This month's Contents Claims Solved begins with an inheritance. A familymember has inherited a collection of glassware from his father'sestate. The shipping company hired to transport the collectiondelivered the glass items, which were unfortunately broken intoshards upon receipt.

The family turned to an online appraisal service to assist withthe valuation. This appraiser, located on a different continent,reviewed digital images and issued a lengthy appraisal identifying10 specific collector glass objects from the likes of Steuben,Lalique, Emil Gallee, and, most notably, Elena Danko.Consequently, the appraiser estimated the value of the collectionto be more than $350,000. The adjuster then called upon contentsclaims specialists to review the images of the broken objects andprovide a second opinion on the appraisal report and valuation.

Case Background

Content claims experts poured over the images trying to isolateany shards that validated the appraiser's identification. Glass anddecorative art specialists identified remains from 14 unique items.Not a single item compared to any of the valuable collector glassobjects specified by the claimant's appraiser. As a result, thecontents claims team determined aggregate valuation of the 14 itemstotaled approximately $800.

Click to find out what happened next!

The Outcome and KeyTakeaways

Given the extent of the variation in assessed value along withthe claimant's exceedingly high expectations based on the valuationprovided by the online appraisal service, a representative from thecontents claims team traveled on site to inspect and identify eachshard. The on-site inspection of the shattered glassware not onlyconfirmed the $800 valuation, but also revealed even thatestimate may have been generous.

An adjusting professional can glean many insights from thisnot-so-clear case. For instance, proactive claims handling andvaluation may have drastically altered the path of the file.Reacting to and defending against an unrealistic expectation basedon a flawed appraisal may have been eliminated had contents claimsspecialists stepped in to assess the damage. Explaining the valueof the damaged collection, prior to when the claimant received anextremely inflated estimate for the shattered glassware, would haveprevented confusion while aligning expectations with the reality ofthe situation.

Keep in mind that inaccurate identification of objectsfrequently results in grossly inaccurate valuations that are ofteninflated. What someone actually owns may differ drastically fromwhat they think they own. Make certain that claims arepaid on what is actually lost or damaged, not on what the owner"claims" to have lost.