Final Report For The End Of Program Evaluation Of: Fill & Download for Free

Back in January, the 1st Armored Brigade Combat Team, 3rd Infantry Division finally started getting the JLTV (Joint Light Tacticle Vehicle), the HMMWV (“Humvee”) “replacement”. The 1st ABCT received total of 500 JLTVs by the end of March. Originally it was planned that the 10th Mountain Division at Fort Drum would receive the first fielding of the vehicle.HOWEVER all is not well with the replacement. The Pentagon’s Operational Test & Evaluation (OT&E) office has seriously criticized the JLTV. The OT&E report says all four versions of of the vehicle are not operationally suitable, with a combination of defects, design problems, and inadequate contractor training support. https://www.dote.osd.mil/pub/rep...In the next decade, roughly 58,000 JLTVs are programmed to be procured by the Army and the Marines (9,000 which will replace about 60% of the USMC Humvee fleet,). But, Marine Corps Commandant Gen. Robert Neller has stated that the "Humvee is going to be around for a while," but said where they are used will depend on "what the threat is."The Mine-Resistant Ambush Protected vehicles, while effective, sometimes weighed more than 20 tons, making them too heavy and slow-moving for many battlefield situations.Currently, in military circles, there is the great debate about upgrading the Humvee.Upshot, the JLTV will probably complement the Humvee, but the Humvee is going to be around for sometime to come.The basic JLTV and Humvee

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 commonly used PhD jargon in India.Course Work: That thing the UGC (University Grants Commission) has made mandatory for every PhD student. Remember to take your Research Methodology paper seriously. Kothari.. Ugh!Monthly Report: Yeah, it’s that thing you submit to your department/institute by the 7th of every month to prove that you’ve been productive over the last month. You might hate it, but you can’t beat it!Half Yearly Report: Well, this is something you need to present to your doctoral advisory committee once every six months. Even though, officially, it’s meant to prove that your PhD is progressing as planned, in actuality it’s nothing but a program through which you practice defense against the dark arts — character assassination. This is something very important if you’re doing a PhD in India. Trust me, this is necessary.Stipend: Ah, well, that thing we used to laugh at, but look forward to by the skin of our teeth every month. It was a joke when I was a PhD student, though it’s a lot better now. We still had to pay our rent/bills, you know! In a lot of places, the stipend you get is directly proportional to the monthly reports you give! That’s when you learn to get creative on your monthly reports! Give enough information, but not too much! Save it for later.DAC (Doctoral Advisory Committee): A bunch of professors, totally unrelated to your field, and a subject expert, who are meant to evaluate your PhD progress every six months. The decision on whether or not you can finally submit your thesis, rest on their shoulders. Remember, when you face them, it’s never about what you DO know, but it’s about what you DON’T know. You might be a PhD in photonics, but you’re still expected to know who the finance minister of the country is!Collaboration: That thing everyone talks about, but no one wants. From the head of your department, to the academic dean, everyone talks about collaborations, the necessity of it, the importance of it, and encourages it, but eventually, when you bring them one — academic or industry, no one bats an eye. Indian researchers have inflated ego’s that are impossible to satisfy!Paper: That thing you write to prove what you’re doing is new and novel. It’s something people are going to quantitatively evaluate your PhD with. It’s also something people are going to ask a lot by the time you’re in your 3rd year. Be prepared to face the DAC and explain why you’re holding back all your data! Good luck, you’re gonna need it!Thesis/dissertation: It’s essentially an elaborate compilation of every six month report you’ve ever written at the end of 4–5 years. Even then, if the DAC thinks you haven’t done enough, it could very well mean 5–6 years.Defense: When you have to orally explain your life’s work to a bunch of people who are mostly not from your field of study, answer a bunch of questions that make you question your life choices, sometimes pushing you to the edge of depression, just so that you can be called Dr. at the end of it all.