Quote:
Originally Posted by valuemkt
FREE LUNCH THEOREM: There is no such thing as a free lunch. Folks that expect to get a brand new roof after 16 or 18 years on a 20 or 25 year roof are the same that eat 3/4 of their meal at a restaurant and then complain that the food was lousy and refse to pay for it .. They get away with it, but the restaurant (in this case insurance company) "eats" the cost. I'm sure the insurance company reserves a certain amount of money for un ordinary claims, but when they come in mass from a group of hucksters trolling a neighborhood, you can expect hefty increases or cancellations if they in fact agree to replace them. Both of the above are unethical, it;s just the size of the claim that's different.
|
If one knows nothing about roofs but you’re concerned because of age and possible damage so you contact a roofer to check it out. He believes you have storm damage so you contact your insurance company to have their inspector check it out, submit a report, then the insurance company’s ( in this case Progressive) Adjuster approves the claim for replacement why is this unethical? Seems a logical process to me and if the insurance provider agrees I’d be crazy not to use the insurance my premiums have paid for what seems forever.