Claims Adjusting Editing and Proofreading Services

The report says the escape of water was caused by a failed flexible hose and that the claim is covered. Nine months later, in a dispute, somebody asks how the adjuster knew the hose failed rather than was disconnected, what the insured said on the day, and whether anybody looked at the isolation valve. The report contains a conclusion and almost nothing that produced it.

We edit what loss adjusters and claims professionals produce — loss reports and their findings, site visit and interview records, causation and quantum sections, coverage position summaries for insurers, reserve recommendations, correspondence with policyholders and brokers, and the statements prepared where a claim may be disputed. Our editors work on documents that are read again long after the site has been repaired.

The separation of observation from conclusion is what makes a loss report survive, and its failure is a finding presented without the evidence that supports it. The site will be repaired within a fortnight and the report is all that remains. We work through these so what was seen is recorded separately from what it means, since the next reader may reach a different conclusion from the same observations and cannot do so if only the conclusion was written down; so each observation is located and dated — which room, which fitting, which direction the staining ran — because "evidence of prolonged leakage" is a judgement and "staining extending 40cm along the joist, dry to touch, no active drip at 14:20" is a fact; so what the insured said is recorded as their words rather than as a summary, given that an account changes between the first visit and a formal statement and the first version is the valuable one; so alternative causes considered and excluded are named with why, as a report that mentions only the accepted cause looks like a report that only looked for one; so photographs are referenced against the observations they support; so anything not examined is stated, since a reader assumes anything unmentioned was checked; so the quantum and the causation are kept apart, because these are argued separately and merging them weakens both; and so the coverage view is expressed as a view with its basis rather than as a decision. Reports written this way hold up in a dispute.

Everything you send is treated in confidence, including loss reports, policyholder information and material prepared in contemplation of proceedings. We are editors rather than adjusters, surveyors or lawyers, and we offer no view on causation, quantum, coverage or any claim. What we can do is keep the evidence visible beneath the finding.