Independence Questions to Ask Any Appraiser

Browse the full Resources Index

Disinterestedness is the standard nearly every appraisal clause invokes, yet it is also one of the harder qualities for a party to evaluate from the outside, since it depends on relationships and incentives that are not always visible on the surface. A short set of direct questions, asked before an engagement begins, can surface most of what matters.

A useful first question asks about prior work for either party in the current claim, including work as an adjuster, a contractor, an appraiser, or an umpire on a previous, unrelated matter involving the same carrier or the same policyholder representative. A single prior interaction does not automatically disqualify someone, but it should be disclosed and discussed openly rather than discovered later.

A second question addresses ongoing business relationships, such as whether the candidate regularly receives referrals from one particular type of party, whether that be carriers, public adjusters, or contractors, and how that referral pattern is managed to avoid a perception of bias over time. An appraiser who works primarily on one side of claims is not automatically compromised, since experience concentrated on one side of the table is common in this field, but the candidate should be able to describe how they maintain independent judgment on each individual file regardless of which side retained them most often in the past.

A third question concerns financial interest in the outcome. As discussed elsewhere on this site, a fee tied to a percentage of the settlement raises its own independence questions, and a candidate should be able to explain plainly how their compensation is structured and why they believe it does not compromise their judgment on the specific items in dispute.

A fourth worthwhile question asks how the candidate has handled a disagreement in the past where the evidence did not favor the party who retained them. An honest answer will usually describe a specific instance where the appraiser reached a conclusion the retaining party did not want to hear, supported by measurements, code requirements, or manufacturer specifications rather than by loyalty to either side. A candidate who cannot describe such an instance, or who suggests that their role is to advocate rather than to value, is signaling something worth taking seriously. Finally, it is reasonable to ask directly whether the candidate is a member of a professional appraisal association, whether that association maintains a code of conduct addressing independence, and whether the candidate has ever been the subject of a formal complaint related to disinterestedness. Not every capable appraiser belongs to such an association, and membership alone does not guarantee independence, but a candidate’s response to the question, including how they discuss their own accountability, often reveals as much as the answer itself. It can also help to ask how a candidate approaches an assignment where the umpire ultimately sides mostly with the opposing appraiser on the disputed items. A candidate who describes the umpire’s decision as simply part of a functioning process, rather than as a loss to be explained away, is typically demonstrating the same disinterested mindset that independence questions are meant to probe in the first place. Appraisal outcomes are not always evenly split, and an appraiser whose professional identity depends on a favorable result for the retaining party on every file is describing something closer to advocacy than to the neutral valuation role the policy’s appraisal clause actually contemplates.

This article is provided as general education on the appraisal process. It is not legal advice, and procedures vary by state and by policy.

Russ Lis is an independent property insurance appraiser and umpire in Minnesota who serves clients nationwide. Contact Appraisal Resolution.