All Claims Adjusters

All Claims Adjusters (ACA) does not have a contract with the complaint partyTherefore ACA is not at liberty to discuss a contract or the terms or outcome on behalf of a clientOften times when a relative passes, in real estate matters or estate proceedings relatives insert themselves into the
process.Proclaiming themselves the new legal entity and expecting businesses to defer to their self proclaimed status is not a viable legal optionFrom what I gather but cannot confirm nor do I have to confirm is that my client passed and the property is now owned by a relativeSomething about how ACA is responsible to get the insurance company to pay for a new roof? If this individual can produce a contract that ACA entered into with the complaining party and in which it states ACA promises to get a new roof paid for by the insurance company then he should produce it.Otherwise once again Revdex.com is wasting my valuable time

Revdex.com:I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID [redacted], and have determined that this proposed action would not resolve my complaint.  For your reference, details of the offer I reviewed appear below.Please find attached business card from the company, my property profile, check from All Claims Adjuster LLC and the canceled check from the insurance company as proof.In respond to his statement ” Often times when a relative passes, in real estate matters or estate proceedings relatives insert themselves into the process.” This is a wrong statement in my case.I am the legal owner since 2004. My wife and I purchase this property for her parent to leave for free. I have also attached the property profile pull by an agent in Arizona. This company “All Claims Adjusters (ACA)” now trying to change his company name since I found out that he is not listed in the Arizona Secretary of state.1.    When I call [redacted] (the roofer) to come and gave us an estimate in our roof he told us that [redacted] is the public adjuster and will work with him to get the roof fix no money out of my pocket. Since I leave in California I decided to have him and the public Adjuster ([redacted] or [redacted]) work on the case.2.    I did spoke and email to [redacted] a couple time and told him that he will need to work with me, but he did not.3.    Somehow he settle the claim with the insurance company for the damage and put 1/3 of the proceed in his pocket4.    My farther in-law pass away in September 2014 [redacted] or [redacted] received a check from the insurance and illegally endorse the check in January 2015 deposited without our knowledge.  5.    My roof still not fix and we did not get any money of the claim because he send a check to my Dead farther-in-law as you can see in the attachment.Regards,[redacted]

This is getting cumbersome. Attached is the contract between All Claims Adjusters (ACA) and Mr. [redacted]  (deceased). As the presenter was filling in the contract ACA presenter was informed that Mr. [redacted] WAS NOT ON THE HOMEOWNERS POLICY Mr. [redacted] was the insured of record so Mr. [redacted] name was crossed out and Mr. [redacted] signed the contract.From the moment Mr. [redacted] signed the contract for ACA to represent him, Mr. [redacted] was the legal client of record. Now it may be that Mr. [redacted] "bought" the house it may be that it is understood within his family that he is the "owner" but the LEGAL facts are this: Mr. [redacted] is listed as one of 4 owners (public records AND ACCORDING TO THE PROPERTY PROFILE MR [redacted] HAS SUPPLIED) and Mr. [redacted] is the owner (1 of 4) that insured the property IN HIS NAME. ACA can only represent the legal owner who is listed on the insurance policy. Since Mr. [redacted] IS NOT LISTED ON THE INSURANCE POLICY HE IS LEGALLY NOT A CLIENT OF ACA. How hard is this to understand?As far the other allegations and threats made by Mr. [redacted], ACA will tackle each one:He is threatening ACA by stating ACA has to go back to insurance company and get him a new roof. Putting aside the fact that he is not our client, the roof was investigated by ACA and insurance company. There is minimal damage and the roof is 100% repairable. Accordingly, ACA negotiated funds to repair the roof. Check was processed and payment sent to the address of record attention Mr. [redacted] on Feb 22, 2015 along with complete instructions on how to proceed. ACA has heard nothing back until 3 months later from one of the owners (Mr. [redacted]). This claim was resolved months ago. ACA was hired to settle the claim on Mr. [redacted]s behalf for a fee of 36.5% and we did so. If the other 3 owners are dissatisfied with the result they have options they can pursue. Upon review ACA determined that the check mailed to Mr. [redacted] has not been cashed. I will a forward a form for Mr. [redacted] to sign and we will reissue check payable to Mr. [redacted].As far as his roof not being fixed, ACA is not a roofing contractor. It is the responsibility of the property owner to maintain his property pass this obligation onto ACA.Basic english lesson for Mr. [redacted]. ACA is not trying to change our name. ACA is an abbreviation of All Claims Adjusters. Using an abbreviation or acronym in correspondence is basic English 101.  I think I learned this in first grade.ACA will not respond further to this matter.

This is getting cumbersome. Attached is the contract between All Claims Adjusters (ACA) and Mr. [redacted]  (deceased). As the presenter was filling in the contract ACA presenter was informed that Mr. [redacted] WAS NOT ON THE HOMEOWNERS POLICY Mr. [redacted] was the insured of record so Mr. [redacted] name was crossed out and Mr. [redacted] signed the contract.From the moment Mr. [redacted] signed the contract for ACA to represent him, Mr. [redacted] was the legal client of record. Now it may be that Mr. [redacted] "bought" the house it may be that it is understood within his family that he is the "owner" but the LEGAL facts are this: Mr. [redacted] is listed as one of 4 owners (public records AND ACCORDING TO THE PROPERTY PROFILE MR [redacted] HAS SUPPLIED) and Mr. [redacted] is the owner (1 of 4) that insured the property IN HIS NAME. ACA can only represent the legal owner who is listed on the insurance policy. Since Mr. [redacted] IS NOT LISTED ON THE INSURANCE POLICY HE IS LEGALLY NOT A CLIENT OF ACA. How hard is this to understand?As far the other allegations and threats made by Mr. [redacted], ACA will tackle each one:He is threatening ACA by stating ACA has to go back to insurance company and get him a new roof. Putting aside the fact that he is not our client, the roof was investigated by ACA and insurance company. There is minimal damage and the roof is 100% repairable. Accordingly, ACA negotiated funds to repair the roof. Check was processed and payment sent to the address of record attention Mr. [redacted] on Feb 22, 2015 along with complete instructions on how to proceed. ACA has heard nothing back until 3 months later from one of the owners (Mr. [redacted]). This claim was resolved months ago. ACA was hired to settle the claim on Mr. [redacted]s behalf for a fee of 36.5% and we did so. If the other 3 owners are dissatisfied with the result they have options they can pursue. Upon review ACA determined that the check mailed to Mr. [redacted] has not been cashed. I will a forward a form for Mr. [redacted] to sign and we will reissue check payable to Mr. [redacted].As far as his roof not being fixed, ACA is not a roofing contractor. It is the responsibility of the property owner to maintain his property pass this obligation onto ACA.Basic english lesson for Mr. [redacted]. ACA is not trying to change our name. ACA is an abbreviation of All Claims Adjusters. Using an abbreviation or acronym in correspondence is basic English 101.  I think I learned this in first grade.ACA will not respond further to this matter.

All Claims Adjusters (ACA) does not have a contract with the complaint party. Therefore ACA is not at liberty to discuss a contract or the terms or outcome on behalf of a client. Often times when a relative passes, in real estate matters or estate proceedings relatives insert themselves into the...

process.Proclaiming themselves the new legal entity and expecting businesses to defer to their self proclaimed status is not a viable legal option. From what I gather but cannot confirm nor do I have to confirm is that my client passed and the property is now owned by a relative. Something about how ACA is responsible to get the insurance company to pay for a new roof? If this individual can produce a contract that ACA entered into with the complaining party and in which it states ACA promises to get a new roof paid for by the insurance company then he should produce it.Otherwise once again Revdex.com is wasting my valuable time.

I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID [redacted], and have determined that this proposed action would not resolve my complaint.  For your reference, details of the offer I reviewed appear below.Please find attached business card from the company, my property profile, check from All Claims Adjuster LLC and the canceled check from the insurance company as proof.In respond to his statement ” Often times when a relative passes, in real estate matters or estate proceedings relatives insert themselves into the process.” This is a wrong statement in my case.I am the legal owner since 2004. My wife and I purchase this property for her parent to leave for free. I have also attached the property profile pull by an agent in Arizona. This company “All Claims Adjusters (ACA)” now trying to change his company name since I found out that he is not listed in the Arizona Secretary of state.1.    When I call [redacted] (the roofer) to come and gave us an estimate in our roof he told us that [redacted] is the public adjuster and will work with him to get the roof fix no money out of my pocket. Since I leave in California I decided to have him and the public Adjuster ([redacted] or [redacted]) work on the case.2.    I did spoke and email to [redacted] a couple time and told him that he will need to work with me, but he did not.3.    Somehow he settle the claim with the insurance company for the damage and put 1/3 of the proceed in his pocket4.    My farther in-law pass away in September 2014 [redacted] or [redacted] received a check from the insurance and illegally endorse the check in January 2015 deposited without our knowledge.  5.    My roof still not fix and we did not get any money of the claim because he send a check to my Dead farther-in-law as you can see in the attachment.Regards,[redacted]