An underpaid claim is a scope problem.

Start here

The test that tells you whether a claim was underpaid

There is one question that settles it, and it does not require a second opinion about anybody's pricing.

Take the carrier estimate to a contractor who will do the work and ask whether the job described on those pages can be completed, to code, for that number. If it cannot, you are not in a dispute about opinion. You are holding a list that is missing items, and missing items are demonstrable: either the drywall in that room is on the estimate or it is not, either the permit is on it or it is not.

That framing matters because it changes what you send the carrier. "This is not enough" is a position nobody can process. "Your estimate has no line for the underlayment, the flashing or the disposal on a roof you have agreed to replace" is a list a claims department can act on, and acting on lists is what claims departments do all day. I have a guide on how to read the insurer's estimate that walks through the structure of the document itself, because the gaps are easier to see once you know how the pages are organised.

Where the scope goes missing

Across enough files the same lines disappear, and they disappear for structural reasons rather than dishonest ones. A staff adjuster inspects quickly, writes what is visible from where they stood, and prices it from a database. Everything that requires opening something, measuring something or knowing a local code requirement tends to fall outside that visit.

Two of those rows carry more money than the rest combined on a typical storm file. Matching decides whether you get one repaired slope or an elevation that looks like one building — I set out the Illinois position in matching undamaged siding. Overhead and profit decides whether the estimate assumes a handyman or a general contractor coordinating trades, which is the difference explained in overhead and profit on a roof estimate. Code items are the third, and they are owed only where your policy carries the coverage — that is the subject of code upgrade coverage in Illinois.

ACV, RCV and the check that looks too small

A large share of the claims that arrive at my desk as "underpaid" were paid correctly for the stage they were at. The owner was looking at a first payment and comparing it to a total.

On a replacement cost policy the carrier typically issues actual cash value first: the estimate, minus your deductible, minus depreciation for the age and condition of what was damaged. The depreciated amount is not gone. On most policies it is recoverable, and it is released once the work is completed and documented — which means the second payment is conditional on paperwork rather than on further argument. The line to find on your estimate is the recoverable depreciation total, because that single figure tells you whether you are looking at a short payment or an unfinished sequence.

Both problems can exist on the same claim, which is why they have to be separated before anything is sent. An estimate can be missing half its scope and be correctly paid at ACV. Arguing the check without fixing the scope wins you depreciation on a list that was too short to begin with. I go through the first-check arithmetic in detail in the actual cash value first check.

Non-recoverable depreciation is the case worth knowing about in advance. Some policies, particularly on older roofs, settle certain items on an actual cash value basis permanently through an endorsement added at renewal. If that applies to you it is in the policy, not in the estimate, and it changes what a realistic outcome looks like before you spend months pursuing one.

How a supplement actually works

A supplement is the formal route for revising a claim that has already been paid, and it is ordinary. Carriers maintain a process for it precisely because opening a wall or stripping a roof regularly reveals damage that no inspection could have recorded.

What a supplement is not is a second request for the same money in stronger language. It is a documented amendment to a scope: this item was not on the estimate, here is the photograph taken when it was exposed, here is the measurement, here is the price at the same pricing basis the carrier already used. Keeping the pricing basis identical matters more than owners expect — a supplement written in the carrier's own estimating terms is checked against the file, while one written in a contractor's private format becomes a negotiation about formats.

Timing is part of it too. A supplement raised while the trades are on site, with the cavity open and the photographs fresh, is a different document from one assembled after everything is closed up and the evidence has been drywalled over. On the files I handle, the moment the repair exposes something unexpected is the moment the record has to be made, whether or not anyone has decided yet that it will be claimed.

What to do when the payment does not cover the repair

1. 1

   Do not start repairs you cannot document

   Photograph everything before, during and after, and keep what you remove. Once a wall is closed the evidence for the supplement is inside it.

   Date-stamped photographs, every stage
2. 2

   Get the carrier estimate in its full itemised form

   Not the summary page. The line-item version shows quantities, unit prices, depreciation and what was and was not included — the summary hides exactly the information you need.

3. 3

   Have a contractor price the same scope

   The same work, not a better version of it. A comparison only counts when both documents describe the same job, which is also what makes the gap impossible to dismiss.

4. 4

   Find the recoverable depreciation line

   It tells you whether money is still owed under the policy sequence and what the carrier will want before it releases it. Many "underpayments" resolve here.

   Check for a roof payment endorsement too
5. 5

   Check your dates before you argue anything

   Suit limitation, proof of loss, appraisal conditions. Those clocks run while a supplement is being discussed. My guide to the deadlines on an Illinois claim shows where each one lives in the policy.

How I work an underpaid claim

I start by rebuilding the scope rather than reviewing the total. That means inspecting the loss myself, measuring it, and writing what the repair actually requires — then setting my document beside the carrier's and identifying every line that differs. The output is not an opinion that the settlement was low. It is a list of specific items, each with the photograph and the measurement that puts it there.

I am a HAAG certified inspector and a licensed Illinois roofing contractor, so the causation half and the cost half of that file come from the same visit. On an underpaid claim that matters, because the most common reason a line was omitted is that the carrier attributed the damage to something else — and answering the price without answering the cause leaves the argument exactly where it started.

From there it is a supplement in the carrier's own estimating terms, a reinspection where the file needs one, and negotiation item by item until the scope and the payment describe the same building. I track recoverable depreciation through to the final payment as part of that, because a claim is not finished when the first check clears. Where a claim turns out to be a valuation dispute rather than a scope dispute, the appraisal clause in your policy may be the right instrument, and I will tell you when I think it is.

Where a file stops being a claim dispute and becomes a legal one, I say so and step back to the part I am licensed for. The consultation and the inspection cost nothing, and I will give you a straight read at the end of it — including when that read is that your claim was paid properly. You can see the full range of claim services, read about my background as a roofer and adjuster, or send me the estimate and we will go through it line by line.

Volodymyr Lukaniuk is a public adjuster licensed in Illinois (No. 19461872) and Indiana (No. 3556317), a licensed Illinois roofing contractor (No. 105.009193) and a HAAG certified inspector (No. 992104047). A public adjuster represents policyholders on insurance claims and is not an attorney. Policy wording varies between insurers — the descriptions here are general and your own policy governs your claim. Nothing here promises a claim outcome, and no adjuster-client relationship exists until a written contract is signed.