Insurence adjuster busting my chops!

Status
Not open for further replies.
M

Mr.Nobody

Member
Location
Philadelphia, PA
Happy new year everyone :)
I was asked to make sense of a commercial building that had been hacked and robbed of at least 40% of its wire.
It has some kind of old VIR wire. I been removing all the outdated equipment ect. The mechanical room is as to be expected from a 1930 building. I recommended replacement of everything beyond the secondary's disconnect. Everything is rusted, theirs 750mcm sagging though 1 hole of a trough to give ya an idea. the conductors are corroded and while I have not done testing yet it is pretty obvious it needs replacing. Aside from that....
I was contracted to restore half the buildings loss of power. I got a surprise visit from the building owners lawyer and a insurance adjuster. I explained as simply as possible the risks and hazards of the system. their response was; why don't I just take whats their and "piece it back together"(IE VIR cloth)I told them I was reusing the RMC and a few of the newer single phase panels and that would be all I could salvage at this point.
I told them that this would be unprofessional, illegal, and no licensed electrician would take various pieces of cloth wire from different runs and re-feed load centers. I tried explaining to them the fire and safety hazards of their request.
Now I need to put in writing Exactly why such a ridiculous thing can not be done? they were insinuating the GC and myself are doing work that's not necessary!!
any ammunition would be appreciated. All I have is recommendations.
I looked in NEC, Philadelphia building and fire safety, and OSHA. However I am missing the exact violation??
I know one thing, I wont put my name on any sub-par work like that lol.:rotflmao:
 
Contact the building dept. and have the electrical inspector look it over. He should require that everything is brought to current codes because of the magnitude of repairs. Once the BD mandates the repairs, you will be covered.
 
Happy new Year..:D

Have the electrical inspector look it over with you, that is what I would do:thumbsup:
 
First things first, your dealing with a lawyer and an insurance adjuster so they have never heard of things like pride and personal integrity so don't take it personal.
I have done similar jobs and it always came down to the inspector and I would insist they provide me with a letter stating they want me to reuse wire and equipment that has no manufactures warranty and that they would assume all liability of old parts and equipment. They never put their name on anything like that and will authorize new stuff. If they don't walk away.
 
The company I work for is involved with a massive insurance job that resulted from a flood due to a broken water main. When the insurance adjusters and insurance consulting firms got done with their analysis they wanted to do similar ridiculous things to save a few bucks. Our boss said "this is how we will do the job and if you don't like it then find someone else to do your shoddy patchwork repairs". Eventually they caved and agreed to out company's demands all of which were perfectly legit.

You might have to threaten to walk away if they want you do do something that you're not comfortable with. After all it's your company who is at risk if something goes wrong in the future.
 
rlundsrud said:
Contact the building dept. and have the electrical inspector look it over. He should require that everything is brought to current codes because of the magnitude of repairs. Once the BD mandates the repairs, you will be covered.
Click to expand...

That would seem to be the best answer. You won't find the answer in a NEC code book because it is not there.

Having said that, while it might not be pretty, there may be stuff that is still serviceable that can continue in use. It is not unreasonable for the insurance company to only pay to repair it to be as good as it was before the fire, assuming they can get it past the building department requirements.

It is like a used car that gets damaged. It is still a used car afterwards so what is the issue with using used parts to repair it?
 
petersonra said:
...
It is like a used car that gets damaged. It is still a used car afterwards so what is the issue with using used parts to repair it?
Click to expand...
Here's a scenario...

You buy a new car and get in an accident driving off the lot. You take it to an insurance-approved collision repair shop. They repair with parts from a car three model years older... and this includes mechanical parts. What say you?
 
Smart $ said:
Here's a scenario...

You buy a new car and get in an accident driving off the lot. You take it to an insurance-approved collision repair shop. They repair with parts from a car three model years older... and this includes mechanical parts. What say you?
Click to expand...

Most insurance companies these days give you a life time warranty on repairs. It does not get any better than that.

If it was just sheet metal, what difference would it make? The body shop would recoat it to like new specs. The sheet metal does not get old and die if it is coated properly.
 
petersonra said:
Most insurance companies these days give you a life time warranty on repairs. It does not get any better than that.

If it was just sheet metal, what difference would it make? The body shop would recoat it to like new specs. The sheet metal does not get old and die if it is coated properly.
Click to expand...
A lifetime warranty doesn't make it as good as before the car got damaged. And read the fine print. I doubt that lifetime warranty covers mechanical parts. And you go right ahead and believe a body shop paint job is as good as factory. :lol:

Anyway, let's not divulge too far off topic. :happyyes:
 
We worked on a fire job a couple years ago that we were to estimate the costs to repair to before fire condition. No one argued about replacing the 240v disconnects with what should have been 480v. We did give a price on setting J boxes where the damage to existing wiring stopped. Not cheap. Wire that has been pulled out is no longer in "before" condition.

The owner hired an advocate that represented him to negotiate the final payout from the Insurance. Took months before we could start reconstruction.

We lucked, the entire building, including footings, was removed and replaced.
 
Tell these insurance adjusters/attorneys how much it will cost to evaluate/refubish/certify the safety of the existing materials.

Then give them the lower cost of replacing it with new materials that are already listed, certified, etc.

Let them choose which route to take.
 
IMO, what the OP needs to realize is that in fact the owner might now be facing a broader cost to
the over-all project! Most building codes have a percentage that is a gauge that used against any size
desired rehab.

If the building has been sitting ideal for more than a code cycle than it will be subject to whatever the active code cycle is and or if a percentage kicks in.

Someone else not the OP needs to qualify not only will the electrical work be replaced,
rehabed and or updated, but what other aspects (and trades) of code compliance need to be addressed and made known to other parties that might be involved.

Even though you are already under contract, If I were the OP, approach the owner and have them hire a PE to let them survey the job, detail the layout and describe the work needed. If the PE needs to hire and the consult of an Architect due to the scope of work, so be it.
 
Smart $ said:
A lifetime warranty doesn't make it as good as before the car got damaged. And read the fine print. I doubt that lifetime warranty covers mechanical parts. And you go right ahead and believe a body shop paint job is as good as factory. :lol:

Anyway, let's not divulge too far off topic. :happyyes:
Click to expand...

the insurance company warranty covers all parts that are replaced.

body shop paint jobs these days are pretty darn close to a factory paint job. if done right, will usually outlast the car. factory paint jobs don't last forever either.

I don't know what "as good as" means. my guess is that no insurance company is likely to replace nearly new parts with all but worn out ones (short of fraud on the part of the repair shop). if it works as well after the repair as it did before, and lasts as long, how is it not "as good"?
 
cadpoint said:
IMO, what the OP needs to realize is that in fact the owner might now be facing a broader cost to
the over-all project! Most building codes have a percentage that is a gauge that used against any size
desired rehab.

If the building has been sitting ideal for more than a code cycle than it will be subject to whatever the active code cycle is and or if a percentage kicks in.

Someone else not the OP needs to qualify not only will the electrical work be replaced,
rehabed and or updated, but what other aspects (and trades) of code compliance need to be addressed and made known to other parties that might be involved.

Even though you are already under contract, If I were the OP, approach the owner and have them hire a PE to let them survey the job, detail the layout and describe the work needed. If the PE needs to hire and the consult of an Architect due to the scope of work, so be it.
Click to expand...

kwired said:
Tell these insurance adjusters/attorneys how much it will cost to evaluate/refubish/certify the safety of the existing materials.

Then give them the lower cost of replacing it with new materials that are already listed, certified, etc.

Let them choose which route to take.
Click to expand...


I like the idea of getting the AHJ involved. Just be careful of the issue of code upgrades. Most insurance companies to not cover upgrades if not expressed in a additional rider on the policy. You might need to determine what it would cost to bring it current and to provide a cost to repair it to the old standards.
 
It's a cart before the horse issue.

The owner had only the logic to start down a path of insurance because they had coverage.
IE the owner goes to their insurance because it's a policy issue.

The owner calls in the lawyer (to push for proper coverage of insurance and oversee contract issues)
to keep the insurance in check along with the GC and all the other parties involved in line.

My read of this dance; The owner didn't know what they needed and has lead to the present issues!

The GC did get from bidding parties a pass and passed on to them all requirements of meeting Code Issues to the contracted parties with no allowable billable variables!

It's the GC's fault because there was no comprehensive discovery issues stated by them to the owner much less for all parties involved. The GC did not get out in front and identify all the issues involved. They ran the bid and scope of work as a bid for what you find when in fact they knew that other Code issues where going to be at fault for every party involved, thus adding only to their button line.

Why is a GC even involved? The electrical should have been been allowed to bring in a GC as sub to them!

I heard this story continually how other professionals parties (not stated by OP) have to clean up these types of problems...
 
Smart $ said:
Here's a scenario...

You buy a new car and get in an accident driving off the lot. You take it to an insurance-approved collision repair shop. They repair with parts from a car three model years older... and this includes mechanical parts. What say you?
Click to expand...

In MA, they are allowed used parts but they can not be older than the car they are fixing. I think on a car that new it gets new parts anyways.
 
Sierrasparky said:
I like the idea of getting the AHJ involved. Just be careful of the issue of code upgrades. Most insurance companies to not cover upgrades if not expressed in a additional rider on the policy. You might need to determine what it would cost to bring it current and to provide a cost to repair it to the old standards.
Click to expand...

What reasonable contractor is going to sign any contracts that involve installing items he knows will not pass inspections?

Any estimate/contract etc. will be for something that the contractor is willing to show the inspector with confidence that it should pass, and if insurance doesn't want to pay for part of it then I certainly wouldn't sign any contract or at least expect the owner to pay any difference that isn't covered. I guess it depends somewhat if the contract is with the owner or the insurance company on just exactly how to handle it.
 
kwired said:
What reasonable contractor is going to sign any contracts that involve installing items he knows will not pass inspections?

Any estimate/contract etc. will be for something that the contractor is willing to show the inspector with confidence that it should pass, and if insurance doesn't want to pay for part of it then I certainly wouldn't sign any contract or at least expect the owner to pay any difference that isn't covered. I guess it depends somewhat if the contract is with the owner or the insurance company on just exactly how to handle it.
Click to expand...

I thought I had a good Idea. I have a good repoir with my inspectors. They would be pleased to back me up.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top