Menu
  • Home
  • Why Us
  • About
    • Overview
    • Data Protection
    • Testimonials
    • NEWS & BLOG
    • Careers
    • Contact
  • Services
    • Overview
    • UM Collections
    • Arbitration
    • Closed File Reviews
    • Subrogation Services
  • Client Portal
  • Need Assistance
  • Services
    • Overview
    • UM Collections
    • Arbitration
    • Closed File Reviews
    • Subrogation Services
  • Client Portal
  • Need Assistance
  • Home
  • Why Us
  • About
    • Overview
    • Data Protection
    • Testimonials
    • NEWS & BLOG
    • Careers
    • Contact
Blog

Archives

He Said, She Said – A back to basics approach to comparative negligence

car accident
Posted on May 12, 2025 by Lauren Clark

My son recently graduated from college and began his career as an auto liability adjuster.   It has been a lot of fun watching him grow into the role and taking his calls with questions, most frequently about liability.   Having been in the business for over thirty years, I probably take liability knowledge for granted.

The reality is that it can be very challenging to properly assess fault.   Even simple situations sometimes require a lot of investigation and critical thinking.

Consider the typical rear-end accident and the presumption that the person in the rear is always at fault. However, what if the person who got hit from behind had intentionally slammed on their brakes, had a defective brake lamp or was in the process of backing up? Compounding matters, consider claims scenarios involving intersections, parking lots, slip and falls, or liquor liability.  If you really want to talk complex situations, let’s examine mass torts, cargo, supply chains and faulty products from abroad.

The origins of comparative negligence date back to 1809 and a decision from the King’s Bench in the case of Butterfield v. Forrester.   Forrester had left a pole jutting out into the road.   Butterfield struck the pole, was injured and sued.   The King’s Bench instructed jurors that if the plaintiff contributed to his injuries in any way, he would be barred from recovery.   Welcome to the advent of Contributory Negligence.

Over the ensuing years contributory negligence was found to be potentially harsh and caselaw eventually gave way to a more comparative approach to assessing liability.   In 1842, Davis v. Mann, established the last clear chance doctrine.   In 1915, British Electric Railway v. Loach established proximate cause.

Perhaps the most famous case is Palsgraff v. Long Island Railroad from 1928.   A man was boarding a rail car with the assistance of an LIRR employee who accidentally dropped a package containing fireworks which exploded.   Palsgraff, who was at the other end of the rail car, was injured and filed suit against the LIRR.   The trial and appellate courts sided with the plaintiff, but the Supreme Court reversed.   The key holdings were that a duty owed must be determined from the risk that can reasonably be foreseen under the circumstances (how duty is determined).  A defendant owes a duty of care to those who are in the reasonably foreseeable zone of danger.

As caselaw continued to evolve, so too, did state legislatures with Wisconsin being the first implement a comparative negligence law in 1931.   Today, we have a hodgepodge of contributory, modified and pure comparative states.

But liability still remains a challenging issue, as it is often not black and white.

Adjusters are tasked with making liability decisions, yet their results often fall far below juries, who apportion liability in a majority of cases nationwide.   In closed file audits, conducted free of charge, by SubroIQ, a leader in subrogation and claims consulting, an estimated 3-5% of files were closed with a comparative decision.   In fact, errant liability decisions are the single leading cause of missed subrogation.

So, what can carriers do to drive these results?

There are plenty of software-based solutions that will provide assistance to the extent that they are effectively executed by the adjusting corporations. There is also the approach of going back to the basics and instilling in the organization the most fundamental concepts of duties owed and duties breached. This should be spelled out by adjusters as part of their liability assessment that should occur in each and every file they handle.

It is often said that the devil is in the details, and in many cases far too many details get overlooked, for reasons ranging from staffing shortages to inadequate training or management/mentoring oversight. By providing adjusters with the necessary tools to understand liability and the time to obtain the facts, inspect the damages, preserve property, and utilize experts, carriers can leverage an accurate outcome that properly identifies and assigns fault.

To optimize claims performance, carriers need to instill an ethic of “investigate, evaluate, and negotiate.” These form the foundation for quality claim files containing accurate settlements yet are increasingly overlooked in a never ending quest to chase other metrics of dubious distinction.

Investigate…Evaluate…Negotiate

Investigate, investigate, investigate!  This can’t be said enough. Are statements taken from all parties? Has all damaged property been inspected, photographed and preserved? Was there a scene investigation? Were primary and secondary liability factors or mitigators considered? Which duties were owed; which ones were breached? By taking the steps to complete a thorough investigation, not only will quality improve but so will results.

Evaluations are the critical byproduct of a thorough investigation. If the latter is incomplete, then how can the former be conducted at the level expected of a fiduciary? From the time the claim is reported, it is incumbent upon all involved to secure the necessary documentation to enable a fair and accurate assessment of coverage, liability and damages which are all of equal importance.

There is no question that evaluations take time; a necessity if one is to achieve accuracy. A detailed evaluation necessitates not only looking at all of the facts presented to date but thinking outside the box.  Often times scenarios that present themselves initially are far more complex as details emerge.

One aspect of the claims process that many adjusters struggle with is negotiation. There is no question that this can be a contentious and adversarial part of the process. Complicating matters is a struggling economy that has resulted in an uptick of insurance opportunism. Whether a claim is legitimate, inflated, or an outright fraud, it seems that everyone is trying to haggle for as much as they possibly can.

This makes the job even more challenging, as carriers must take steps to ensure that they have not only the best and brightest in their ranks but provide them with the negotiation tools and strategies that have been proven to work. Far too often people will take the path of least resistance, failing to negotiate the shared liability or pre-existing conditions. This not only costs the carrier, but alas violates the fiduciary duties between the insurer and the insured.

Calibrating Your Organization

During my tenure as quality assurance director for a large multi-national carrier, our team was tasked with providing the necessary feedback to enable the organization to improve the entire claims process. From loss intake and investigation to evaluation, settlement, and recoveries, a myriad of opportunities existed.

Perhaps one of the greatest challenged faced across the insurance industry is consistency, such as liability assessment. While consistency in any process is a challenge, it becomes even more so when there is an element of subjectivity. After all, who’s to say if the accident was 50/50 or 60/40?

Herein lies the challenge, as a 10 percent differential in liability assessments is not necessarily the concern, but having clear comparative losses settled as absolute is. When reviewing internal data, it is critical to not only identify the frequency by which comparative is assessed, but to conduct calibration exercises to ensure that staff understands and uniformly applies the proper application of jurisdictional laws and general duties owed.

Calibration, defined as a set of gradations to show positions or values, brings into alignment what previously was out of sync. In the world of insurance claims, it accomplishes the ever elusive goal of organizational consistency. Once this has been established, internal processes can be designed so as to achieve a variety of metrics to gauge results.

This process can be used to benchmark both current results and internal knowledge.

While many aspects of the claims process should be calibrated, liability is often a key issue that can serve as a foundation for organizational improvement can be based. Proper liability assessment will ultimately lead to improved negotiations, more accurate settlements, better recovery identification and ultimately an improved bottom line.

In the end, it isn’t the bells and whistles that will improve results, but rather a keen focus on blocking and tackling the very basic elements of insurance claims. While there are certainly claims in which one person bears sole responsibility, they do not comprise the majority.

To the contrary, there are many more opportunities where shared liability exists. From product defects and dram shop claims to homeowner’s, commercial, and auto insurance, there are often multiple parties that share culpability. From points of impact to statement inconsistencies, it is incumbent upon the investigating claims team to identify those opportunities. But beyond the identification comes the effective negotiation. It is one thing to determine shared fault, but another to effectively educate a person as to why they bear some of the responsibility.

To take advantage of the opportunities that exist, it is critical to evaluate current results, both internally and against the industry. But even then, if 15 percent of all claims across the industry are closed with a missed subrogation opportunity, is that benchmarking enough?

A good solution is a three-pronged program that begins with the recognition that opportunities exist, and certainly can serve as a foundation from which to gain a competitive edge. By recognizing that money is being left on the table, there should be a tremendous cross-functional incentive to collaborate on effective solutions that have been proven to work.

Next, identifying an organization’s gaps can serve as an invaluable exercise to identify glaring openings like a football coach reviewing game day films. Simply asking process related questions isn’t enough. Sit down and plot out every single action taken from the inception of a claim through its final disposition. For carriers with multiple physical locations, or even multiple teams, this can prove to be an eye opening experience.

Lastly, calibrating the audience to ensure consistency of purpose is the only way to create an exceptional organization. As Vince Lombardi once said, “perfection isn’t attainable, but if we chase perfection we can catch excellence,” which should be everyone’s ultimate goal.

Christopher Tidball is an Executive Claims Consultant with SubroIQ.  He has spent more than 30 years in the claims industry, including roles as adjuster, manager and executive for multiple Top 10 P&C carriers.   He is the author of Re-Adjusted: 20 Essential Rules To Take Your Claims Organization From Ordinary to Extraordinary! He can be reached at christopher.tidball@subroiq.com.

Posted in Announcements

Missed Subrogation by the Numbers

subrogation money
Posted on April 25, 2025 by Lauren Clark

Every year, insurers leave millions of dollars on the table due to missed subrogation opportunities. In fact, studies estimate that up to 15% of claims are closed without identifying valid recovery potential, with certain lines like workers’ compensation reaching as high as 30%. In this blog, we break down the data behind missed subrogation, highlight the hidden costs of claims leakage, and explore how leveraging technology and expert reviews can significantly improve recovery outcomes. At SubroIQ, we combine analytics with over 600 years of adjusting expertise to turn these missed opportunities into measurable results.

  • Fire loss: $1,326,534
  • Water loss: $2,127,236
  • Risk Transfer: $48,237
  • Cargo: $759,342
  • Business Interruption: $1,653,556
  • Uncashed Check in File: $16,250

These are just a handful of examples of potentially missed subrogation from closed claim audits. Six files with over $6 million dollars in missed subrogation.  It is estimated that 15% of all files are closed with a missed subrogation opportunity at a cost to the industry of over $15 billion dollars per year. My guess is that figure is substantially higher. During a recent conversation, a leading subrogation attorney shared that four of his 5 largest recoveries (all over $10 million dollars) had been closed by the adjuster as having no subrogation potential.

Missed subrogation is a very real problem costing carriers, TPA’s and self-insured’s sizeable amounts of money.

In addition, there are many policyholders out deductibles because this subrogation was not pursued. This could be a cause for concern if a creative trial lawyer explored breaches of recovery fiduciary duties as a new cottage industry.

Having handled claims for a number of years I will be the first to say that getting outstanding and accurate results takes time and effort.   In an environment of doing more with less adjusters are often burdened with large caseloads. In a quest to maximize profit and efficiencies claims organizations are pushing for file closures as a critical metric. As the adage goes, a closed file is a good file. True to a point, but not when money is being left on the table.

So how is subrogation being missed?

First and foremost is a lack of comparative negligence identification and assessment.   It is estimated that juries assess shared liability more than 50% of the time. Yet when we review claim files it is rare to see claims that are other than 0% or 100% with an occasional 50/50 sprinkled in for good measure. How is it that jurors, who are not trained claims experts, are getting it right when trained experts are missing it so often?

Accurately assessing liability is fundamental to claims.  It is something that should be reviewed in every single claim no matter how apparent one’s negligence appears to be. The liability writeup should focus on duties owed and duties breached by all parties to the claim.

Beyond comparative negligence there are a myriad of opportunities missed because evidence is missing. While claims organizations do a decent job of working with their insured’s to promptly resolve property claims evidence is often left behind.   If recovery potential is identified later in the claim cycle it is often too late as the evidence has been discarded. Herein lies the reason that SubroIQ created their Property Recovery Partnership process, working with client’s beginning at FNOL, to identify and score recovery potential and working hand in hand with experts to obtain and preserve critical evidence.

Sometimes recovery just is not obvious to the adjuster. 

We often see this in no-fault states that have specific definitions where subrogation may or may not apply. Additionally, we see this in jurisdictions with conflicting caselaw that can impact chain of custody in the supply lines. This has become such a problem that the SubroIQ team is patenting ReverseSubrogation™, a transformational process that will redefine recoveries for years to come.

Subrogation is not rocket science, unless it involves a Royal Caribbean cruise liner straying into a no-go zone off the coast of Cape Canaveral causing a SpaceX launch to be scrubbed at a cost of $1.6 million dollars in fuel and labor.

Rather, subrogation generally involves basic blocking and tackling. Evaluating every claim for recovery potential is a critical part of the end-to-end claim cycle. It is paramount to getting the most accurate claim results possible. Yet we continue to find a significant percentage of files that have been closed with missed recovery potential, a large portion of which is recoverable.

A recent audit of 100,000 New York PIP files SubroIQ recovered over $2 million dollars that both the adjuster and the subrogation vendor missed. In another audit of an outside subrogation vendor SubroIQ recovered an amount missed in excess of 10% of the dollars referred.    In an audit of a global insurer, looking at just one jurisdiction, over $5 million dollars was recovered.

This is real money that can have a profound impact on the bottom line of carriers, TPA’s and self-insureds.

SubroIQ provides closed file audits at no charge and has recovered over $1 billion dollars for clients.

Chris Tidball is an Executive Claims Consultant at SubroIQ, a leading provider of audit, consulting, and subrogation services. He spent more than 25 years as an adjuster, manager, and executive with multiple Top 10 insurers. Chris is the author of Re-Adjusted: Taking Your Claims Organization From Ordinary to Extraordinary and is the creator of The Adjuster television series based on his fictional thriller Deep State.  He can be reached at christopher.tidball@subroiq.com.

Posted in BlogTagged Subrogation

After the Storm: Effectively Subrogating Mother Nature

Damage from a storm
Posted on April 4, 2025 by Lauren Clark

The picture you are seeing is my dock, torn from its pilings after Hurricane Ian.   Was it the result of massive waves battering it for 48 hours straight or was it the result of poor design and craftsmanship.  In today’s blog we are going to take a closer look at the various aspects of subrogating Mother Nature, including a great case study.

Hurricane Ian was one for the ages. I have probably been through thirty named storms over the years and this one was a once in a lifetime experience, and I wasn’t even close to where it made landfall.   Ian hit with 153 mph sustained winds, 2 mph shy of a CAT 5, causing extensive devastation across the Florida peninsula.    In my location on the east coast of the state, but in the path of the eyewall, the outer bands began arriving midafternoon on September 28th.   The eye went over us for six hours the following day, followed by the trailing bands that wound down on September 30th.

To put the size in perspective, the storm caused damage from Marco Island to well north of Tampa on the west coast, and from Fort Pierce to Flagler Beach on the east coast, both four-hour drives.   Most hurricanes that have hit Florida would have fit in the eye of Ian.

Hurricane Ian

It was a jaw dropping size and in addition to winds Ian dropped record amounts of rain in Central Florida before exiting the east coast over Volusia and Brevard County as a CAT 2 storm.   Of course, storm season didn’t end with Ian as we got hit by a less severe Nicole six weeks later.  But with the ground already saturated and structures already weakened from Ian, more damage was just par for the course.

Here is where we begin the investigation into potential subrogation after storms, be they hurricanes, tornadoes, nor’easters or some other weather related phenomenon.

While damage is often due to wind and rain, the reality is that there is a lot of shoddy construction.   In the most basic example, you have the aforementioned dock.   While the driving waves did separate the dock from the pilings, construction experts have said that the stringers were attached on the wrong side of the pilings.  Had they been east of the pilings the driving waves would have pushed them, versus pulling, and not been able to loosen the lags.   In addition, the hurricane clips used to attach the deck to the pilings were insufficient and had lags been properly installed through the hangars to the pilings the deck likely would have not come loose.    This is just one simple example of how poor construction can result in potential subrogation.

Unfortunately for those with decks, docks and seawalls over the water, this is all excluded by policy.  The result is that the affected homeowners will have to pursue contractors directly.   But in many instances, there may be coverage.   Improperly installed roofs, windows and doors could have failed.    As adjusters continue their investigations there will likely be covered losses making it extremely important to dig into all facets of construction.

In some instances, it is even possible that property owners and/or contractors were aware of certain conditions from prior acts of God that previously resulted in catastrophic damage.  This is why it takes a lot of digging to determine what is and is not recoverable.

Let’s take a look at a case study from an audit conducted by SubroIQ, a leader in subrogation investigation and services.

This particular case involved a commuter parking lot that was flooded during a storm.   A significant number of cars were damaged.   This would appear to be an act of God, right?

This is why digging deeper results in finding money that is often left on the table.   In this case, the parking lot was adjacent to a large river.   During the investigation it was determined that the parking lot had flooded on multiple prior occasions, all during a full moon at high tide.   The owners were aware of this, and warnings should have been posted or the parking lot closed during such events.

But it doesn’t stop there.  As the adjuster dug deeper it turns out that aerial imagery showed that the parking lot had grown year over year as owners brought in fill, encroaching on the river.   Yet no permits were ever found, indicating that the parking lot expansion was occurring without oversight from local, state or federal officials.

In this particular case the SubroIQ adjuster was able to present evidence to the carrier for the parking lot resulting in an amicable settlement.    The subrogation money was collected for the SubroIQ client and deductibles were returned to many very happy customers.

There is a reason that 15% of all claims are closed with a missed subrogation opportunity.

Basic investigations, algorithms, AI and ML can all do a decent job on subrogation ID for less complex recovery opportunities.   But as cases get more complex, it requires a lot of digging, knowledge and intuition to get to the right outcome. SubroIQ’s SubroIQ Technology takes things a step further by modeling over 600 years of collective claims experience to ID what others miss.  To date, the company has recovered over a billion dollars for clients.

Before closing out and writing off those storm related claims, consider taking a SubroIQ, utilizing a NO COST closed file audit.   You never know what you will find in those claims.

Chris Tidball is an Executive Claims Consultant with SubroIQ, a leading provider of subrogation services.   His career has spanned more than thirty years, working in adjusting, leadership and consulting roles for multiple to insurers.   He is the author of Re-Adjusted:  Taking Your Claims Organization From Ordinary to Extraordinary, fictional thrillers Swoop & Squat and Deep State, and is the creator of the TV series The Adjuster.   To learn more about how SubroIQ can deliver missed revenue to you please contact christopher.tidball@subroiq.com

Posted in BlogTagged blog, deductible, Subrogation

March Madness and Subrogation: Avoiding Costly Turnovers in Claims Recovery

march madness blog
Posted on March 26, 2025 by Lauren Clark

As March Madness takes over the sports world, it’s a great time to draw some parallels between winning strategies on the court and successful subrogation recovery. Just like in basketball, where every possession matters, in claims subrogation, every missed opportunity can cost insurers millions in lost recoveries. At SubroIQ, we specialize in helping carriers, TPAs, and self-insured organizations maximize recoveries by eliminating subrogation turnovers.

The Full-Court Press: Identifying Missed Subrogation Opportunities

In basketball, a full-court press is used to apply relentless pressure, forcing turnovers and creating scoring opportunities. In insurance subrogation, a similar aggressive approach is needed to identify and recover missed subrogation opportunities before they slip through the cracks. Studies show that up to 15% of all claims are closed with missed subrogation potential, and in some lines like workers’ compensation, that number climbs to nearly 30%.

To win the subrogation game, insurers must implement advanced analytics, closed file audits, and expert claims handling to ensure that no recovery is left on the bench.

Avoiding Fouls: Common Mistakes That Lead to Claims Leakage

In basketball, careless fouls can change the outcome of the game. In claims subrogation, common mistakes lead to significant claims leakage, resulting in millions of dollars in lost revenue. Some of the most frequent subrogation errors include:

  • Failure to assess comparative negligence – Too often, adjusters overlook shared liability scenarios where recovery is possible.
  • Overlooking evidence – Missing police reports, witness statements, or critical documentation can weaken a case.
  • Premature file closures – Pushing files to closure without a thorough subrogation review can leave substantial recoveries on the table.
  • Relying solely on AI and automation – While technology is crucial, it can only take insurers 80% of the way. Complex liability scenarios still require human expertise.

Winning the Championship: The SubroIQ Playbook for Maximizing Recoveries

At SubroIQ, we deploy a championship-level strategy to ensure subrogation success. Our proven SubroIQ Technology blends AI-driven analytics with over 600 years of combined subrogation expertise, identifying missed opportunities that traditional models overlook. Through patent-pending solutions like ReverseSubrogation™, we have helped insurers recover millions in previously lost claims.

Take Your Subrogation Game to the Next Level

March Madness is all about momentum, strategy, and execution—the same principles that drive successful claims subrogation. Don’t let missed recoveries and claims leakage put your organization on the losing end of the scoreboard. Partner with SubroIQ to implement proven strategies that maximize recoveries and keep your financials in championship form.

Are you ready to eliminate costly turnovers and boost your subrogation success? Contact SubroIQ today for a FREE closed file audit and start winning more recoveries!

Posted in BlogTagged blog, business, Subrogation

ReverseSubrogation™ can be easy to miss

Reverse subrogation
Posted on March 21, 2025 by Lauren Clark

With a new year upon is, there has never been a better time to implement processes to find more money.   Adjusters are busier than ever, more and more subrogation opportunities are getting overlooked.

While some carriers, TPA’s and self-insured’s have gotten better at subrogation identification, there is still a gaping hole to fill.

It is estimated that 15% of all claims are closed with a missed subrogation opportunity. 

In some lines, such as workers’ compensation, that figure approaches 30% and that doesn’t even include the credits that are lost in an effort to push files to a premature closure. The reason for some improvements, in some lines, is that many carriers and vendors, including SubroIQ, have developed advanced analytics and algorithms to ID subrogation.  In many cases, that is all that is needed, in particular on less complex claims.  But analytics will only get you so far, as demonstrated in the following chart, which is what led us to the creation of SubroIQ Technology where we stepped beyond a tech only application and modeled over 600 years of claims expertise to provide a cutting-edge solution.

In two recent closed file audits for large insurers SubroIQ Technology found millions of dollars missed by front line adjusters and vendors.  We reviewed over 100,000 claims closed with no recovery.   In 404 of them SubroIQ recovered what others missed for a net back to the carrier of $2 million dollars.  The majority of those recoveries were the result of our patent pending ReverseSubrogation™ process.

Reverse subrogation can come into play in a variety of situations, in particular on auto no-fault, cargo and construction claims.

To solve for these very difficult scenarios, SubroIQ designed a unique to industry solution to identify what is virtually impossible to model.  Building this level of sophistication into a subrogation process is ever evolving and one where utilizing SubroIQ’s FREE closed file audit could yield substantial missed subrogation opportunities.

Subrogation remains one of the few areas in the claims process where money can be brought back into the organization.  Focusing on new and innovative technology has proven to be helpful but can only get organizations part of the way there.  Laying in SubroIQ’s unique solution, currently used by dozens of insurers, TPA’s and self-insureds has resulted in clients gaining a significant competitive advantage in the marketplace.

Chris Tidball is an Executive Claims Consultant with SubroIQ, a leading provider of subrogation services.   He has spent more than 30 years in adjusting, management and leadership positions with multiple Top 10 carriers’ insurance related enterprises. and has authored multiple books, including Re-Adjusted: Taking Your Claims Organization From Ordinary To Extraordinary!  and is the host of the Insurance Claims Innovation podcast.   He can be reached at christopher.tidball@subroiq.com

Posted in Blog

The Subrogation Cash Cow (the saga continues)

Posted on March 12, 2025 by Lauren Clark

My first “Subrogation Cash Cow” article was published back in 2010, followed by a series of educational training modules over the next few years.   But as we evaluate the state of subrogation practices today, it seems that for as much as the world has changed in the past thirteen years, many subrogation practices remain the same.

Back in 2010, carriers faced some big challenges largely driven by the crash of the housing market and the great recession.   Today, the challenges faced are related to the lingering effects of the pandemic such as inflation, the slowing economy and the “great resignation”. Claim volumes have fluctuated up and down.  There seems to be less predictability in an already unpredictable world.   Exacerbating these challenges are ongoing mergers, acquisitions, downsizing and much consolidation within our industry.

So how does this impact claims, in particular subrogation?

Increased productivity demands, fewer resources, and ever changing technology all play a role in the quality of claims investigations and outcomes.  Arguably one of the biggest opportunities in the world of claims is subrogation, as an estimated 15% of claims closed are closed with missed subrogation opportunities!

In a conversation with a longtime colleague, we discussed how it was “back in the day”.   Claims were handled with a generalist approach requiring adjusters to have their eye on the ball at all times.  Subrogation was just part of what we did and failing to pursue it often resulted in negative audit and leakage reviews.   In today’s more specialized world there are arguably more opportunities for defects in the claims handling process.   While there may be economies of scale and productivity gains, there is also a greater risk of leakage, which can offset many of the other gains.

In two recent file audits, more than ten million dollars of missed subrogation was identified.   Many of the claims were very basic auto, property and work comp scenarios.   How does this happen?  Adjusters are extremely busy, often tasked to do more with less while chasing metrics, such as disposition, that put subrogation at a greater risk of being missed.   In the world of work comp we often find scenarios where adjusters did a great job on the compensability front, but completely missed the liability situation.   Missing evidence continues to hamstring property recoveries.   Adjusters not assessing comparative negligence when it is event certainly remains a significant issue.

So how do you come out on top?

When it comes to subrogation, the key to winning the game is ID.   If you don’t ID the subrogation you are going to miss the recovery.  Vince Lombardi once said, “If winning isn’t everything, why do they keep score?”   It is a pretty simple formula.   Despite this, many opportunities do get missed as our industry leading subrogation experts often see in routine closed file audits.

In this day and age of advanced algorithms, AI and machine learning this just shouldn’t be the case.   The reality is that all of the aforementioned are good, and vitally important.   But they only get you 80% of the way there.   Certainly, technology can do a good job on the majority of claims, but when you have complex recovery scenarios, PIP nuances, convoluted workers’ compensation laws and ever-changing case law, technology simply can’t adapt fast enough.  This is why SubroIQ has deployed SubroIQ Technology, which has been shown to outperform AI due to it incorporating human adjusting behaviors in the process.

Today, we are going to focus on two key strategies to drive subrogation outcomes.   Comparative Negligence and Complex Liability Scenarios.    When looking at recoveries on collision claims, there is a wide variance, but generally it falls to a range of about 22-28%.    When evaluating Six Sigma studies of quality reviews for a variety of carriers the statistically valid samplings find a recovery range that are much higher.  The recovery gap is the variant opportunity for improvement that carriers can expect when staff fully understand and effectively apply the concepts associated with comparative negligence.

Comparative Negligence and Complex Liability Scenarios

Aside from straightforward situations such as intersection, lane change or parking lot accidents, there are a myriad of opportunities where comparative fault would apply in virtually any coverage line.   Concepts such as assumption of risk, laden versus unladen vehicle weight, bailment and last clear chance, phrases not heard since our adjuster boot camps, need to once again become part of the daily claim vernacular.

In simplest terms front line adjusters often miss comparative negligence assessments.   Audits that I have been involved with routinely show that a mere 3-5% of auto collision claims have a shared liability assessment.    This is a much different outcome than we see with juries where it is estimated that more than 50% of cases adjudicated have liability apportioned between the parties.  Other lines aren’t much better with contributing factors to the loss often being overlooked.

As the adjusting population ages and retires, there is going to become an even bigger void in experience that will likely result in even more missed subrogation.   This is further exacerbated by the outsourcing of First Notice of Loss, often overseas.   While FNOL can serve as a valuable training experience for future adjusters, the costs savings of outsourcing is what some carriers are more focused on.    When accuracy of information and data collection become problematic, it has a direct and quantifiable impact on a carrier’s bottom line.   When relying on subrogation models, the output is only as good as the data being collected.

Beyond FNOL, adjusters are often measured in terms of production versus the quality of their work, which results in critical items slipping through the cracks.   A missed witness statement here, a overlooked piece of evidence there, missing police reports, witness statements, etc., can all add up to billions of dollars in leakage across the industry.   Carriers that see the highest subrogation success rates are those that are consistently utilizing impartial auditors for closed file reviews, as well as enhancing processes to leverage business partners to augment staff and provide valuable services such as applicant and response arbitrations.

By focusing on two areas- maximizing recoveries on tough collections and developing an acute understanding of comparative negligence- carriers can battle their way out of the red ink.   These opportunities abound in our industry, and carriers, TPA’s and self-insureds that leverage expertise in these areas will have an immediate competitive advantage.    While millions of dollars may not seem like much to billion dollar companies, the reality is that ever little bit helps.   What can an extra million buy?  More adjusters?  Better programs? Newer fleets? More technology?

To wrap it all up…

In my own case, I utilized Second Look while overseeing subrogation at a multi-billion dollar company.   They recovered over $5 million dollars.   While not a lot in the grand scheme of a global enterprise, it allowed us to purchase some critical technology that improved claims results across the organization to a benefit that was at least tenfold of what was recovered.   As the old adage goes, it takes money to make money so why leave anything on the table?

A renewed focus on execution associated with effective and accurate investigations and outcomes will drive overall subrogation recognition, a key component to improving profitability.   Recognizing subrogation as an area of opportunity and focusing on continuous process improvement by leveraging expertise in the industry is what we will define the most successful carriers and companies in coming years.

 

Chris Tidball is an Executive Claims Consultant with SubroIQ, an industry leading subrogation firm with over 600 years of collective experience that has recovered over $1 billion dollars for clients. His career spans over 30 years, including adjusting, management and executive roles with multiple To 10 P&C carriers.  He is a frequent industry speaker and the author of multiple books including Re-Adjusted: Taking Your Claims Organization From Ordinary to Extraordinary!  To learn more about no cost closed file reviews to ID missed subrogation please contact christopher.tidball@subroiq.com

Posted in BlogTagged blog, newsletter, Subrogation

SubroIQ Strengthens Its Position in the P&C Subrogation Industry with Strategic Acquisitions of SecondLook, LLC and Vengroff Williams SA

Posted on August 7, 2023 by Lauren Clark

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE – ITASCA, IL- August 4, 2023

SubroIQ, a leading provider of subrogation identification and recovery solutions and a proud member of the ARMStrong Receivables Management (RM) family, is pleased to announce the acquisition of two prominent P&C Subrogation companies, SecondLook, LLC, and Vengroff Williams SA. These strategic acquisitions mark a significant milestone for SubroIQ as it fortifies its position as the leader in P&C Subrogation.

The acquisition of SecondLook, LLC, a well-established company known for its missed subrogation analytics and no-fault subrogation solutions, further enhances SubroIQ’s capabilities in identifying and pursuing subrogation opportunities with unmatched precision and efficiency.

Additionally, the acquisition of Vengroff Williams SA, a trusted name in the subrogation services industry, will further bolster SubroIQ within the uninsured motorist subrogation segment.

Mike Baldwin, CEO of ARMStrong RM, commented “We are thrilled to join forces with SecondLook, LLC, and Vengroff Williams SA. These strategic moves reflect our commitment to delivering the most advanced and effective P&C Subrogation solutions to our clients. By combining the strengths of these exceptional companies with SubroIQ’s existing expertise, we are positioned to provide unparalleled value and innovation to the industry.”

Norm McKnight, COO of SubroIQ, also shared his enthusiasm, remarking, “The addition of SecondLook, LLC, and Vengroff Williams SA to the SubroIQ family strengthens our ability to deliver superior results for our clients. We are confident that our combined resources, talent, and technology will elevate our services to new heights, making us a force to be reckoned with in the market.”

For further inquiries or to learn more about the comprehensive subrogation capabilities offered by the combined organization, please visit www.subroiq.com or click the Contact button at the top of the page.

 

About SubroIQ:
SubroIQ, a member of the ARMStrong RM family, is a leading provider of P&C subrogation identification and recovery solutions. Through cutting-edge technology, advanced analytics, and a dedicated team of professionals, SubroIQ delivers exceptional results for its clients.

Posted in AnnouncementsTagged acquisition, announcement, business updates, news

Merger Announcement

Posted on June 21, 2021 by Lauren Clark

June 21, 2021

ITASCA, IL — Brown & Joseph, LLC and Recovery Partners, LLC, are proud to announce that they have merged their companies to strengthen the portfolio of subrogation services currently offered to the P&C insurance industry. The Recovery Partners team will be paired up with Paragon’s SubroIQ team, another recent acquisition of Brown & Joseph, to maximize customer benefit.

Mike Baldwin, CEO at Brown & Joseph, comments, “We are very proud to welcome the Recovery Partners team to the B&J/SubroIQ team. The Recovery Partners team has built an industry-leading brand with a relentless focus on innovation and on driving superior results on behalf of their valued clients. In addition, the Recovery Partners culture of respect for all team members is a perfect match with the values and culture of B&J/SubroIQ”

Ben Lewis, CEO at Recovery Partners, adds, “We are excited to enter into this partnership with Brown & Joseph/SubroIQ, a team that shares our values and culture. Recovery Partners and SubroIQ are a natural fit. SubroIQ has a proven suite of best-in-class front-end subrogation recovery services. Coupling their services with Recovery Partners’ expertise on back-end UM subrogation collections will provide carriers with a comprehensive platform that will maximize recoveries at all stages of the subrogation process.”

There are no plans to change any aspects of any client’s relationships at either Brown & Joseph, Paragon, SubroIQ, or at Recovery Partners. All direct and indirect aspects of supporting clients will remain the same.

The existing relationship between SubroIQ and Recovery Partners is significant as they have been highly valued business partners since 2017. Both companies are also long-standing members of the National Association of Subrogation Professionals (NASP), proving their focus and investment in the subrogation industry.

Please use the Contact button at the top of the page or visit www.recoverypartners.com if you have any questions and/or would like to learn more about the subrogation capabilities of the combined organization.

Posted in AnnouncementsTagged acquisition, announcement, business, merger, news

Categories

  • Announcements
  • Blog

Archives

Tags

  • Subrogation
  • blog
  • announcement
  • business
  • news
  • acquisition
  • merger
  • newsletter
  • business updates
  • deductible

Fax:

Fax: 412.375.6470

Privacy Policy | Legal Notice | Language Access

Copyright © 2025 SubroIQ. All rights reserved.

Website by