What is the best course of action for an adjuster when the damages assessed are lower than the claimant's estimate?

When an adjuster finds that the damages assessed are lower than what the claimant estimates, negotiating a settlement with the claimant is the most appropriate course of action. This approach allows for open communication and collaboration between the adjuster and the claimant, fostering an environment where both parties can discuss their perspectives on the damages.

Negotiation can lead to a resolution that is mutually acceptable and could account for potential discrepancies in estimates. It also empowers the adjuster to explain the rationale behind their damage assessment, while allowing the claimant to present their evidence and reasoning for their higher estimate. This two-way dialogue can often lead to a fair compromise that satisfies both the insurance company's guidelines and the claimant's needs, reducing the likelihood of disputes escalating to litigation.

In contrast, letting a court settle the claim can be time-consuming and costly, while rejecting the claim outright or simply accepting the claimant's estimate without discussion may lead to dissatisfaction and could harm the insurer's relationship with the claimant. Each of those alternatives does not address the need for communication and negotiation, which are key components of effective claims management.