RETAIN ME!

262.271.3519

Recent Comments

    Weather and Your Claim: Why Automated Reports are Bad Data

    Hail stones held in one hand and on the ground

    By Mark McGinnis, CCM

    Many people and companies within the insurance claims ecosystem rely on automated weather reports. Almost all of these reports are simply numbers and words on paper. They look clean, they look easy, and they give you a quick answer. But quick and easy data is not necessarily the best data. In fact, if you are relying on automated, grid-interpolated reports to evaluate a claim, you are likely exposing your company and your client to bad data and poor methodology.

    Most automated weather platforms do not actually measure the weather at the property site. They look at the nearest official government radar station or airport and use a computer algorithm to guess the weather at the insured address.

    But algorithms don’t account for many variables. They don’t rely on ground truth or include quality control on the report issued. I have seen automated reports analyzing hail, even large hail, on sunny days with no rain. That is a painful and expensive lesson to learn.

    Having an experienced Certified Consulting Meteorologist (CCM) engaged early in the process increases confidence in what occurred at the insured address. This helps all parties in the claims process.

    Automated Reports vs. CCM Forensic Analysis

    Weather Factor Automated Reports CCM Forensic Analysis
    Data Integrity Interpolated computer guesses/ estimates   Calibrated, certifiable government sensors, dual-pol radar, peer reviewed best practices
    Ground Truth None. Just an estimate based on proprietary, non peer reviewed algorithms Actual NWS documents that can be certified 
    Court Readiness Inadmissable. Most automated providers state: Not for use in court Fully certified and built to survive challenges

    Trust your instincts! If a quick computer-generated report says one thing, but the claimant or the facts on the ground point to another, get confirmation.

    Relying on unverified, non-certified data is a significant waste of time and money. If your automated report incorrectly flags an event, you may serve your client below your high standards. Worse, if you use a flawed automated report on a claim, an opposing attorney with a qualified CCM will easily throw it out in court.

    Automated tools are fine for a quick initial look, but they have little to no human review. For high-exposure premises liability claims, you need a CCM to construct and write a bulletproof report. Challenge the automated reports early in the process before they hurt your case.