An Empirical Basis for Post-Claim Analytics: Examining closed files
An analogy should be considered in preface: “If we merely buried the dead without an autopsy, how far along would medicine be?”. Another mode is the age-old adage for the definition of insanity, which is doing the same thing over again with the same unsatisfactory results.
There isn’t an independent vendor or in-house claim representative who has a continuously successful 100% close file rate. At some point, we have all re-opened a file for one reason for another, and that’s particularly true with regard to wind and hail perils in the property coverage sector.
The majority of independent adjusters and claim professionals do not have the same access to post-claim activity that Carriers and Underwriters do.
It’s true that a small number of independent claim providers regularly receive access to final claim settlement, often delivering settlement checks and obtaining release. When it comes to the majority of more simple claims, such as hail, wind, property and non bodily-injury auto, there often isn’t any post-claim data available. This creates somewhat of a short-fall for both the insurer and vendor, particularly in the 21st century.
The first argument most carriers and underwriters typically make here, is that no need exists to let the vendor review (or even know) the disposition of the file after their independent services are completed. This argument also exists in several other types of coverage. Essentially, the carrier assumes that if the independent vendor has completed the file, then it is closed, and there is nothing else to discuss; move on to the next file.
Conversely, many independent claim offices will argue Read more…

![Validate my RSS feed [Valid RSS]](valid-rss-rogers.png)

