Check Your Ego at the Ladder: The Appraisal Trap
Two roof appraisals, both sides of the table, and the same lesson both times.
Writing this article is a delicate subject. You have to be careful not to sound too biased – very hard task – be as professional as possible and knowledgeable, and not offend anyone. However in this piece I decided to go all the way, based on personal experience on how to win the appraisal.
The First Contact
First and most of all is the first connection. People have a tendency to play games, show who’s tougher, etc. Nah, that’s a road to nowhere. As soon as I get the opposite appraiser’s contact info, I personally check their credentials – simply like to know who I’ll be working with, are they a licensed adjuster, who they work with and for. Very easy, simple public record search.
Not waiting much longer, I reach out to the opposite appraiser to schedule the field inspection, which I prefer to conduct together, but it’s not a must – worth noting the majority of appraisers prefer that too. If I don’t hear back in 2-3 days from the first attempt, I go back to the original person that provided the contact info, playing dumb – “Hey, could you confirm that opposite appraiser contact info, I initiated contact and tried to schedule the field inspection but no response to date.” Usually works best – most of the time you never get a direct confirmation, but by the second day you’ll get the appraiser magically respond to the initial email.
During the inspection, I keep it all as professional as it can be, bringing my own tools and answering any questions the opposite side might have, as well as asking anything I might need to know about the claim. Example: do you know how old the roof is, the windows, etc. If not, that’s fine, I check public record or ask the insured.
After the field inspection comes the real tug of war – preparing and exchanging Loss estimates. This should be the normal, standard way to start, and I want to share how I won two recent appraisals from the perspective of both sides of the table. Once hired by the insureds and their attorney, and second as the carrier’s appraiser.
Case One: Hired by the Policyholder’s Attorney
My services were retained by the policyholder’s attorney to be their appraiser in a post-hurricane claim involving exterior as well as interior damages. Fast forwarding through the initial contact and scheduling, let’s start with the field inspection. I show up 15 minutes before the set time, as I usually do – like to be ready, read the file again, set up the ladder, introduce myself to the owner, etc. The other appraiser showed up 25 minutes late, no call, no message, nothing. I’m not a chaser, I’m already here, so I start my inspection from the outside to give him a chance to catch up and possibly do the interior together. When he finally arrived I was done with the exterior, putting my ladder back, and he asked if he could use it. I politely refused, explaining liability concerns, and suggested since he’s already here, maybe we should do the interior together since we don’t want to overwhelm the insured – they might have things to do. He agreed.
From that moment on, the inspection went smoothly and we – in my head – went off the site in a professional manner, and if not friendly, at least not bad relations.
Two weeks later, after a few follow-up emails, we’re all busy, I received his written position on the loss with the award to be executed. It took me by surprise because his estimate was like half of mine.
When I reached out trying to negotiate, in return I received his list of proposed umpires. The argument here, besides depreciation pulled out of thin air – 50% on drywall (150-year life expectancy per Xactimate on a 20-year-old house) and more – was the roof. His argument was repairable, mine was replacement. He didn’t want to listen to any argument, just simply stated “he’s not going to pay for the roof, period, and if I don’t like it, that’s what umpires are for.” At that point I stopped even trying to reason with him. Worth mentioning that before his final statement, he kept emphasizing the roof is newer and can be matched, etc.
Obviously we were not able to agree on the umpire choice, so it went to court for one appointed by a judge.
Weeks later we finally had the umpire named and could present our positions. I presented my original Loss and explained in detail, concentrating only on the case – not the personal aspects of the appraisal, only the points of disagreement. For interior it was mostly the 50% depreciation across the entire claim as mentioned above, a 75-year depreciation rule applied on a 20-year-old house. But more importantly, I concentrated on the roof.
The Roof Argument That Wins
This is the part that actually decides these cases, so it’s worth pulling out on its own. When the fight comes down to repair vs. replacement on a roof, here’s what I bring to the table every single time:
- ▲ No determination of the material for the repair – unknown brand, manufacturer, color, whether it’s even still made, and who’s going to source it.
- ▲ All Florida laws, including statute and Florida building code.
- ▲ Pictures showing mismatched repairs, showing that Florida weather is definitely not in favor of repairs matching.
- ▲ Diminished value the mismatch would create in the house.
- ▲ The policy itself, from two angles:
- – Pre-loss condition – the roof was newer, so why would we allow repairs/patches. It’s against the policy, and the policy should be what matters most.
- – Creating precedent – if a repair is allowed now, any future damage gets repaired too, since that’s the “pre-loss condition.”
Since he wasn’t able, or wasn’t prepared, to logically overcome any of my arguments, I ended up winning almost every penny of my Loss estimate.
Case Two: Retained by the Carrier
On this one I was retained by one of the biggest carriers in the state of Florida to be their appraiser on a roof dispute. Long story short: a two-story split-level house with a first-floor garage roof and main roof on the second story. Damage occurred to the garage from a falling tree during one of the many heavy storms we get in our beautiful state.
The insureds wanted a full replacement, the carrier was willing to pay only for the garage. The insured’s appraiser showed up before me – I was on time. He started very aggressively, pushing to hurry up because he had another appointment coming. Very aggressive, argumentative, almost cocky. I started setting up my ladder and he asked me to climb it together with him so he could show me all the damage himself. I politely declined – two people on one ladder isn’t something I do – and asked why he didn’t bring his own. He said he’d already inspected the roof. After that, things got ugly – he finally exploded, hurling insults my way and going after insureds in general as if we were all running some kind of racket.
Most likely he hadn’t checked who he was talking to. As a Florida-licensed public adjuster, that was the first time in my life I understood why some people have a bad opinion of PAs – seeing us as cocky, pushy, money-hungry, never actually having the insured’s interest in mind, only our contingencies and what we promised them. I didn’t escalate it, just finished my inspection and left the premises.
A few weeks later we exchanged Loss estimates, and as expected, his was nowhere near the settlement. One thing did change though – he did his homework, checked who I am, and started playing the empathy card – how can I be an appraiser for the insurer if I’m a PA, why would I do that to a policyholder. I actually believe working both sides as an appraiser makes me better at the job – it shows I’m unbiased, sets my standards higher, and makes me more of an umpire candidate than someone who only works one side.
He’d also found articles I’d written, including one addressing the new 25% rule, SB 4-D. Florida’s SB 4-D limits how much of a roof an insurer can be required to replace based on age and condition versus how much can legitimately be repaired, and it’s specific about when partial repair is and isn’t appropriate. Funny enough, he made the exact same mistake most carriers make interpreting that rule to fit their side. And to be fair, it’s not just carriers – I’ve seen plenty of PAs do the same thing in the other direction, bending whatever rule is in play, whether it’s SB 4-D, wear and tear, or a depreciation schedule, toward whatever number they want instead of reading it straight. It proves the point either way: read the rule for what it says, not for what you need it to say. The case went to umpire, same as above. How I won: professionally, by properly interpreting SB 4-D the way it was meant to be applied. Carrier paid only for the garage roof.
The Takeaway
Two cases, two sides of the same table, and the same lesson both times: the appraisal isn’t won by whoever yells the loudest or shows up with the bigger attitude. It’s won by whoever actually did the homework – public record checked, policy language read twice, code sections lined up, photos taken, and the argument built before you ever sit down with the umpire. Both opposing appraisers I dealt with tried to win on ego and pressure. Neither one had an actual argument when it came down to it, and that’s the difference every time.
Doing the homework isn’t complicated, it just takes the discipline to actually do it every time: know the file cold before you show up, check public record instead of guessing, read the policy and the statute yourself instead of taking someone’s word for what it says, and document everything so your position doesn’t rest on your say-so alone. That’s the whole edge.
If you’re a homeowner or an attorney deciding who represents you in an appraisal, this is exactly what to look for – not who’s the most aggressive personality in the room, but who shows up prepared enough that the other side can’t out-argue them. Control what you can control – show up on time, stay professional, keep it about the case and never about the person – and let the other side make it personal or sloppy. That’s when you win. Not because you were the toughest guy on the roof, but because you were the one who was ready.
Neither one had an actual argument when it came down to it.
Daniel “Jay” Jama · FL PA License W221110 · Homeowner Claims Help