trying to make his job easier by not doing due diligence, well then its his own fault and he should be blamed.

[William H. Smith]

Originally Posted by khunt

You understand its not the actual inspectors fault right? Most of those guys are just like us here on these message boards. Its the training they receive which is handed down directly from Citizens and their underwriting dept. Citizens decides what is acceptable and what is not. If Citizens says they need a sticker, then they need a sticker. The guy doing the inspection must follow that rule or his inspection will get rejected by Citizens, thus he will receive no payment.

Now, if hes an idiot and just trying to make his job easier by not doing due diligence, well then its his own fault and he should be blamed.

IMO, that is semantics. Like "Data Plate" on compressors. Most don't have plates, they have data labels.
This panel indicated was "labeled" with the data.

[Jay C. Murray]

Originally Posted by khunt

You understand its not the actual inspectors fault right? Most of those guys are just like us here on these message boards. Its the training they receive which is handed down directly from Citizens and their underwriting dept. Citizens decides what is acceptable and what is not. If Citizens says they need a sticker, then they need a sticker. The guy doing the inspection must follow that rule or his inspection will get rejected by Citizens, thus he will receive no payment.

Now, if hes an idiot and just trying to make his job easier by not doing due diligence, well then its his own fault and he should be blamed.

The whole re-inspection system is at fault.

The entire program is based on a model, that has no obligation to get it correct for the homeowner.

It is fueled by any discrepancy between the inspection and re-inspection.

[Kevin Hunt]

Originally Posted by jmurray4

The whole re-inspection system is at fault.

The entire program is based on a model, that has no obligation to get it correct for the homeowner.

Agree with that part

It is fueled by any discrepancy between the inspection and re-inspection.

Don't agree with that.

[Greg Gold]

Originally Posted by jmurray4

My understanding is, that the agent and homeowner tried. They supplied all the documents to the underwriter and to the reinspection firm.

They refused to amend their report.

Been there, IMO, Agent makes his money on higher premium clients pay, way should he look after her best interest here. This is a big flaw in the system, and needs to be looked at. Insurance companies and their hired guns. Again IMO..

[Jay C. Murray]

Originally Posted by khunt

Agree with that part



Don't agree with that.

The whole process of reinspection is justified by the discreptancies between the inspection and re-inspection. The differences are used to justify the program. Which is fine. Re-inspection help to keep inspectors honest.

The problem occurs when it easier for the re-inspectors to just deny a credit or mark unknown, than take the extra time or effort to get it right.

The re-inspection firms work for the underwriter and have no obligation to the homeowner.

[Jay C. Murray]

Originally Posted by khunt

You understand its not the actual inspectors fault right? Most of those guys are just like us here on these message boards. Its the training they receive which is handed down directly from Citizens and their underwriting dept. Citizens decides what is acceptable and what is not. If Citizens says they need a sticker, then they need a sticker. The guy doing the inspection must follow that rule or his inspection will get rejected by Citizens, thus he will receive no payment.

Now, if hes an idiot and just trying to make his job easier by not doing due diligence, well then its his own fault and he should be blamed.

It is the inspectors fault...He should have seen the marks on that shutter. If what the homeowner says is true, the guy should not be doing re-inspections.

[Eric C. Van De Ven]

Originally Posted by jmurray4

The whole process of reinspection is justified by the discreptancies between the inspection and re-inspection. The differences are used to justify the program. Which is fine. Re-innspection help to keep inspectors honest.

The problem occurs when it easier for the reinspectors to just deny a credit or mark unknown, than take the extra time or effort to get it right.

The re-inspection firms work for the underwriter and have no obligation to the homeowner.

It shouldn't matter who the inspector works for. It clearly states on the shutters what they are. The inspector was lazy or incompetant. In either event:

An individual or entity who knowingly or through gross negligence provides a false or fraudulent mitigation verification form is
subject to investigation by the Florida Division of Insurance Fraud and may be subject to administrative action by the appropriate
licensing agency or to criminal prosecution. (Section 627.711(4)-(7), Florida Statutes) The Qualified Inspector who certifies this form
shall be directly liable for the misconduct of employees as if the authorized mitigation inspector personally performed the inspection.

I would file a complaint immediately and then demand an investigation. I bet this isn't the first time for this guy.