Can someone tell me whether there is a special Xactimate line item for laying decking over the battens after tearing off a shake roof (and prior to shingling) ? If there is, can you tell me the item # and description?
Is it possible that Xactimate is context-sensitive to the point that this special cost gets automatically added into the shingle installation, e.g. “Laminated - High grd - comp. shingle rfg. - w/out felt”
I have the adjuster’s report on this house, and the only items called out are:
“Remove Tear off, haul and dispose of wood shakes shingles” $41.71/sq
“Remove Add. layer of comp. shingles, remove and disp. - Laminated” $22.28/sq
This [contract adjuster working the Texas Safeco claim] seems to me to have completely left out the deck installation. There is certainly no way to shoehorn it into that $183.51 for new shingles.
Here’s what you do. You sit down with your own spreadsheet or whatever you use to price a roof and you price the roof with your pricing. Give it to your homeowner, or adjuster or however you work and tell them this is what it costs. You do not even have to use Xactimate.
But, if you want to use Xactimate the line items are as follows:
RFGSHW1/2 or RFGSHW5/8 for waferboard sheathing, 1/2" or 5/8 ".
RFGSH1/2 or RFGSHW5/8 for CDX, 1/2" or 5/8".
RFGSHSTP for sheathing steep roof - 7/12-9/12
RFGSHSTP> for sheathing steep roof - 10/12-12/12
RFGSHSTP>> for sheathing steep roof - over 12/12
Here’s what you do. You sit down with your own spreadsheet or whatever you use to price a roof and you price the roof with your pricing. Give it to your homeowner, or adjuster or however you work and tell them this is what it costs. You do not even have to use Xactimate.[/quote]
While I appreciate the quick comment, this is not all that helpful. I don’t need a primer on how to price my jobs, nor does the question I asked necessarily imply that I am or am not pricing my job based on Xactimate. I needed to know something, but did not have access to the information, so I posed the question to those who do (have access).
[quote=“dstew66”]
But, if you want to use Xactimate the line items are as follows:
RFGSHW1/2 or RFGSHW5/8 for waferboard sheathing, 1/2" or 5/8 ".
RFGSH1/2 or RFGSHW5/8 for CDX, 1/2" or 5/8".
RFGSHSTP for sheathing steep roof - 7/12-9/12
RFGSHSTP> for sheathing steep roof - 10/12-12/12
RFGSHSTP>> for sheathing steep roof - over 12/12[/quote]
Ah, that is much more useful, and directly answers some of my questions. In the absence of other info, I will assume that none of the line items I [earlier] mentioned subsume the items you have listed.
This was actually the comment you made which I made the first part of my response to. The point I was attempting to make, if not necessarily to you but to others who may think they have to “shoehorn” their job costs into an insurance estimate, is that it is not necessary. Not everone in the biz nor every homeowner is aware of that. While it might not have been that helpful to you, your comment along with my reply may help some other poor sap whose shoes are a size too small.
Perhaps I could have worded my initial response a little differently.
Now that I look at it, I believe this one was incorrect for the 5/8". It should be RFGSH5/8 (drop the “W”).
This was actually the comment you made which I made the first part of my response to. The point I was attempting to make, if not necessarily to you but to others who may think they have to “shoehorn” their job costs into an insurance estimate, is that it is not necessary. Not everone in the biz nor every homeowner is aware of that. While it might not have been that helpful to you, your comment along with my reply may help some other poor sap whose shoes are a size too small.
Perhaps I could have worded my initial response a little differently.[/quote]
Well, perhaps I could have done the same, I’m not sure.
The full quote and context was this:
What I meant by that was that it appears that he left the decking out, and the reason it appears that way is BECAUSE there is no way it could have been included within the $183.51/sq unit price, which is far too low to include both shingles and decking. I was talking about Xactimate not being able to “shoehorn” it in there.
BTW, another member here just posted these prices on another thread, as FRM-SH1/2 = $1.56/ft2 and RFG-SH1/2 = $1.71/ft2. I don’t know what the FRM entry is for (wall sheathing?), but the RFG number (if correct for North Texas) would mean that there would only be $12.51 allocated to new shingles, if in fact they two things were both included in the shingle line item. Obviously, there is no way Xactware or the insurer could support that argument.
I apologize for the confusion.
No apologies are needed. You are correct in your assumption that sheathing is not included in that price. That is why there is a separate line item for it. FRM is the abbreviation for the framing category. Sometimes you will find items duplicated in different categories and they have different prices. The item description usually tells you what it is for.
The recently published Xactware White Paper discussing roofing prices within Xactimate alleviates some of the issues I’ve had with Xactimate pricing. As I said before, I can’t cut and paste what is written in them because of usage agreement, but I can do a synopsis. It basically says that each estimator must determine whether the reported price is appropriate for their company and if it is not then Xactimate is designed so that the pricing can be adjusted to fit each estimator’s pricing structure. It’s not meant to be a set in stone price. It is merely the median range price for that particular area.
[quote=“dstew66”]No apologies are needed. You are correct in your assumption that sheathing is not included in that price. That is why there is a separate line item for it. FRM is the abbreviation for the framing category. Sometimes you will find items duplicated in different categories and they have different prices. The item description usually tells you what it is for.
The recently published Xactware White Paper discussing roofing prices within Xactimate alleviates some of the issues I’ve had with Xactimate pricing. As I said before, I can’t cut and paste what is written in them because of usage agreement, but I can do a synopsis. It basically says that each estimator must determine whether the reported price is appropriate for their company and if it is not then Xactimate is designed so that the pricing can be adjusted to fit each estimator’s pricing structure. It’s not meant to be a set in stone price. It is merely the median range price for that particular area.[/quote]
dstew, I’d be VERY interested in your experience working with that white paper and adjusting the Xactimate to fit your company. How has that worked with the Adjusters? What’s happened when it failed (if at all)? Does it seem to work with one insurance company better than another?
That particular white paper has only been out since May so my experience with it is limited. I will say that so far my results have been successful. I have used it successfully with 3 different insurance companies so far: State Farm, Shelter and E.M.C. I will try to scan in a before and after so you can see one.
I recently sat down with the “head” local adjuster of a smaller insurance co. They are paying 225 a sq on/off on a 7 pitch. They dont pay steep til 8 and will not accept xactomate pricing. Would not budge an inch on pricing!!! After he called his joe blow roofer (I’ve seen his work not impressed) to confirm for me he could get the job done for that price and I tried to reason with him in every possible way I got up, shook his hand and said he might want to get an appraiser lined out for arbitration! what else can you do with these idiots?
Very rarely do field adjusters authorize decking to be installed over spaced decking. I quit asking field adjusters to write it into their scope because so many said, “I had a salesman talk me into it once and I got in big trouble from my supervisor”. What I do now is simply supliment it along witih new step, 15in flashing, and in many cases counter flashing. I typicaly charge for “Replace” of 1/2in waferboard/OSB but some insurance companys will pay for Remove and Replace which is odd because you don’t remove anything!
One thing I’ve had a problem with getting adjusters to pay for decking is a waste factor. Just like 15% for shingles on a hip roof it should be applied to decking. In most cases I add 10% for decking waste. Another thing that’s missing is a line item for cutting out turtle vents or ridge vents and plumbing/exhaust vents. Another missing line item is a 2 story charge for decking.
Quite often adjusters will want to see pictures of the gaps and a letter from the local building official stating new decking is required by code. Pictures are taken of all redeck jobs but more and more city inspectors won’t get involved in commenting on decking. In a worse case scenario I’ll have my CT rep look at the roof in person or by picture and write a report saying the roof needs solid decking to be able to properly secure the new roofing materials. To date have never had an adjuster say no for putting up new decking.
As far as the lowball adjusters which are typicaly paid hourly by small insurance companies that can be a tough one! When my work load is high (this year) I’ll kindly walk away and politely inform the insured they’ll have to start looking on craigslist for a roofer cheap enough to do the work for what their insurance company is willing to pay. They are also offered an out of pocket price option (beyond deductible) for me to do the work. What I’ve found odd with some insurance companies is one claim they pay next to nothing and stand firm on their price while the next claim they pay my price. Are they basing some of their pricing on customer relations?
My friend called me yesterday and said his friend was offered $225 a square for lams from his insurance company. I laughed and said even if it was in my back yard there a minumal of $100 a square short.
Will get from time to time adjusters who tell the insured they need to shop around for more quotes. Now I tell the homeowners to call back the adjuster and tell them when they decided to switch to their company they didn’t show them two other quotes for insurance companies. In MN state law allows a policy holder to pick their contractor after an insurance loss occures. One larger insurer lately has been really giving me a hard time. It’s been great to explain to customers that I used to insure with the same company but now found better and cheaper coverage elsewere. Won’t go into specifics but have lured a handful of customers away from their “old” carrier!
AD, here is the claim I mentioned. The first two images are from the original SF estimate. I have only included the relevant pages. I have edited out the customer name and claim number to protect privacy.
These are images of the pages I submitted. The main thing to note is on line 4 & 5 where I broke out the shingle install as material and labor and inserted our current pricing in place of the Xactimate median price.
I submitted it along with an explanation of what I had done and referenced the Xactware white paper. I also included the relevant portions I found in the white paper. I never heard anything from them. The homeowner called me and said he got another check and looked like I did quite well.
Final price: $ 11.308.57
SF original: $ 8,898.55
Difference: $ 2,410.02
% increase: 27.08%
This was just the first one so it was experimental. There are other items that I need to increase also on future ones. I can’t say that it will work every time (although there is no reason it shouldn’t other than an insurance company breaching their contract with a homeowner), but it was successful on this one.
