Could This End The WAR Between Contractors & Adjusters? Matt Behrens – John Wood – Randy Brothers

There is no true indemnification when a policyholder must pay a public adjuster or attorney out of their settlement - they end up paying more than their deductible, or the contractor absorbs the shortfall in reduced margin.

AAA's flagship fix is 'fee balancing': a one-sentence legislative change stating that if a PA fee results from the carrier breaching the policy or insurance code, that fee is paid IN ADDITION to the settlement.

UPPA laws are dangerously undefined - in some states a contractor can face a felony just for discussing scope, price, code requirements, or causation, even though they are the first responders on nearly 100% of claims.

Adjuster licensing is nearly nonexistent in many states (someone could 'work at Arby's one day and be an adjuster the next'), so AAA is lobbying for licensing standards for all independent adjusters.

A competent public adjuster more than justifies their fee on commercial and large-loss claims - the issue isn't whether they earn it, it's that the policyholder shouldn't have to fund it out of their own recovery.

Carriers are exploiting the gap: after a PA fee reduces the payout, insurers push contractors to rebuild for less, then their defense attorneys accuse the contractor of insurance fraud for invoicing the original scope.

John Wood argues the legal basis already exists - the doctrine of consequential damages (traceable to Hadley v. Baxendale, 1854, and treatises back to 1546) means a foreseeable PA fee caused by the carrier's breach should be recoverable.

The carrier lobby thrives on 'divide and conquer' - contractors, PAs, and attorneys fighting each other online - so AAA is building a broad coalition of contractors, adjusters, attorneys, and experts to push back at the legislative level.