Our Methodology: How We Analyze Claims

Estimate Comparison Logic

Carrier estimates (Xactimate, Symbility, or similar) often diverge from contractor estimates. We use a structured comparison approach:

1. Line-by-line matching: We align carrier line items with contractor line items by description, category, and scope. Exact and fuzzy matching identifies where both agree and where they differ.
2. Scope gap identification: Missing items in the carrier estimate—extra rooms, additional materials, debris removal, code upgrades—are flagged and quantified.
3. Pricing deviation analysis: Where items match in scope but differ in price, we surface those variances. Regional labor and material costs frequently exceed carrier database values by 15–40%.
4. Deterministic math: Underpayment amounts are calculated from parsed totals and matched lines. We do not fabricate dollar figures. The math is transparent and auditable.

The output is a findings report that you can use in a demand letter or supplement. We highlight potential omissions, under-scoping, and price gaps—without telling you what to demand. That decision stays with you.

Supplement Strategy Approach

Supplements are formal requests for additional payment when the carrier's initial estimate is incomplete or undervalued. Our supplement strategy is:

• Evidence-based: Every supplement item is tied to contractor documentation, photos, or policy language. No speculation.
• Structured: We organize supplements by category (scope additions, pricing corrections, code upgrades) so carriers can review efficiently.
• Prioritized: Higher-impact items—recoverable depreciation, overhead and profit, missing scope—get clear treatment.

We provide templates and guidance; you submit the supplement. We do not submit on your behalf or contact the carrier.

Documentation-First Philosophy

Claims are won or lost on documentation. The carrier has its estimate. You need yours. Our approach:

How We Analyze Policies

We do not provide legal interpretations of your policy. What we do:

• Identify key sections (Coverage A, B, C; ACV vs. RCV; depreciation; appraisal clause).
• Flag deadlines (proof of loss, appraisal invocation, suit limitations).
• Note common exclusions and conditions that affect payout.

Our tools surface policy-relevant information so you can make informed decisions. For coverage disputes or legal questions, we recommend consulting a licensed attorney.

How We Identify Gaps

Gaps fall into three categories:

1. Scope gaps: Items in your contractor's estimate that are absent from the carrier's estimate. These may include damaged components, code upgrades, or necessary prep and cleanup.
2. Pricing gaps: Items both estimates include, but with different unit costs or quantities. Carrier databases often use regional averages that lag behind local market rates.
3. Policy gaps: Coverage or limits the carrier may have under-applied—for example, recoverable depreciation not released, or overhead and profit omitted when multiple trades are required.

Our analysis highlights these gaps with references to your documents. You decide which to pursue and in what order.

Process Transparency

We believe in transparency. Our methodology, logic, and limitations are documented. We do not use black-box AI to invent findings. Our estimate engine follows deterministic rules where possible and surfaces its reasoning. You can see what we found and why. If something does not apply to your situation, you can ignore it. You remain in control.