Q: I have 50 LGR dehumidifiers that are rated +124 ppd of water removal. I see no need in purchasing the smaller LGRs that have recently been introduced into the market due to the added expense, occupying more floor space, stocking different size filters and limited space on our water restoration vehicles.

Some adjusters are calculating the dehumidification requirements based on the IICRC S500, paragraph 1.21 (pages 232-233). I am not opposed to this, but if the area being dried requires 55 ppd according to the calculations the insurance company will only allow for a small dehumidifier ($50.25 per day vs. $101.25).

We as mitigators may have backed ourselves into a corner. Any suggestions on fighting this approach by the adjusters?

It looks like the essence of the problem is an informed consumer. 

If the smaller units are available in the market and the consumer (and his adjuster) are aware of it, I don't see a defense to the lower pricing. Furthermore, I don't think you are backed into a corner because you have the larger machine to accommodate both large and small jobs. 

But you’ll have to adjust your price according to the size of the job if the specific adjuster calls for it. 

If I were you, I would deal with it on an individual adjuster basis. That is, I wouldn’t make it my standard operating procedure (to use the smaller machine pricing), but for the specific adjuster who insists on the smaller dehumidifier unit, use the larger machine (because you have it) but charge the lower rate.

The alternative is to invest in the smaller machines, which you do not appear to favor.

Q:  I now know for adjusters, the value statement I want to promote is ‘Competency, Cost Efficiency, and Expediency’.  Do you have a three-word value statement for agents?

You'll perk any agent’s ears (or his office claim rep’s ears) when he hears this:

"We're available 24/7 — for when your client is a foot deep in water or they call you at 3 a.m. when they have a hole in their roof and need emergency board-up."