Made with FlowPaper - Flipbook Maker
< PreviousRESTORING COMMERCIAL CONTENTS With sustainability high on the agenda for both the damage management and insurance industries, the philosophy of ‘restore more’ is one that we should all be collectively promoting. There are endless opportunities to apply this in the residential sector for contents – but how do we engage policyholders and insurers in the commercial sector, given the unique and complex challenges that are presented when ‘contents’ can often mean machinery with values in the millions? As practitioners of damage management, we all know the incredible results that can be achieved through ‘restoring more’ through our years of practical application and achieving results. However, a policyholder faced with a one-off disaster can understandably be hesitant or even dismissive of the possibility of restoration. This situation is never more prevalent than when dealing with machinery or specialist equipment for a manufacturing or scientific facility. Policyholders want to be back up and running as quickly as possible, and the assumption is that the quickest means of making this happen is to replace, rather than restore items. In the event of damage, the first port of call for a policyholder is typically the original equipment manufacturer (OEM) or their service engineer. A representative of said company will attend and carry out an assessment of the equipment, and in our experience more often than not, the recommendation will be for a new piece of equipment to be ordered with all haste. From an OEM’s perspective, replacement is the most prudent course of action. After all, their knowledge lies in what a functioning piece of equipment should look like, the timescales for obsolescence of the machinery, and the impact this has on carefully worded warranties that are in place. However, OEMs are not damage management experts – they do not always know what can be achieved through restoration and the benefits this can have for a policyholder. This is where we as an industry need to challenge the OEM’s assumptions with our expertise, for the benefit of all stakeholders in the claims process. Now let’s apply this to a hypothetical scenario, and I appreciate this is a very simplified state of affairs. Let’s say I’m a factory owner. ‘Machine X’ was in situ when my factory suffered a fire and it’s clear that Machine X has suffered smoke damage as a result. Machine X produces 100 widgets an hour, and my staff have been using Machine X to press button A, then button B to maintain this level of productivity for the past five years. My OEM has advised that due to the age of the equipment, replacing it with the latest model – let’s call it ‘Machine Y’ is the most sensible course of action. After all, the machine is clearly damaged, and replacing it with Machine Y will increase my productivity to 120 widgets an hour! A win-win for all parties, right? Every case must be treated on its own merits, but in the above scenario, multiple important factors have failed to be considered. First of all, what’s the lead time for Machine Y? The current shortage of numerous key hardware components globally could mean a six month plus lead time for this new machine, which will lead to a huge amount of interruption to the business. Secondly, assuming they proceed with the installation of Machine Y and have waited six months for installation, how quickly can staff be trained to resume the previous levels of productivity, given the requirement for a new process which may be much more complex? The above are the discussions we routinely have with policyholders and insurers when considering all practical options following damage. Indeed, we should consider it our duty as an industry to advocate for benefits of restoration as part of these discussions. Restoration can be undertaken in a matter of days or weeks, with the vast majority of components capable of decontamination, repair or replacement. This is more often than not more beneficial for policyholders, as they can have staff back using Machine X at previous levels of productivity in a short space of time, rather than waiting months to reach those former heights. Policyholders can then maintain their contracts and above all, their reputations. We must revisit and reframe the conversations around damaged contents and machinery in a commercial setting. This involves shifting the responsibility onto OEMs to prove the items cannot be restored viably and detail the reasons why this can’t be done. Demands around sustainability aren’t going away. The onus, therefore, is on our industry to keep promoting the ‘restore more’ philosophy in both residential and commercial settings. 10 GUEST FEATURE BY JACK CORDEN, CLIENT RELATIONSHIP MANAGER, DAVIS FRENCH & ASSOCIATES LTD GUEST FEATURE10BDMA AWARD WINNERS 202211 SUSTAINABLE PROJECT OF THE YEAR (DOMESTIC): DISASTERCARE PLATINUM BDMA AWARD WINNERS 2022 DISASTERCARE PLATINUM SOUTH CENTRAL WERE APPOINTED BY THE INSURER TO A SERIOUS FIRE AT A 30 ROOM 8 BEDROOMED MANOR HOUSE. EVERY ROOM IN THE PROPERTY HAD BEEN CONTAMINATED. THE FIRE WAS CAUSED BY A RECHARGEABLE TORCH AND THERE WAS EXTENSIVE SMOKE AND SOOT CONTAMINATION THROUGHOUT THE PROPERTY. Firstly, the property was secured, made safe, and the power supply reinstated. Drying equipment was installed to raise temperatures and control relative humidity levels. Temporary lighting was installed along with a large air scrubber to purify the air. The property was also thermo-fogged to clean and sanitise contaminated air and eliminate the smoke odours. Priority Items The direction from the policyholder and insurer was to have their contents cleaned and restored wherever possible. This was understandable as the property contained many high value contents which would be difficult to replace. DisasterCare worked with the policyholder to identify priority items that held significant emotional importance. These items were restored quickly and returned to the policyholder so that they could have them in their alternative accommodation. Soft Contents DisasterCare carefully wrapped and packed over 3200 soft content items including formal evening wear, bedding, and soft furnishings. The items were HEPA vacuumed, washed, and polished when necessary. 99% of these soft contents were restored successfully delivering significant savings for the insurer, and great relief for the policyholder. Hard Contents 18 crates of hard contents were removed from the property. This included high quality furniture and crockery items. The overall cost to replace the affected contents was estimated to be over £750,000 so restoration represented a significant saving when compared to replacement. Paintings Over 200 original artworks were carefully packed and removed from the property, some of them of very high value. A specialist fine art restorer was brought in to carry out necessary restorative work and all paintings were restored successfully. Kitchen The cost of replacing the kitchen was estimated at £100k. DisasterCare carried out successful test cleaning, and the kitchen was successfully restored to the delight of the policyholder. In Conclusion… This was a serious fire with significant contamination and detailed and thorough planning was required to manage all the elements of packing, removing, restoration and the return of contents to the customer. DisasterCare Platinum are committed to minimising environmental impacts, decreasing carbon emissions and reducing landfill by championing restoration over replacement. This delivers environmental and cost benefits for the insurer together with customer satisfaction and delight. This incident demonstrates that restoration can deliver significant environmental benefits and that significant cost benefits are achieved for the client. The policyholder was also, of course, delighted! Quote from the Customer: “Alongside the work they did [with] all the soft furnishings and clothing, they did a wonderful job of packing up all the valuable China and porcelain we had. Thanks to their work, I think the vast majority of our ornaments and China will be usable again. All in all we are extremely happy with the service we have had from Andrew Tait and the Team”12 BDMA EXECUTIVE OPINIONS AND EXPERTISE FROM THE BDMA EXECUTIVE BOARD How can our industry improve the way we demonstrate the financial and non-financial benefits of restoration?: Adam: In my opinion some of the reasons that more is not restored are: That field and claims technicians are not given or allowed access to specialist restorers for opinions or advice. An “Opinion” should cost the insurer and damage management company nothing and the restorer should be able to provide this information at no additional cost. In doing so, technicians gain important knowledge on what can and can’t be restored. In turn, specialist restorers get a chance to share their knowledge with those who can provide them with future work. Everyone gains from this, including the insurer and customer. Chris: This is a real challenge. In my view it is just as difficult to show the financial benefits of restoration as the non-financial benefits. I think transparency is key. Everyone assumes it is always more economical to repair rather than replace, but is that always the case? Do the added benefits that restoration brings mean that restoration should be the default position? The obvious benefits relate to reduced claims cycle times, less disruption and inconvenience to the policyholder. The less obvious benefits such as reducing the amount of waste that goes to landfill are all equally valid. It is relevant to ask that insurers factor this cost into calculations which drive an overall strategy. James: I think we need to be transparent about the likely savings we can achieve in a very specific way. If we take something common like a plastered wall that we have managed to dry, this prevents the plaster being hacked off and the requirement for replastering. What would the cost have been? A visit to hack off and leave clean, then back to replaster leaving the associated mess that comes with wet work of this nature. In the current market conditions with ever increasing labour and material costs, this would add significant cost to the claim. The damage management supplier might want to think about how they can showcase the saving achieved and the green credentials of their restoration approach. Also, if you are a damage management company using modern energy efficient drying equipment, let the client know this. The energy consumption is lower, compared to older equipment, so you are demonstrating your investment. What prevents us from ‘Restoring More’? Adam: The cost of collection, delivery, and storage. These are costs that potentially turn an economic repair into a write off. What can be done about them? Well, first of all, do the items NEED to be removed or can they be restored onsite? If they can be restored onsite, then significant cost is immediately removed. There are other advantages to restoring on site: importantly, it removes the risk of transit damage or later discussions over pre- existing damage. It also reduces the risk of losing keys, shelves, leaves, or fittings, and of breakages. Another reason that more is not restored is that the Policyholder is not always made aware that items can be satisfactorily restored. Items are often uplifted and placed in a skip long before a damage management company has even been appointed. Chris: Society in general has become a “throw- away society”. This is, of course, a generalised concept, strongly influenced by consumerism, but very true of the industry that we work in. Single use items, disposable packaging, and consumer products that are not designed for reuse or lifetime use, drive a culture of replacement. Customers expect their items to be replaced and will demand new kitchens or BDMA EXECUTIVE WHY AREN'T WE RESTORING MORE?bathrooms after damage. Very often, they aren’t given information on other options which may be available. It is the role of the claims handler or loss adjuster to be up to date on all available options and offer the customer a choice from day one. Making decisions early upon notification and investigation of the claim means there are lots more options available. James: Customer resistance remains, for me, the biggest hurdle to overcome. Most modern thinking people want to be green. However, this tends to go out the window when dealing with your own home. I still find that most people still prefer the idea of things being replaced. The home Insurance mantra of “new for old” never goes away in terms of customer expectations. I believe we need to incentivise the path to restoration. For example, if a customer claims for accidental damage to a mobile phone, could we offer a refurbished phone of a similar model or specification? If accepted, perhaps we could waive all or part of the policy excess. Often the waiting time is another big factor for a customer. If an Insurer embraced the concept of refurbishing mobiles, they could hold stock to help to make the initiative work. The turnaround time for a repair is unacceptable as the customer wants a replacement phone as soon as possible. Any other relevant comments/ thoughts? Adam: In the past, it was generally felt that the policyholder wanted or expected ‘new for old’. However, in the last few years, we have noticed a greener approach and a desire for restoration. Bearing in mind it may have taken the oak tree a hundred years to grow, it seems somewhat sad to think it only lasts a few years as a table before it’s either thrown into landfill or recycled as chipboard. Chris: There are lots of great options when it comes to restoration. Many BDMA members offer some truly unique and innovative solutions and it is our job to raise awareness and improve the choice that we as an industry are able to offer. James: I think soon we may all be looking at making claim decisions that includes selecting the route that is most sustainable in terms of waste and environmental impacts as key metrics. We are also likely to be tasked with demonstrating appropriate consideration of varying settlement routes before picking the one that achieves the lowest carbon footprint (subject to cost considerations and controls of course!). A few years ago, we would not have imagined that selection of a settlement route would strongly focus on its carbon performance - now it feels inevitable that this will be the way forward. James ParsonsChris EdwardsAdam Waters 13 BDMA EXECUTIVE BDMA EXECUTIVEBEYOND RESTORATION? SAVING A SEVERELY FIRE DAMAGED PAINTING One of the most frequent questions we are asked at Fine Art Restoration Company is whether an artwork is damaged beyond restoration. Perhaps surprisingly, many paintings can be saved following even the most severe levels of damage. We often come across issues arising from historic or recent exposure to a fire or smoke, sometimes combined with water damage if the item has been involved in a house fire. The painting may be affected by dark soot, water stains, discoloured or clouded varnish and have areas that have been scorched by flames, appearing in an alarming state to any owner, insurer, loss adjuster or technician. However, our team has achieved successful results even when an artwork’s only initially perceived outcome is to be written off. This was the case with a modern oil on board with a thick impasto surface, it had been badly burnt with the centre of the painting completely obscured by fire and smoke damage. We were approached as the policyholder wasn’t keen on a cash settlement due to the connection to the artwork, but instead for it to be saved wherever possible. Assessment by our team confirmed that restoration was absolutely possible and that it was economically viable over it being a cash settlement. The client and insurer were delighted and conservation work commenced. One of the most time sensitive aspects of a fire damaged painting is the removal of acidic soot. If left, this can continue to damage the surface of the artwork and as such risk escalation of costs. The process of restoration begins with ozoning the artwork initially and then the sensitive removal of contaminants with a tailored solvent solution created by our conservators. BY JULIA STOCKDALE, FINE ART RESTORATION 14 GUEST FEATURE GUEST FEATUREFire damaged artworks: top tips Do act swiftly - acidic contamination deteriorates artworks Do remove artworks from the affected room/building swiftly Don’t leave affected artworks wrapped in plastic for extended periods Do seek advice if unsure at any stage For help and advice as to whether artworks affected by an incident can be restored, please contact Julia Stockdale on 020 7112 7576 or via email at Julia@fineart- restoration.co.uk In the case of this modern oil painting, a very heavy coating of smoke and soot was removed with small swabs - swapped out inch by inch to prevent cross-contamination. The damaged impasto was then carefully stabilised and in some areas recreated to ensure the texture of the piece was not interrupted. Using reference photographs of the artwork, areas of missing or disturbed paint were carefully reapplied with conservation pigments. During this process, our conservators take care not to over-restore damaged areas, opting for an approach that maintains an artwork’s historic and artistic integrity. The client and family were delighted to see the painting revived and saved from being a complete loss. It returned home in restored condition, conserved for future generations to enjoy. It is always important to never assume but to ask the question when damage to artworks, decorative items or furniture pieces - however bad it may appear at the outset. Our team is always open to assessing and providing expert advice when it comes to the preservation and restoration in even the most extreme cases of damage. 15 GUEST FEATURE16 There’s more to contents items than just pounds and pence when it comes to restoration following an incident in the home. It is an opportunity for emotional engagement with the customer because their objects are precious to them. Restorers are influential in having a core purpose which delivers on cost, sustainability, and also, human engagement. Firstly, the average value attached to a household contents policy was £35,000 in 2017 (source ABI). The UK total value was therefore close to £1 trillion. Secondly, research identified that the majority of people under-estimate the potential financial loss and are therefore under-insured for their contents. We are dealing with hugely emotional areas for people and their contents are valuable to them. There may however be some obstacles, like under-insurance to contend with when a claim occurs. As restorers what do we do after receiving an instruction to assess emotional impact and value? Fast fashion has increasing environmental concerns. Clothing and other soft-contents form, on average, 35% of a home’s contents value. This is often overlooked when policies are taken out or renewed. Even insurance brokers who visit a property can miss the true value of contents as many items are stored behind closed doors. Therefore, it is hard to articulate a true value for contents both before and after an event. What contents are restorable? The answer is a lot more than in the past. Technology has moved on tremendously and items we would have written off 5 years ago are now cleanable and restorable with environmentally safe and non-toxic processes. We have found this approach to be financially cost effective too! It is more economical to clean and restore an item for the customer than it is to replace it and throw it away. Cleaning and restoration also provides an important strategic message. Reducing waste reduces landfill volumes which in turn has a positive impact on land use. We also know that replacing an item when we don’t need to will have an impact on parts of the world that can ill afford it. Water security is something that affects us all. It takes an average of 2,720 litres of water to make a single t-shirt, yet we can clean it and restore the same t-shirt using under 5 litres of water. As restorers, we should champion restoration over replacement. It is cost effective, the sustainable option and can reduce our carbon and water footprint. Restoration technology has improved dramatically in recent years. Previously, items generally have been classed as BER (beyond economic restoration) due to smoke, water, and mould damage. However, items can now be restored and returned to the owner, providing a much more satisfactory customer experience. There is also a financial dimension. Over the course of the last 4 years, we have recorded Management Information (MI) in relation to the value of each item restored, success rates, and relevant savings for our clients. When we restore an item successfully, it means spending more money with restorers, and paying out less cash to the customer. However, it is suggested that this provides significant savings with Insurers spending an average of 69% less. Over a set period, we recorded water used and carbon emissions saved by restoring rather than replacing. It is our aim to be able to not just be carbon neutral, but to be carbon positive by 2030, saving more carbon emissions than we use in delivering our service. TOTAL CONTENTS RESTORATION BY CHRIS NETHERTON JNR GUEST FEATUREAlthough it is an overwhelmingly positive journey, there are some considerations and challenges and, in my opinion, the main points are highlighted below. Firstly, it is suggested that Restorers should always have their own in -house contents restoration capability – premises and equipment. This requires significant financial investment which in turn generates a need for a return on investment (ROI). Rates paid by insurers therefore rose to effect this. Secondly, cash settlements can close the contents element of the claim very quickly. However, throughout a large contents restoration job, various items can be declared BER. This means there can be several iterations of a BER list and it can take many weeks to calculate a final settlement figure. Our need for speed needs to be tempered with a need to consider cost and environmental savings and to provide the maximum benefit from the available technologies. Lastly, I want to suggest that contents restoration is a specific skill set with a requirement for skilled restorers within this sector. We will need to see further bespoke training courses for those wishing to take this path to allow technicians to keep pace with the advancements in technology. In conclusion, in delivering contents restoration, we can often connect customer engagement with environmental benefits as well as better financial settlements, using new technology and adopting a caring, supportive attitude. I believe Restorers can champion this cause, which is completely aligned with the United Nation’s (UN) goals for sustainability and 2030 targets. In fact, our work can align with nearly all of the UN’s goals. For me, this is a purpose we should strive for and be very proud of. 17 GUEST FEATURE GUEST FEATURE Jacket before restoration Jacket after restoration07 GUEST FEATURE Surface restoration is a much more appealing solution for insurers and customers than ever before. It’s more sustainable, it’s more cost effective, and with supply chain and material shortages, it can significantly reduce customer disruption. Hard surfaces in the home can become damaged by fire, impact, theft or accidentally, and often the extent of the damage is fairly minor - for example, a chip, crack, scratch, or scorch mark. Historically, it was customary to replace the entire unit such as a kitchen worktop, bath or sink if a surface suffered damage. Zurich have been in partnership with one of the UK’s leading surface repair and restoration specialists for 12 months. The company has ISO 14001 accreditation, which verifies long-term commitment to sustainable damage management, minimising pollution, reducing energy usage and waste. The company uses state of the art technology and deploys a single skilled technician onsite to carry out a high-quality restoration process - meaning repairs are carried out quickly at the home and there are no delays caused by having to order and fit an entire new unit. They are so accomplished at what they do, that they can tackle a multitude of surfaces and colour match the final look to perfection. So, whether something is chipped, cracked, or stained, they have the restorative solution to make it look as good as new. Hard surface restoration isn’t new. Historically there has been poor utilisation of this service owing to claims handling philosophies and customer expectations. We interviewed over 150 customers to ask them what they thought about our repair vs restore initiative. The results were heavily in favour of restoring rather than providing a complete replacement for cosmetic damage. Respondents said speed and ease of claims process were the main benefits they could foresee following the adoption of a sustainable method, while many felt it would be simply ‘doing the right thing’. The past 2 years have seen increased accidental damage claims as more customers and their families spend longer at home, and because of this we need to work differently. The global supply chain is turbulent and certain materials are becoming difficult to source. This is adding unprecedented delays to property damage claims. A shortage of skilled labour in the UK is also having an impact on claims settlement times in some areas of work - we're responding to this by adapting the way we work, allowing us to continue to support customers through these challenging times. The surface repair approach to minor damage claims unlocks a number of customer benefits, such as: •The average time to complete a repair is just six days - with 95% of claims completed on the first visit. As a result, customers can expect less disruption and an improved customer journey •Diminishes the possible requirements for alternative accommodation in some instances •Customers can access an online portal to see the status of their claim and manage appointments •All repairs are effective, long lasting and come with a 24-month guarantee 18 RESTORE VS REPLACE BY REBECCA MARSHALL, ZURICH INSURANCE Case Study - Shattered skylight resulting in damage to flooring and a dining room table. - Completed in 32 hours with 2 fine finishers. - The flooring was estimated at around £10,000 to replace and the table £8,000 resulting in an estimated saving of £16,080. - As the table was obsolete the occupier was unable to source a replacement, having the flooring replaced would have resulted in alternative accom- modation as this ran through the entire ground floor of the property in central London. - Landfill saving is estimated at 4 tonnes going to wasteland, that’s around the equivalent of 2 ½ cars! GUEST FEATUREGUEST FEATURE When dealing with restoration of contents in the private client’s market, there are a mix of challenges, ranging from the more straightforward through to bespoke antiques of high value, high end technical items and a whole range of personal items in between. Although a policy allows for replacement, it is important for loss adjusters to work closely with suppliers to look at ways to improve rates of restoration and ultimately reduce landfill. The opportunities from standard repairs right through to fine art restoration are readily available; it is a case of having and building a relationship with the right supplier - specialists that can assist with soft furnishing or rug restorations for example. Restoration is always a more environmentally friendly solution when considering the carbon footprint of replacement and brings the added benefit of managing indemnity spend. In the private client’s market, loss adjusters are often privileged to see some truly incredible contents items and have the even more delightful experience of seeing the customer’s joy at items being perfectly restored. A particular example where this is clearly shown would be when faced with something unusual, such as a large wine collection. The customer has probably invested a reasonable amount of financial wealth into the collection, whether it is for investment purposes or for the joy of owning it. Our team was faced with exactly this scenario in a recent claim where wines left on racks had been inundated with extinguishment water from a roof above during a fire; the exposed bottles were soot and water damaged externally. In addition, a very large refrigeration unit that stored the more expensive wines was also water and soot contaminated and had become sealed shut due to door seals melting. The wine collection within the cooler was worth approximately £70,000.00. The customer was distraught at his lifelong collection being damaged, and insurers were facing a replacement cost certainly in excess of £70,000. We quickly arranged for the cooler system to be removed by a wine expert with whom we had built a relationship, the expert opened the unit under controlled conditions and each bottle was removed and cleaned immediately. The expert subsequently stored the wines in a controlled environment and invited the customer for a random selection of sampling to be undertaken. The delighted customer, accompanied by our expert, enjoyed a very pleasant afternoon of sampling and discussion. Based on this tasting session, the condition of the sampled wines was assumed to reflect the entire collection. It was calculated that on average an 8% reduction in value had occurred because of the fire damage. The sum of £5,600 was agreed with the customer as the settlement (plus the cost of the opened bottles). The remaining wine was stored and returned to the customer when the repairs to the home were complete. Loss adjusters encounter unusual contents all the time and having the right people there at the right moment allows us to impress our customers, often turning a tragedy into a hugely satisfactory experience - and all at a significant cost saving to insurers. Quality restoration, when done well, is an advantageous solution for everyone including the environment. RESTORATION OF CONTENTS IN THE PRIVATE CLIENTS MARKET BY NIKKI SUTTON, HEAD OF PRIVATE CLIENTS, QUESTGATES 19 GUEST FEATURE GUEST FEATURENext >