Re: Three Years Later, Industry Puts Toxic Mold into Perspec
Posted by Mary on 4/06/04
I don't know if you really need my help with this one. You seem to
put yourself up on the cross a lot. I mean, just look at your posts
In any event, I hope spring finds you well and happy. Really.
On 4/06/04, dd wrote:
> You leave out the biggest class of 'victims', the renters. They
> are often unaware of any problems and landlords and property
> managers simply paint over evidence; the paint visually and
> olofactorily obscures the presence of mold.
> I have said time and again that some criminal penalties must be
> assessed for failure to maintain, particularly when awareness of
> the problem results in a 'makeover' rather than remediation of the
> underlying problem.
> It is Easter, so go ahead and crucify me. Mary, give it your best
> On 4/01/04, johncodie wrote:
>> On 3/31/04, Jack wrote:
>>> I don't work for for Farmers and am no longer in the busines
>>> so I could give a s*#t about Farmers.
>> This sounds like you saw the light of day. When did you decide
>> that being a representaive of the insurance industy was just not
>> worth the effort. I have read alot about how the guys that stay
>> on the road months out of a year can't depend upon a livable
>> income from the insurance industry paying a decent wage for the
>> knowledge and front line personnel skills these guys have to
>> In my opinion Farmers won this case...giving away what they did
>> in the Ballard case is pocket change for this company and and
>> realistically only a fraction of all the fraudulent mold claims
>> they paid out.
>> So Winning the case in your opinon is having a jury find evidence
>> to warrent a 32 million dollar judgement, the company admits bad
>> faith, and advertise they are not found guilty of fraud? If
>> Farmer's bread and butter is trust with the insurer's of the
>> World to put their money with them rather than someone else; it
>> sounds like they lost a major Public Release opportunity. What
>> other commodity does the insurance industry provide besides a
>> promise to make whole in case of an unlikeyly event.
>> In my opinion both parties are at fault... (Contributary
>> Negligence ?)
>> incompetence vs. money train...
>> Ms Ballard is a very competent Public Relations person. I doubt
>> that she was ever not heard, or misunderstood.
>> Now concerning money train... did you expect Ms Ballard to foot
>> all the repairs and then wait until Hell froze over for Farmers
>> to send her a check for all her incompetence
>> If Farmers hired the people that were to come find the problems
>> with the house are they not competent to relove the problem
>> before it becomes a 32 million dollar reduced, not counting the
>> bad public opinon? Either side could have called anyone up to
>> the $300 dollar an hour toxicologists.
>> Good for you maintaining your home...
>> In my industry people die if leaks are not found and fixed, and
>> the industry from Texas your refer to, Houston, Corpus Christie
>> sent over their best three times, after the industry had sent
>> even more. We have video of them smelling contents and claiming
>> no mold, and upon removal and destruction we found the boxes
>> never opened and contents like redwing boots and leather shoes
>> growing together. For those boxes of contents no compensation
>> was provided in the estimates, and they had been made available
>> for inspection for seven years.
>> you would be suprised how many Americans do not and then blame
>> someone else for their problems.
>> After a hurricane delunged my home and all the contents saturated
>> with moisture contents up to 100&37;, i got critisized for
>> up the interior walls and letting the A/C dry the interior. The
>> adjuster said it would be fine since it was not flood water, just
>> let it dry. It just about boiled down to blaming me for the
>> hurricane and not going to the bank to borrow a quarter of a
>> million dollars on top of existing notes to finance all the
>> repairs, on top of all the other labor, and moving we had paid
>> out of pocket. In their opinion my knowledge over their
>> adjuster's knowledge made me negligent.
>> It a shame there isn't a bad faith clause in the policy for a
>> homeowner not taking care of their home.
>> There is a clause there if ever an adjuster would take the time
>> to sit down with an attorny and look at the words. The insurance
>> company always retains the rights to come and examine the home
>> for potential problems. We had ours checked four years before
>> the storm. The company wanted to see the dead bolts, the fire
>> etinquishers and the overall condition of the home. They were
>> satisfied and just kept taking the checks every year.
>> I wish you could have been in my shoes when I handled claims in
>>> the houston area a couple of years ago in the height of this
>>> hysteria. Contractors, public adjusters, remediators and just
>>> plain con-men new exactly how to play the game.
>> I was talking with the paralegal downtown Houston at that time
>> when Houston was flooded; they were just starting to deal with
>> the miscommunications as I had been dealing with it for the past
>> four years. In my opinion the insurance industry was doing
>> everything they could to justify the rate increases, while they
>> were greezing the skids of the judicial sides to say no problem
>> to mold, while there was no scientific support. The paralegal
>> also found mold in her closets, having an inflicted child at
>> home; and the law firms attorney discovered he had Cancer. I
>> know how the gam is played, we prepare for it every day. The
>> game is called all out war. There is nothing Civil about it and
>> no need to lessen the blows.
>> Like I said the problem hasn't gone away. As long as newer homes
>> are "moldy" and the realtors are divided, and the contractors
>> unsure how they got that way; there is a huge liability brewing.
>> I am sure if Farmers would have been on the up put the competent
>> people on the problem people in Texas would be smiling rather
>> facing off over the battle lines. Insurance is supposed to be a
>> betterment of Socity and its policy held to a higher standard
>> than a standard Contract. Is should not be an instrument to
>> divide and cause Civil disobidence.
Posts on this thread, including this one