Browse the full Resources Index
Somewhere in the middle pages of nearly every homeowners and dwelling policy sits a clause that most policyholders never read until they need it. The appraisal clause describes a specific, limited procedure for resolving disagreements about the amount of a covered loss, and agents who can explain it clearly, before a claim ever happens, save their clients confusion later.
The mechanics are fairly consistent across carriers, even though the exact wording differs. Each side, the policyholder and the insurer, selects its own competent and impartial appraiser. Those two appraisers then select a neutral umpire. The appraisers work to agree on the amount of loss; if they cannot, the umpire breaks the deadlock, and any figure agreed to by two of the three participants becomes binding on the amount of loss. It is worth repeating that last phrase to clients, because it is the most commonly misunderstood part of the clause: appraisal addresses how much a covered loss is worth, not whether the loss is covered in the first place.
That distinction matters for how agents frame the conversation. A client who believes appraisal will resolve an argument about whether a particular type of damage is covered at all is likely to be disappointed, because coverage determinations remain with the insurer, and ultimately the courts, not with the appraisal panel. Agents can accurately describe appraisal as a tool for closing a valuation gap, such as a disagreement over the cost to replace a hail-damaged roof or the scope of interior repairs, after the adjuster and the policyholder have already reached an impasse on price.
Agents should also be candid that invoking appraisal is not the first step in a disputed claim. Most policyholders and carriers attempt to resolve differences through direct negotiation first, and appraisal becomes relevant when that negotiation stalls. Explaining this sequence at the point of sale, rather than in the middle of a stressful claim, gives clients a realistic mental model of what to expect if a disagreement ever arises.
It is also fair to tell clients that each side typically bears the cost of its own appraiser, while the umpire’s fee is usually split, and that policy language on this point should be read directly rather than assumed. Agents are well positioned to point clients to the specific appraisal provision in their own policy and to encourage them to ask questions about it before a loss occurs, even though agents themselves should stop short of interpreting how the clause would apply to a hypothetical future claim.
The best time to have this conversation is not in the middle of a stalled claim but well before one, during an annual policy review or at renewal. An agent who mentions the appraisal clause in passing, describing it as a routine part of the policy rather than something reserved for adversarial situations, gives clients a frame of reference they can draw on later without needing to research the concept for the first time while frustrated. That single proactive mention, repeated occasionally over the life of a client relationship, tends to do more good than any explanation offered after a dispute has already hardened.
This article is general education about how the appraisal process commonly works. It is not legal advice, and specific procedures can vary by state and policy.
Russ Lis is a working property insurance appraiser and umpire based in Minnesota, serving clients nationwide. Contact Appraisal Resolution.