The IT industry and its surrounding insured structure requires a technical level of expertise in order to understand whether the insured has carried out there obligations, and to determine the real impact of any claim. For example loss of data or business would typically require backups. Would you be able to determine if the insured did actually do the backups, exercise reasonable care, or did they just hand you a log and burnt or destroyed tape and point at the safe. If the insured claimed a $20,000.00 colour laser, which was in his office brunt to the ground, could you determine via other technical means what was really there.
Would you know the difference between a collection of $7000.00 laptop's or desktop and a $3000.00 machines
IT4U can help provide answer based on facts by which you can make the relevant decision in regards to computer room environments, hardware, software, data loss, and networks. Whether the damage results from malicious intent, fire, flood, or electrically. In terms of lost time, and recovery time, procurement of equivalent replacements, we can also assist in this regard with our estimating skills as part of our Project Management skill set.
With our exposure to a broad range of products and situation we are well positioned to provide valuable information.
It is highly likely that you already have a proffered technical expert to assist you in these area's, and given there are not to many of us about who have worked in this field before, its highly probably you have used the same individual for many years, so perhaps now is time to consider alternatives and competition, you just might be pleasantly surprised.
Unlike the majority of IT professionals we have acted in this area before providing service's to both Loss Adjusters and Insurance companies directly, and hence have an understanding of the industry.
Following are two examples;
1) A chicken processing factory suffered a fire, due to electrical contractors. The insured claimed loss of damages after repairs on the bases the computer equipment was both miscounting, and weighting the chickens. It was determined that the miscounting of the computer had been a problem for many years, prior to the fire damage. Further that the error in processing chickens by weight, which had only occurred since the fire did not actually cost the company any direct revenue as chickens were incorrectly labelled both smaller and larger than what was actually packaged. The actual weighting problems was not the weighing mechanism but the equipment that directed the different size chickens.
2) A large printer manufacture claimed the fire which destroyed plant was started by computer processing control equipment. It was later established that this equipment was working well after the fire started, and hence it could not have started the fire.
These are examples of rejected claims, but of course there are examples unfortunately where the Insurance company wanted to replace name brand equipment with clone equipment which also transpired after investigations.
From a financial view your rates are typically more than ours and this enables you to still make a margin while continuing on with other claims, and thus you will find it cost effective.
Depending on you level of knowledge within the industry you also stand a greater chance of being fully informed in regards to claims.
13/05/2002 04:36 PM