Dear Claims Adjuster: Fill & Download for Free

My answer is going to be very shocking to many, and maybe I will end up being sued for defamation or something. This is simply my theory, based on my own observations. More extensive research is needed. I would like to see an investigative reporter explore this widespread scam.First, some background info. Back in the olden-days of insurance adjusting, we would do our own market research on a total loss vehicle. We had the appraiser’s report showing mileage, condition, and tire tread measurements, and his opinion on value. Then we would check for comparable vehicles for sale (in newspaper), and get the book value, and call dealers for quotes. From this we came up with a value.It always ended up being a tug of war as we negotiated the final settlement value. And a huge time waster. It was a bit frustrating, but I became very skilled in negotiating these deals.Then a new company came along called CCC Evaluations, and I think there is an ADP Evaluation company as well. We used CCC. The nice thing about CCC is that they send you about 30 or 40 pages of “documentation” proving the value of the totaled vehicle. The evidence seemed to be overwhelming. And this volume of data really extinguished the arguments of any claimants or insureds. Now settling total loss claims on vehicles was easy. Here’s what we are willing to pay, and that was accepted 99% of the time without further discussion or argument. (Because we sent them a copy of the voluminous report.)This actually worked quite well from the claims adjuster viewpoint. But then a friend of mine was having trouble on a total loss settlement, and asked for my help. This was from 8 years ago, and she had a 2002 Buick. And she had this CCC report. For the first time, I actually analyzed the report.While they list 45 “comparable vehicles,” they only use 3 to actually compare it to. And I figured out they use a computer algorithm to always skew the results. So rather than picking the “most comparable” vehicles in your location, the computer program will always grab one vehicle that is “less comparable” to skew the results. But most people do not notice because there is too much data to analyze.Now if they were obviously cheating to save a lot of money, it would be more noticeable, and they would be caught. So to stay “under the radar,” they only cheat you by a little bit. Like maybe $500. Or maybe a little more?But this accumulates over time. If the insurance company pays $500 less on each total loss claim, how much money are they raking in through this scam?In 2007 there were approximately 16,700,000 new vehicles sold in the USA. Let’s assume maybe 15% of these vehicle purchases were due to a vehicle being “totaled” in an accident. That comes to 2,505,000 total loss claims in one year. And if most insurance carriers are utilizing CCC for their evaluations, and if they cheated everyone by $500, this comes to $1,252,500,000 in surplus revenue that they got from using CCC to run this scam.In analyzing the CCC report for a friend, I reached this conclusion.Now no one in the insurance industry is going to say anything about this scam. There is too much money involved.Here’s a copy of my letter to USAA in which I complained about the inaccuracies of their CCC Evaluation. (Not my claim; I was ghost writing this letter for a friend.) Remember, the adjuster is not the one actually doing the evaluation. Again, it is the CCC computer algorithm doing the work.Dear Claims Adjuster:Thank you for your recent email. I have to admit I was disappointed in your response. When we last spoke about this, you had agreed to run the CCC evaluation limited to our local market of the Twin Cities area. Rather than doing as promised, you now say that the value of my vehicle would drop if we only used the local market. This is not true.I have completed a review of the CCC evaluation that you provided. This evaluation includes three vehicles selected as "comparable vehicles," and then it lists another 45 vehicles. (One of the vehicles listed has no price, so I do not understand the point of that.)Perhaps you could explain the methodology in which you decided which vehicles to use as the "comparables." Out of 48 vehicles, one of the vehicles selected as "comparable" was the lowest priced vehicle in the whole list ($3,763), and that vehicle had been located in Rochester, Minnesota, and it is no longer available. No indication has been provided as to when that vehicle was sold.Since there are sufficient vehicles of this year, make, and model available locally, it is not necessary to expand your search to markets outside the Twin Cities area, unless it is your intention to manipulate the results by finding the lowest priced vehicle in other markets.If we limit the vehicles listed in the CCC evaluation to only vehicles within a 20 miles radius of my home, there are nine vehicles that are comparable to my vehicle. The price listed for all of these nine vehicles total $63,441.00, and calculating the average price of these nine vehicles comes to $7,049.00. The CCC evaluation also includes an adjusted value on these nine vehicles, and this total comes to $50,856.00, and calculating the average adjusted price comes to $5,650.00. The problem with this list is that we have no way of knowing if these vehicles are still available for sale, or if they were simply "recently available." Recently available doesn't help me replace my vehicle.To find vehicles that are actually for sale in this market now, I have checked the Auto Trader web site. I have attached a PDF file of my findings. (I have only included the first page of each of these listings to keep the PDF file small. If you prefer, I can send you the entire listing including all pages for each vehicle.)I located 13 vehicles available in this local market. These are all 2002 Buick LaSabre's. The options are all very similar. From this list, I selected five vehicles that have mileage readings that are closest to the mileage reading on my vehicle. (To view the supporting documentation, please refer to the attached PDF, and I am listing these selections according to their order on the list.)Veh. 1 - 123,815 miles, $7,995.Veh. 8 - 112,118 miles, $6,900.Veh. 9 - 109,801 miles, $5,995.Veh. 10 - 117,502 miles, $5,900.Veh. 13 - 110,464 miles, $5,999.Averaging these five comparable vehicles comes to $6,557.80.You have offered to settle my total loss claim for $5,029.00 before we add on sales tax, license, and vehicle registration. I do not accept this amount. I do not believe this offer reflects the true market value of my vehicle.I am asking that you voluntarily reconsider this matter.Significant time has passed since the accident, and I am extremely disappointed this matter has not yet been resolved. Making me a fair offer to settle my claim would very much be appreciated.Thank you.Do you see what a scam this could be? And I believe they are just cheating by a little bit. Most people would not notice it, or take the time to analyze the numbers. And that means the insurance company is getting away with cheating on total loss settlements.I believe they do this to everyone. But it is a huge secret. And no one is supposed to know about it. Shhhh . . . . don’t tell anyone.

Here are some of my favorites:A man is arrested for burglary. When he asked the cops how they found him they told him his fingerprints were all over the place. He said that’s impossible, I was wearing gloves. The cops asked to see the gloves. They were golf gloves.A couple of guys decided to go to a construction site and steal what they could find. They found a few kegs of nails and put them in the trunk of the car. The weight was so great that the back of their car was scraping the road and giving off sparks. For some reason a couple cops in a patrol car were interested in seeing what they had in the trunk.Another guy decided to commit a burglary during a snow storm. The cops just followed his footprints back to his front door.My all-time favorite:Guy goes into a convenience store and holds up the clerk at gun point. While there he notices they are having a give away drawing. He fills out an entry slip and puts his name and address on it.This is the cleverest. Guy kidnaps girl on the street and takes her into the woods and rapes her. She convinces him she enjoyed it so much that she wants to see him again. He writes down his name and phone number for her. He drops her off in town and she heads straight for the police station.P.S. Based on the comments I’ve been getting I think a little elaboration is necessary. I found the golf glove story in Sports Illustrated in the early ’70s. (At that time S I was the best written magazine out there and everyone read it. They once had a list of country song titles that included this all-time classic; “If You want to Keep the beer real cold, just put it next to my ex-wife’s heart”.) Anyway, in those days, golf gloves had cut off finger slots, so the ends of the fingers were exposed. It is possible they don’t make them anymore.The construction site thieves were a couple local guys from where I grew up.The last three come from a book of “stupid criminal stories” that I bought somewhere about 30 years ago.P.S. I just saw one on TV that I have to add to my answer.This man lures a professional woman (claims adjuster) to his house. He proceeds to murder her and steal her credit cards. He uses one of her credit cards after she is dead. He tells the clerk it is his girlfriend’s card and proceeds to sign the charge slip using his own name. (Yes. They had security cameras and he was caught on tape doing that).Just saw another one that I have to add to the list. A man hired a “hitman” to kill his wife for the insurance money. The “hitman” took a picture of the gun he used with his cell phone. And, yes, the cops got a warrant for his phone and found the picture.This answer is already a little long but they just keep on coming. Guy’s wife wants a divorce and he doesn’t. He puts a tracking device on her car, follows her around and kills her. He dumps her body and then dumps her car in a parking lot. He removes the tracking device and takes it home with him. The police search his computer and there on the screen they can track every step he takes from where he left her car right up to his front door.

My answer is going to be very shocking to many, and maybe I will end up being sued for defamation or something. This is simply my theory, based on my own observations. More extensive research is needed. I would like to see an investigative reporter explore this widespread scam.First, some background info. Back in the olden-days of insurance adjusting, we would do our own market research on a total loss vehicle. We had the appraiser’s report showing mileage, condition, and tire tread measurements, and his opinion on value. Then we would check for comparable vehicles for sale (in newspaper), and get the book value, and call dealers for quotes. From this we came up with a value.It always ended up being a tug of war as we negotiated the final settlement value. And a huge time waster. It was a bit frustrating, but I became very skilled in negotiating these deals.Then a new company came along called CCC Evaluations, and I think there is an ADP Evaluation company as well. We used CCC. The nice thing about CCC is that they send you about 30 or 40 pages of “documentation” proving the value of the totaled vehicle. The evidence seemed to be overwhelming. And this volume of data really extinguished the arguments of any claimants or insureds. Now settling total loss claims on vehicles was easy. Here’s what we are willing to pay, and that was accepted 99% of the time without further discussion or argument. (Because we sent them a copy of the voluminous report.)This actually worked quite well from the claims adjuster viewpoint. But then a friend of mine was having trouble on a total loss settlement, and asked for my help. This was from 8 years ago, and she had a 2002 Buick. And she had this CCC report. For the first time, I actually analyzed the report.While they list 48 “comparable vehicles,” they only use 3 to actually compare it to. And I figured out they use a computer algorithm to always skew the results. So rather than picking the “most comparable” vehicles in your location, the computer program will always grab one vehicle that is “less comparable” to skew the results. But most people do not notice because there is too much data to analyze.Now if they were obviously cheating to save a lot of money, it would be more noticeable, and they would be caught. So to stay “under the radar,” they only cheat you by a little bit. Like maybe $500. Or maybe a little more? Maybe $1,000?But this accumulates over time. If the insurance company pays $500 less on each total loss claim, how much money are they raking in through this scam?In 2007 there were approximately 16,700,000 new vehicles sold in the USA. Let’s assume maybe 15% of these vehicle purchases were due to a vehicle being “totaled” in an accident. That comes to 2,505,000 total loss claims in one year. And if most insurance carriers are utilizing CCC for their evaluations, and if they cheated everyone by $500, this comes to $1,252,500,000 in surplus revenue that they got from using CCC to run this scam. (If they are trimming $1,000 off of each vehicle evaluation, this comes up to over $2.4 billion of “free money” each year.)In analyzing the CCC report for a friend, I reached this conclusion.Now no one in the insurance industry is going to say anything about this scam. There is too much money involved. And this CCC service must be “paying for itself.” And then some.Here’s a copy of my letter to USAA in which I complained about the inaccuracies of their CCC Evaluation. (Not my claim; I was ghost writing this letter for a friend.) Remember, the adjuster is not the one actually doing the evaluation. Again, it is the CCC computer algorithm doing the work.Dear Claims Adjuster:Thank you for your recent email. I have to admit I was disappointed in your response. When we last spoke about this, you had agreed to run the CCC evaluation limited to our local market of the Twin Cities area. Rather than doing as promised, you now say that the value of my vehicle would drop if we only used the local market. This is not true.I have completed a review of the CCC evaluation that you provided. This evaluation includes three vehicles selected as "comparable vehicles," and then it lists another 45 vehicles. (One of the vehicles listed has no price, so I do not understand the point of that.)Perhaps you could explain the methodology in which you decided which vehicles to use as the "comparables." Out of 48 vehicles, one of the vehicles selected as "comparable" was the lowest priced vehicle in the whole list ($3,763), and that vehicle had been located in Rochester, Minnesota, and it is no longer available. No indication has been provided as to when that vehicle was sold.Since there are sufficient vehicles of this year, make, and model available locally, it is not necessary to expand your search to markets outside the Twin Cities area, unless it is your intention to manipulate the results by finding the lowest priced vehicle in other markets.If we limit the vehicles listed in the CCC evaluation to only vehicles within a 20 miles radius of my home, there are nine vehicles that are comparable to my vehicle. The price listed for all of these nine vehicles total $63,441.00, and calculating the average price of these nine vehicles comes to $7,049.00. The CCC evaluation also includes an adjusted value on these nine vehicles, and this total comes to $50,856.00, and calculating the average adjusted price comes to $5,650.00. The problem with this list is that we have no way of knowing if these vehicles are still available for sale, or if they were simply "recently available." Recently available doesn't help me replace my vehicle.To find vehicles that are actually for sale in this market now, I have checked the Auto Trader web site. I have attached a PDF file of my findings. (I have only included the first page of each of these listings to keep the PDF file small. If you prefer, I can send you the entire listing including all pages for each vehicle.)I located 13 vehicles available in this local market. These are all 2002 Buick LaSabre's. The options are all very similar. From this list, I selected five vehicles that have mileage readings that are closest to the mileage reading on my vehicle. (To view the supporting documentation, please refer to the attached PDF, and I am listing these selections according to their order on the list.)Veh. 1 - 123,815 miles, $7,995.Veh. 8 - 112,118 miles, $6,900.Veh. 9 - 109,801 miles, $5,995.Veh. 10 - 117,502 miles, $5,900.Veh. 13 - 110,464 miles, $5,999.Averaging these five comparable vehicles comes to $6,557.80.You have offered to settle my total loss claim for $5,029.00 before we add on sales tax, license, and vehicle registration. I do not accept this amount. I do not believe this offer reflects the true market value of my vehicle.I am asking that you voluntarily reconsider this matter.Significant time has passed since the accident, and I am extremely disappointed this matter has not yet been resolved. Making me a fair offer to settle my claim would very much be appreciated.Thank you.Do you see what a scam this could be? And I believe they are just cheating by a little bit. Most people would not notice it, or take the time to analyze the numbers. And that means the insurance company is getting away with cheating on total loss settlements.I believe they do this to everyone. But it is a huge secret. And no one is supposed to know about it. Shhhh . . . . don’t tell anyone.