The New Hampshire Insurance coverage Division (NHID) has issued a bulletin clarifying insurers’ obligations when utilizing digital claims adjustment programs to evaluate vehicle harm.
That guidance got here in response to a rising variety of insurers counting on picture and video submissions from customers or restore outlets fairly than conducting in-person inspections.
“The implementation of digital claims programs can enhance effectivity, but it surely should not come on the expense of equity or thoroughness within the claims course of,” mentioned DJ Bettencourt, insurance coverage commissioner. “Moreover, Granite Staters shouldn’t be denied the correct to an in-person inspection just because they initially submitted photographs or movies.”
Based on a press launch, beneath the Unfair Claims Settlement Practices (UCSP) provisions of the state’s Unfair Insurance coverage Commerce Practices regulation (RSA 417:4, XV), insurers are required to promptly and fairly examine and settle claims pretty as soon as legal responsibility is obvious.
The bulletin states that whereas digital adjustment instruments could assist settle claims quicker and scale back prices for insurers, pictures and movies don’t at all times seize the complete extent of a car’s harm. To adjust to the UCSP, carriers should supply an in-person inspection of a broken car inside an affordable timeframe if the buyer requests one.
Insurers could not deny such a request primarily based solely on a shopper’s prior participation in a digital evaluation, the bulletin mentioned. Unreasonable delays in offering requested in-person inspections may additionally represent a violation of the responsibility to promptly and fairly examine claims beneath RSA 417:4, XV(a)(3).
“Making certain transparency and timeliness within the claims course of is important to defending customers,” mentioned Keith Nyhan, deputy insurance coverage commissioner. “These clarifications reinforce that insurers can not rely solely on digital instruments if doing so limits a shopper’s proper to a good investigation.”
Aerial Imagery
The state’s steerage on auto claims adjusting comes after the division’s February guidance on insurers’ use of aerial imagery in property insurance coverage underwriting, notably relating to choices to refuse to put in writing or renew insurance policies primarily based on roof situation.
The division mentioned current complaints point out that some property insurers have relied on aerial imagery to justify non-renewals primarily based on mistakenly recognized roof circumstances. The February bulletin reaffirmed that whereas insurers could refuse to put in writing or renew insurance policies attributable to clear proof of property degradation or harm, they might not accomplish that solely primarily based on beauty points reminiscent of roof discoloration.
If aerial imagery doesn’t conclusively display roof degradation or harm ample to justify refusal to put in writing or renew a coverage, insurers should conduct a follow-up bodily inspection to confirm their findings. Moreover, if an applicant or insured disputes the insurer’s dedication—even when the insurer believes the aerial imagery to be conclusive—a bodily inspection is required.”
Subjects
Auto
Claims
Underwriting
Tech
Property
Excited about Auto?
Get computerized alerts for this matter.
