Tag Archives: public adjuster

Missouri Insurance Claims and Politicians Don’t Mix Well

April 13, 2026 By in Property Insurance Tags: , , , , , 3 Comments
map of missouri

The Great State of Missouri

 

There is a disconnect between Missouri legislative promises and regulatory reality in Missouri property insurance claims. Here, what THEY don’t know can hurt YOU.

In the world of property insurance, the language we use to set consumer expectations matters. Currently, Missouri’s proposed Senate Bill 1543 is attempting to change, among other things, how consumers interact with public adjusters. There are some good provisions in this bill, but a close look at the bill’s mandated language reveals a massive gap between what legislators are promising and what state regulators can actually deliver.

The Legislative Promise: “Free Help”

Missouri SB 1543 proposes that public adjusters must include a very specific, bold-text disclaimer in their contracts. It requires them to tell the consumer: “YOU DON’T HAVE TO HIRE A PUBLIC ADJUSTER TO FILE A CLAIM WITH YOUR INSURANCE COMPANY… IF YOU NEED HELP WITH YOUR CLAIM, THE MISSOURI DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE AND INSURANCE WILL HELP YOU FOR FREE”.

It is true that a policyholder does not have to hire a public adjuster to assist with their insurance claim, just as a taxpayer does not need to hire a tax preparer or CPA to prepare their taxes.  Particularly, when the firetruck is still at your home spraying water on the fire and a public adjuster or solicitor is there trying to get you to sign a contract for representation before you have had a chance to consider your entire situation (yes, unfortunately, this happens), this warning is certainly valid and useful. I enthusiastically endorse it. However, when you have already filed a claim and are seeking help with it, is the Missouri Department of Commerce and Insurance able to represent you in the same way I can for free? 

In the context of the bill, which tightly regulates who is allowed to “negotiate” a claim—defined as discussing or exchanging offers with an insurance company to reach a settlement amount—this mandatory disclaimer strongly implies that the Department of Insurance will step in and act as a free alternative to a hired public adjuster.

The Regulatory Reality: “No Authority to Determine Loss”

However, if we look at the actual letters sent by the Missouri Department of Commerce and Insurance when consumers today request this “free help,” a completely different reality emerges.

When responding to consumer complaints regarding property claim disputes, the Department explicitly clarifies the strict limits of its power. A standard response from a Department complaint investigator plainly states: “I do not have the authority to determine the amount or extent of loss you have incurred”.

Instead of negotiating the dollar value of the damage or debating the scope of repairs with the insurance company, the Department outlines a strictly regulatory role:

  • Finding out the current status of the claim file.
  • Evaluating how the insurance company is handling the situation.
  • Assisting in claim resolution if possible, primarily by ensuring “the company is compliant with Missouri insurance laws”.
  • Cannot address property claim denials or partial denials.
  • Cannot establish the facts regarding any other disagreement between you and another party.

How much “help” can they really provide without determining or negotiating the amount of the loss, the scope of the damage, or the merits of the claim they are presumably helping with for free when the claim has been denied or underpaid?

The Danger of Over-promising

The difference between these two documents is staggering. The proposed contract language suggests to consumers that they can forgo professional representation because the state will step in and “help” them resolve their claim for free. Yet, when the state actually arrives, they legally cannot evaluate the damage, determine the cost of the loss, or negotiate the financial settlement.

If an insurance company relies on an engineer to deny structural damage or limit a roof replacement, the Department of Insurance does not have the authority to argue the engineering merits or negotiate a higher payout on the consumer’s behalf. They merely check to see if the insurer followed the statutory timelines and processes. When they have finished helping you for “free” and informed you that the insurer who has denied or underpaid your claim has violated none of the particular rules they govern, is not the insurer who denied or underpaid your claim even more solid in their partial or full denial of your claim? What can you do at that point other than sue?

Conclusion

For property owners facing devastating losses, clarity is essential. Suggesting that a regulatory body can replace the active negotiation and valuation services of a public adjuster is not just misleading; it leaves the consumer fundamentally unprotected during the most critical phase of their claim.

In short, while the state will offer its regulatory review for free, they will not—and legally cannot—act as a free public adjuster to negotiate the financial value or factual merits of either a residential or company’s commercial insurance claim.

Legislators must ensure that the statutory notices they force upon professionals accurately reflect the actual powers of the state agencies they promote. If those lobbying for this bill to become law are successful, Missouri policyholders will need to know that the promise of “free” help in this contract language may not be true.

James H. Bushart, Licensed Missouri Public Adjuster
MO License #8207067 | SCLA | NAPIA
314-803-2167 | missouripublicadjuster.org

Missouri Policyholders and Missouri-Based Public Adjusters

April 9, 2026 By in Property Insurance Tags: , , , Leave a comment

The Great State of Missouri

Why Missouri Policyholders Are Better Served by a Missouri-Based Public Adjuster

After a significant property loss, the decisions a policyholder makes in the first few days can shape the outcome of the entire claim. One of the most consequential of those decisions is who to hire to represent them. Public adjusters from outside Missouri sometimes work claims in this state, and some hold valid Missouri licenses. But licensure alone doesn’t make someone the right advocate for your claim. Where a public adjuster lives, works, and has built their career matters — and for Missouri policyholders, hiring someone with deep roots in this state carries real, practical advantages that an out-of-state adjuster simply cannot match.

Missouri Law Is a Specialty of Its Own

Insurance is regulated at the state level, and Missouri has its own statutes, administrative rules, and regulatory history that govern how claims must be handled. The Missouri Department of Commerce and Insurance sets the rules carriers must follow — including how quickly they must acknowledge a claim, respond to communications, and issue payment decisions. Missouri courts have interpreted policy language and insurer obligations in ways that are specific to this jurisdiction.

A public adjuster who primarily works in other states may hold a Missouri license, but that doesn’t mean they have a working command of Missouri’s regulatory environment. Knowing when an insurer is out of compliance with Missouri’s prompt payment requirements, understanding how the Department of Commerce and Insurance handles complaints, and being familiar with how Missouri arbitration and appraisal processes tend to unfold — these are things that come from sustained experience working Missouri claims, not from passing a licensing exam.

They Know the Market — Your Market

One of the most important functions a public adjuster serves is helping to create an accurate, well-supported estimate of what it will actually cost to restore your property. That estimate needs to reflect real-world costs in your area, not national averages or figures derived from markets hundreds of miles away.

A Missouri-based public adjuster who has worked claims across the state understands what licensed contractors charge in your region, what materials cost in your local supply chain, and what code upgrades are commonly required by Missouri municipalities during restoration work. They’re familiar with the contractors who do quality insurance restoration work and can identify when an insurer’s estimate falls short of what the job will genuinely require.

An adjuster who primarily works in coastal markets or high-population metros may rely on estimating software defaults that don’t translate well to Missouri conditions. Those discrepancies can cost policyholders real money.

Relationships With Missouri Carriers Matter

Missouri’s insurance market has its own cast of carriers, third-party administrators, and independent adjusting firms. A public adjuster who has worked this market for years knows how different companies approach claims, which carriers tend to engage constructively and which ones require more pressure, and which individuals within those organizations are empowered to make decisions. That institutional knowledge informs strategy at every stage of the claim.

Out-of-state adjusters encounter Missouri carriers as relative strangers. A Missouri-based public adjuster walks into that negotiation with context that shapes how the conversation goes.

Accessibility When It Counts

Property claims can move quickly, especially in the early stages. An adjuster who can be on-site promptly — to document damage before it’s disturbed, to meet with the carrier’s representative during inspections, or to walk through the property with a contractor — provides a level of engagement that’s hard to replicate remotely. A Missouri-based public adjuster can be there. Someone operating primarily out of Florida or Colorado cannot offer the same responsiveness.

This matters not just at the start of a claim but throughout it. Claims often require follow-up site visits, reinspections, or additional documentation as new damage is uncovered during demolition or repairs. Ongoing, in-person engagement is part of thorough claim representation, and proximity makes that possible.

Accountability That Outlasts the Claim

An adjuster with an established Missouri practice has professional reputation and community standing at stake in every claim they handle. They work in this market year-round — not just after major storm events — and they depend on referrals and repeat business from Missouri policyholders, attorneys, and contractors. That ongoing accountability shapes how they work.

An out-of-state adjuster operating in Missouri on a temporary or opportunistic basis has fewer long-term stakes here. If a dispute arises after the claim is closed, or if supplemental issues emerge months later, a locally rooted adjuster is far more accessible and motivated to see things through. Their reputation depends on it.

The Long Tail of a Claim

Many policyholders don’t realize how long a property claim can remain active. Supplements arise. Disputes over scope or pricing can extend negotiations. Repairs reveal hidden damage that wasn’t visible during the initial inspection. The policyholder’s need for representation doesn’t always end when the first check arrives.

A Missouri-based public adjuster is positioned to stay engaged through all of it. They’re a phone call and a short drive away, not a flight and a time zone difference.

Choosing the Right Advocate

When you hire a public adjuster to represent your Missouri property claim, you’re not just hiring a license — you’re hiring a person’s knowledge, relationships, and commitment to your outcome. A public adjuster who has built their career in Missouri brings all of that to the table. One who is passing through brings a credential and a plane ticket.

For Missouri policyholders, the choice is clear.

 

James H. Bushart, Licensed Missouri Public Adjuster
MO License #8207067 | SCLA | NAPIA
314-803-2167 | missouripublicadjuster.org

Public Adjuster Hannibal, Missouri

April 8, 2026 By in Property Insurance Tags: , , , , Leave a comment

Welcome to Hannibal, MO

Hannibal and Marion County sit along the Mississippi River in a region that sees its share of severe storms, hail, flooding, and high winds every year. Property damage claims in northeast Missouri are often disputed by insurers — and many policyholders don’t realize they have the right to push back.

I’m James H. Bushart, a licensed Missouri public adjuster serving Hannibal and the surrounding area. I represent policyholders, not insurance companies.

Free Hannibal area claim review: 314-803-2167

Who I Represent

Hannibal homeowners and business owners whose claims have been denied, underpaid, or disputed after storm, hail, wind, fire, water, or flood damage. If the insurer’s offer doesn’t cover your actual losses, that number may be negotiable.

What I Do

I review your policy, independently inspect all damage, document what the insurer missed, and negotiate on your behalf. SCLA designation. NAPIA member. Missouri-licensed since 2012. I’ve handled disputes with all Missouri insurance providers, including Allstate, Nationwide, State Farm, Church Mutual, Shelter, Columbia Insurance, and others across Missouri.

No Fee Unless I Recover More

Contingency basis — you owe nothing unless I recover more than the insurer’s offer. See all Missouri areas I serve.

James H. Bushart, Licensed Missouri Public Adjuster
MO License #8207067 | SCLA | NAPIA | 314-803-2167
missouripublicadjuster.org

Are the Engineer Reports Purchased By Insurance Companies to Deny Claims Accurate and Truthful?

April 29, 2021 By in Home Owner Insurance Issues, Home Repairs Tags: , , , , , , 4 Comments
engineer report to deny claim

Photo by Pixabay on Pexels.com

     In search of an expert to provide them with a reason to deny a claim, many insurance companies will turn to the engineering profession. 

     There are highly respected and valued professional licensed engineers who design and build bridges and skyscrapers, who safely and efficiently channel waterways through and around large cities, who design and test the durability of aircraft and automobiles, who meet and overcome construction and building challenges around the globe – and then there are those who market themselves to insurance carriers for the purpose of providing written reports for them to use to deny insurance claims for wind and hail damage to homes and businesses.  There is money in it.  Insurance companies will pay them upwards of $2,500.00 per report.  Most of these reports provide little more than boilerplate narratives regarding simple roofing materials and most of them contain little or no scientific or engineering data – but aside from their apparent lack of relevance, how accurate is the information that is provided?

     As a public adjuster representing business and homeowner policyholders with their insurance claims, I read many of these reports and too often find errors, misrepresentations, and ambiguities salted among information intended to present a “scientific” spin on what are usually simple, routine observations that virtually anyone can make.

     Much of what you will find in these reports, sometimes as much as two-thirds or more of the entire report, is a boilerplate filler of generic information that could be (but not always) relevant to their observations.  It looks impressive at first glance, just as it is intended to, but is it even correct?  Not always.

     An engineer in several of his recent reports used by various insurance companies to deny claims includes the following language:  “According to the National Roofing Contractors Association (NRCA), the lifespan of a roof is 20 years.”  His report was peer-reviewed and stamped by another engineer with his firm – an engineering firm widely used by insurance carriers throughout the country. This claim by the engineer caught my attention because he was writing about a certain type of roofing material that carried a 30-year warranty and, as most people familiar with roofing materials know, various roofing materials have various lifespans – some as high as over 50 years.  

     I did not believe that the National Roofing Contractor’s Association would be so uninformed as to publish what he claimed they did, so I wrote to them and inquired as to where I could find the information from them that this engineer was quoting in his report used to support a denial of a cliam.  The Vice President of Technical Services for the NRCA responded to me, as follows:  “The 20-year figure is not from the NRCA.  Lifespans vary greatly.”  Thus, the engineer was not only wrong in his peer-reviewed statement of fact regarding the lifespan of a roof, but he also misrepresented the source for his errant facts.  

     Some engineers will provide comments and conclusions about the density or speed of hailstones as being less than required to damage roofing material and provide absolutely no information as to how they were able to measure the density or speed of the hailstone that melted away months or years before their observation.  We are to simply take their word for it, like the quotations from the NRCA, perhaps.

     The engineer paid by the insurance company might use ambiguous language that appears to say something but doesn’t.  For instance, did the engineer say that large hailstones did not strike your roof, or did he simply say that he did not observe evidence of large hail strikes?  There is a difference.  Could there be evidence that he did not “see”, such as bruised indentations on weathered asphalt composite material that is soft to the touch?  Did he say this, or did he leave it to the insurance company to use in the manner of their own choosing?

     Insurance carriers, being corporations who have a fiduciary duty to protect the financial interests of their shareholders as well as a contractual duty to fulfill their promises to their policyholders, will often find this conflict of interest resulting in their wrongful actions of grossly underpaying or wrongfully denying their policyholders’ claims.   The misuse of engineer reports is one of the ways they do this.

     Often, insurance companies will knowingly allow the engineer’s errant attempts to interject policy interpretations into his report to be used to deny a policyholder’s claim.  I have personally reversed an attempt by an insurer to deny an insurance claim because the engineer reported that the damage to the roof “could not be seen from the ground” when there was nothing in the policy to exclude damage for that reason, as one of many examples.  

     An expert witness in court must present his credentials, provide his testimony under oath, and be subjected to cross-examination, but insurance companies present biased hired guns as experts in the claims process and deprive vulnerable policyholders of necessary funds to restore their homes and businesses, with impunity.

     The advice to not believe everything you read should be extended to engineer reports paid for by your insurance company to deny your insurance claim.  Have them closely reviewed by your own expert for accuracy, relevancy, and truth before accepting that your claim should be denied as a result of an engineer’s report.  Whatever you do, do NOT let the insurance company’s engineer be the final word on the validity of your claim.

Public Adjusters Negotiate on Behalf of Policy Holders … Not Their Contractor

March 7, 2015 By in General Home Issues, Home Repairs, Property Insurance Tags: , , , , 1 Comment

Public adjusters work for the policyholder. No one else.

I am a licensed public adjuster and all my business comes to me by way of my internet advertising and referrals.  I do not “chase fires and storms” or otherwise solicit policyholders who have suffered a loss to hire me.  A potential client (or the person referring them) must contact me, first.

Referrals come to me regularly from former clients, attorneys, insurance agents, and building contractors who recommend me to policyholders that they know, and that might benefit from my involvement with their insurance claim.

Some Missouri building contractors will attempt to negotiate with an insurance company on behalf of the owner of the property that they are repairing or rebuilding (when not prohibited by law) and will often find that the insurance company refuses to cooperate with them.  Instead of contracting to do work for less than what they need to make, or before using inferior products and labor and cut corners to afford to work for the insurance company’s lowball estimate, they advise the homeowner to hire a public adjuster for assistance.

I have received many referrals from building contractors and have assisted the policyholders that they referred to me with successfully reopening their claim and getting a fair settlement that covers the full cost of the project (as well as my fee) so that the contractor can receive his full pay to do quality work.  This is a win for the policyholder, a win for the contractor, and a win for an insurance company who operates in good faith.

Likewise, policyholders that I help will often ask me for advice or referrals when they have been paid and are ready to begin the work of restoring their home or business.  I will recommend many of the fine and reputable building contractors that I have come to know and admire, knowing that they will be satisfied with the results.

Sometimes I will get calls from contractors who are simply wanting me to aid them to increase their own level of profit, at the expense of the insurance company and the policyholder, by adding unnecessary work to the scope to increase the cost to the job and expect me to negotiate on THEIR behalf and convince the insurance company to pay it.  I don’t do that.

A recent case in point was a Missouri policyholder who was reluctant to hire a public adjuster but was pressured to contact me by his building contractor.  The contractor initially attempted to “represent” the policyholder in negotiating his contract with me and discussing the claim with me, but I refused and communicated directly with the policyholder.  This is the only way I do business.

As I investigated the claim, I found that the insurance company had inspected the hail-damaged roof and siding with the contractor’s estimator and had agreed to pay what the estimator had originally estimated the costs to be.  Then, for reasons not clearly explained, the owner of the construction company revised his estimator’s original estimate and added a large amount of money for something outside the normal scope of work, and the insurance company refused to pay for this additional cost.

My job, according to the building contractor who pressured the policyholder to hire me, was to get the homeowner this extra sum for this unnecessary work so that he could pay it to the contractor.  I refused to do this and advised the policyholder that the insurance company had offered a fair settlement that matched the original estimate provided by his contractor, and that I was withdrawing from his claim.

An insurance claim is a matter that is between the policyholder and his insurance company, and the only acceptable resolution to an insurance claim is a complete restoration of the insured property to the condition that it was immediately before the event that caused the loss.  The policyholder hires the contractor to perform the work to meet that level of restoration and the insurance company has a duty to pay the costs associated with that level of restoration.  Nothing more … nothing less.

I appreciate the many referrals that I receive from building contractors who are looking to help policyholders achieve fair settlements so that they can be paid in full for their valuable services; however, when the policyholder and I agree to work together on his claim, I represent the policyholder, only.

Home destroyed by fire.

Home destroyed by fire.

A Broken Water Pipe and the Insurance Claim

February 15, 2014 By in Home Owner Insurance Issues, Home Repairs, mold, Property Insurance Tags: , , Leave a comment

The recent cold blasts and “polar vortexes” that have made their way south into Missouri this winter have not been kind to some homeowners … particularly a recent client who had the misfortune of having a bathroom water pipe burst on the second floor of his home.

Broken water pipe on the level above.

They have a broken water pipe on the level above.

For an undetermined number of hours, water cascaded from the second-floor bathroom, then through the ceiling of the first-floor master bedroom, and then soon created a path into the finished basement and game room.  The damage was significant to the home’s structure and the furnishings, clothing, pool table, and electronic equipment that found itself underwater for hours before being discovered.

He called his insurance company, who, in turn, hired a local “independent adjuster” who came to the home to assess the damage and determined that the insurance company would agree to pay approximately $11,000.00 to cover the loss of personal property and restore the house to its original condition.   Having recently spent much more than this to install the destroyed wooden floors and finish his basement the previous summer — my client was offended by his insurance company’s apparent disregard for his condition and was understandably upset.

In the search for a public adjuster to represent him, he found this blog on the internet and called me for assistance.

In about four weeks, we negotiated a settlement with his insurance company for over $38,000.00, with which he can fully restore his home to its original condition and replace his personal property precisely as promised by his insurance policy.

Most states now license public adjusters to assist homeowners and business owners with property claims.  Help is available.  All you need to do is ask.

Property Depreciation – Age Should NOT Be the Only Factor

February 1, 2013 By in Home Owner Insurance Issues, Property Insurance Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , Leave a comment

By James H. Bushart

 

Most insurance policies will define the terms by which the insurer will calculate ACV (“actual cash value”) in determining how much to pay, and, usually, the factor of “age” is not one of those conditions. Still, the property’s age is often used as the primary determining factor when depreciating or subtracting from the replacement costs of an item of property being adjusted for settlement.

While it is true that an object’s age can correspond closely to its extent of physical wear and tear – it is not valid in every circumstance. Age alone should not cause an object to lose much of its value; if the thing is functionally sound, it should retain most of its value.

I have helped clients recover higher settlements from insurers who had initially calculated depreciation as high as 75% for perfectly working and maintained fireplaces that happened to be original to older homes. The plaster on the wall lost to the fire was depreciated by more than 65% even though it was fully intact and functional before the fire, and the insured homeowner was entitled to a higher adjusted settlement. Countless other items and systems in the home have been grossly over-depreciated – at a great expense to the insured – for no other reason than their age.

In some cases, the age of the item may be incorrectly calculated, and higher depreciation rates can be mistakenly applied.  One recent case highlighted certain things as being subject to excessive depreciation due to what the adjuster determined to be advanced age when, in fact, the same insurance company had paid for their replacement less than a year prior when vandals had damaged the home.

Property owners should know that an object’s depreciation amount is identical to how much better or more valuable a new thing is compared to the older object. This is what is being determined. Age is not always an appropriate measure of this, and the insured should challenge arbitrary deductions from replacement values based on age. The adjuster must carefully listen to the insured’s arguments and negotiate in good faith.

If you feel that your property was unfairly depreciated and that your insurance company’s offer of settlement is unreasonable and unfair, contact me (if you live in Missouri) or a public adjuster licensed to represent you in your state.

[Update – 3/12/13 –  My client had a home damaged by a fire that needed extensive repair, as mentioned above.  The insurance company underpaid him … claiming depreciation of 67% on the interior walls based on their age.  After reopening the claim and further discussion with me,  they issued him an additional check for $11,438.00.]

 

Copyright 2013 James H.Bushart

Emergency Supply Kit for Severe Weather

October 17, 2012 By in Health and Safety, Home Owner Insurance Issues, Property Insurance Tags: , , , , , , , , , , Leave a comment

Photo by Ralph W. lambrecht on Pexels.com

Assemble the following items to create emergency supply kits for use at home, the office, at school, and in your vehicle:

  •  Water—1 gallon per person, per day (3-day supply for evacuation and 2 week supply for home)
  •  Food—a 3-day supply of non-perishable food for evacuation, 2-week supply for home
  •  Battery-powered or hand crank radio, and a “Public Alert Certified” NOAA Weather Radio and extra batteries for both
  •  Items for infants—including formula, diapers, bottles, pacifiers, powdered milk and medications not requiring refrigeration
  •  Items for seniors, people with disabilities and anyone with medical needs—including special foods, denture items, extra eyeglasses, hearing aid batteries, prescription and non-prescription medications that are regularly used, inhalers and other essential equipment
  •  Kitchen accessories—a manual can opener, mess kits or disposable cups, plates and utensils, utility knife, sugar and salt, aluminum foil and plastic wrap, resealable plastic bags
  •  One complete change of clothing and footwear for each person— including sturdy work shoes or boots, raingear and other items adjusted for the season, such as hats and gloves, thermal underwear, sunglasses, dust masks
  •  Sanitation and hygiene items—shampoo, deodorant, toothpaste, toothbrushes, comb and brush, lip balm, sunscreen, contact lenses and supplies and any medications regularly used, toilet paper, towelettes, soap, hand sanitizer, liquid detergent, feminine supplies, plastic garbage bags (heavy-duty) and ties (for personal sanitation), medium-sized plastic bucket with tight lid, disinfectant, household chlorine bleach
  •  Other essential items—paper, pencil, needles, thread, medicine dropper, whistle, emergency preparedness manual
  •  Several flashlights and extra, fresh batteries
  • A first-aid kit
  • A copy of your home owner’s insurance policy
  • Contact information for a pre-selected, local and licensed Public Adjuster

This list was extracted and modified from the information provided at: http://www.nws.noaa.gov/os/severeweather/resources/ttl6-10.pdf