07/20/2024
Steven Badger, insurance defense attorney:
As everyone knows, my early morning routine includes reading Chip Merlin's excellent daily blog. Not only because he often mentions me (lol), but primarily because it is probably the best source of information in the industry on hot topics involving the first-party property insurance industry.
Although I wasnt mentioned in today's blog (but I was anonymously quoted), it was one of his recent best. Chip just finished a three-part series on supplementing, including the growing industry of "supplementing companies." He addresses all the issues arising in the supplementing process.
I wont rehash everything Chip discusses, as I agree with most everything he stated, but I will add just this....
--Legitimate supplements submitted by the real brick-and-mortar contractor who did the work should absolutely be considered. If the contractor timely gave notice of the need for a supplement, the work had to be done pursuant to code and manufacturer requirements, the work actually was done, and the work was covered by the policy, then the supplement should be paid. And I have no problem with the contractor calling the insurance company and explaining the supplement (which is not UPPA).
--Insurance companies have no obligation to negotiate a supplement with a third-party company a thousand miles away who has never been to the loss site, who wrote a new Xactimate estimate after the work was done adding additional line items for the first time, who calls the insurance company and lies about being the actual contractor who did the work, and who takes a percentage of the supplement amount (which is UPPA).
I encourage everyone to read Chip's entire three part series on supplements. No doubt Chip and I will spend some time on the issue at Bob Norton's IAUA Certification Course in Badgerland (Park City) next week. A lot of appraisal demands are being filed based strictly on disputes involving supplements.