Editor's Note: This is the fourth article in a six-partseries on adjuster ethics.

Over the last five decades, major changes in the way property, casualty and marine claims are investigated have undergonemany developments. Telephone adjusting arrived in the 1960s, oncecourts permitted telephone statements taken with permission to beadmitted as evidence.

In the 1970s, there were new ways of settling claims, like“open-ended releases” and the use of rehabilitation. Auto damageappraisals came into being despite automobiles becoming morecomplex. This eliminated the potential fraud in “send in threeestimates” adjusting. In the 1980s, as the personal computer wasjust beginning to show up on adjusters' desks, new methods of claimresolution such as structured settlements, came into being.Suddenly, adjusters spent more time at their desks than out in thefield investigating claims.

The 1990s brought more changes with increased use of theinternet, integrated computerized photography (for showing haildamage on roofs), medical cost containment procedures, and similarclaim-related processes. By the 2000s the number of field adjustersstarted to decrease, and long-distance claims handling increased.Claims being handled “off-shore” from Asia or elsewhere was alreadybeing tested. Many important innovations included team andcomputerized claim handling, and pre-approved repair facilities,but whether these really enhanced the quality of claim settlement is debatable.

Looking for new techniques

Use of the internet may be a good source for useful data likecourt records. “When it comes to claims investigation,” suggestsMatthew J. Smith of Smith, Rolfes & Skavdahl Co., “click yourkeyboards instead of your heels.” Discussing fraud investigation,Smith considers the electronic trail of funds transfer as a sourceof information. But over-reliance on data comes with a built-inhazard; data may or may not be accurate, and making decisions oninaccurate data can be dangerous.

Nothing beats a good photograph of the evidence. The camera hasbeen an adjuster's tool for probably more than a century, and thereis an art to taking the right picture in a correct and documentedway. In the last 30 years additional photography has becomeavailable through closed-circuit television. Such filming may showaccidents as they occur, or a still from a CCT may identify a caror person. As television news programs began “on the scene”interviews at accidents and crimes, their video films becameevidence that might be used as res gestae at trial, recording whatwitnesses said.

What new tools may prove helpful in the adjuster's trade? Oneincreasingly important tool is a drone, capable of takingphotographs of almost anything that might be important in a claim,but which would be difficult to capture from the ground. It mightbe anything from a close-up of some flaw that allowed something tocollapse, or it might be a busy intersection that would beimpossible to fully assess from the sidewalk.

Attorneys also have recognized that “social media” is a greatsource of information, and may subpoena everything from corporateemails to personal messages that reveal what the sender wasthinking. Facebook comments can become evidence and are availablewithout a subpoena.

Be nosey in a legal & ethical way

Using initiative to find new ways to document claims is anongoing effort, but it must be done ethically. The old trick ofletting air out of a claimant's tires in order to film him jackingup the car was and remains unethical. Yes, courts have ruled thatthe defendant has a right to follow and investigate even arepresented plaintiff, but it must be done in an ethical manner.The fact that Joe is claiming a disability does not necessarilymean that he has to spend every minute in bed, except while at thedoctor's office. Adjusters may need to be nosey in order to findout what they need to know, but must do it in a legal and ethicalway.

“Winning by the Rules” says, “The insurancespecialist cannot simply be a fill-in-the-blanks andpull-the-handle type of employee. She [or he] must take theinitiative to complete the task… and the responsibility for acorrect outcome. That requires ingenuity, intelligence, imaginationand fortitude.”

Ken Brownlee, CPCU, is a former adjuster and risk managerbased in Atlanta, Ga. He now authors and edits claims-adjustingtextbooks. He can be reached [email protected]. Opinions expressed are the author'sown.