Subrogation demand and arbitration software that drafts the demand or the contention from the claim file, every fact cited
Demand packages and contentions drafted from the file, every fact cited.
See one case, screen by screen ↓Software that helps a recovery unit win back what it paid its insured for a loss someone else caused — first with a demand to the other carrier, then, when liability or damages are disputed, with an arbitration filing. Subrogation Demand & Arbitration drafts the demand package or the contention from the claim file, every fact cited to its page, attaches the exhibits and checks the forum rules before a specialist files.
How to choose AI solutions for insurance →
Updated
In inter-company arbitration the arbitrator decides only on what the filing attaches. The evidence has to be attached when the filing is submitted, nothing can be amended afterwards, and a point that is not raised — legal fees, an affirmative pleading, a disputed rental day — is waived. The file has to stand on its own.
Yet every demand letter, damages summary and contention is still built by hand from a claim file of 40 to 80 documents: the crash report, the photographs, the recorded statements, the event data recorder download, the estimate and supplements, the rental and towing invoices, the payment ledger. A cited invoice left out of the upload is money lost. And when the other carrier files against us, the answer is written against the response due date, conceding rental days and labour rates that could have been disputed.
Estimated split for one contested-liability auto contention, by hand and with the solution, in hours.
Six specialist agents read the file, draft, attach and check every rule; the specialist decides and files.
Pinecrest Casualty accepted only 50% on Delgado, a left-turn collision in Wexley, Ohio, saying our insured was doing 41 mph on a stale yellow. Here is how the contention reaches the forum, screen by screen, in the working solution.
Tessa opens APD-26-0418833, Delgado v. Pinecrest Casualty: contention drafted, not filed, file by Fri 16 Oct. The run log shows Sunday night’s work — 61 documents read, 214 facts with their pages, five sections written with every factual sentence cited. The readiness meter says 70% ready to file, with 3 to fix.
Run log: “Exhibit assembler — 10 exhibits attached in citation order · 2 cited files not in the binder.”
In the facts of loss, each sentence carries a chip like E-1 p.2. Clicking it opens Wexley Police crash report 26-07-3318 in the side panel at the cited spot: Unit 2, Voss, K., failure to yield turning left, ORC 4511.42, ticket WX-118402. The 14 scene and vehicle photographs open the same way, at the F-150’s passenger doors.
Pinecrest’s letter gives no source for its speed or its stale yellow. The answer section does: the CR-V’s event data recorder shows 36 mph five seconds before impact and 34 mph one second before, braking from 1.4 seconds, in a 35 mph zone. The city’s signal log has the northbound signal green from 5:41:38 to 5:42:21 pm; the crash notification places the impact at 5:42:04 pm.
“Pinecrest’s 41 mph is answered by the recorder (E-7) and the city’s signal log (E-8), both attached.”
Before anything goes, the rules check reads the draft against the arbitration rules, revised 1 Jan 2025, and pins each finding beside the paragraph it concerns. The Crossway rental invoice is cited in the damages section but not attached. The $500.00 deductible is counted inside company-paid damages, entering $16,333.40. And Alan Pruett is quoted, but his recorded statement is not listed as evidence.
“The arbitrator may only consider evidence listed and attached, and a filing cannot be amended.”
Every margin note carries its fix. Attach as E-10 pulls invoice R-558102 from the claim file — 12 days at $48.00. Correct the total enters $15,833.40 as company-paid damages and claims the deductible as the insured’s interest. Attach as E-4 lists the transcript of Pruett’s 16 Jul call. The meter moves to Ready to file: 10 of 10 checks passed.
“All forum rules checks pass · ready to file.”
Company-paid damages are $15,000 and above, so Rule 3-3 makes a three-person panel available; with speed and signal disputed, Tessa requests it and the panel fee is added. The filing screen sums it up: Automobile forum, $15,833.40 plus the $500.00 deductible, 12 exhibits, 47 pages and 14 photos, 10 of 10 checks passed. Under $25,000 and asking for 100%, no supervisor approval is needed.
“Once filed, nothing can be amended (Rule 2-1).”
Twelve exhibits, numbered in the order the contention first cites them, each with its pages, where it is cited and what was redacted — driver licence numbers on the crash report, a phone number on each statement, the partial VIN on the recorder report. Pinecrest is notified; its response is due Fri 11 Dec.
Northfield Indemnity filed against us on Huang, claiming $11,284.60. The drafted response accepts 100% liability for the rear impact and disputes $1,488.10 on the Feature Response step under Rule 2-5: 21 rental days against the body shop’s own 9 repair days, a $68.00 labour rate against a surveyed $58.00, and a bumper cover photographed damaged on Northfield’s own 2025 claim. Response due Tue 27 Oct, extension not used.
Outcomes lists the 14 decisions of the last 90 days and what decided each one. Of the 5 split or lost, two had rental cut because the invoice was not attached, one had speed disputed with no recorder data, one quoted a witness without a statement, and one was lost because the failed part was not preserved. Each is now a check that runs before filing. Three awards totalling $41,018.32 are still owed to us.
“Each of these is now a rules check that runs before filing.”
The same recovery files, seen by the four people who carry them — what their week looked like, and what it looks like now.
Six specialist agents read the file, draft, attach and check every rule; the specialist decides and files.
Reads the whole claim file — crash report, statements, recorder data, photos, estimates, invoices, ledger — into a fact sheet, every fact with its page or image.
Applies the loss state’s rules of the road and negligence rule to the facts, and maps the other side’s argument against the evidence — saying when they cite none.
Ties every dollar claimed to a payment in the ledger and an invoice, keeps the deductible apart, and checks rental days against the repair dates.
Drafts the demand, the contention or our response in the forum’s order — facts of loss, liability, answer to the other side, damages, exhibits — plain and factual, every sentence cited.
Numbers and orders exhibits by first citation, redacts personal identifiers, adds cover sheets to graphic images and builds the binder.
Checks the draft against the forum’s rules and the carrier’s settings, and pins each finding beside the paragraph it concerns, with its fix.
Fixes, decides and files. The agents propose; a named person decides.
Ask in plain words, or tell it what to fix. Answers point to the exhibit and page they rest on.
Why does Pinecrest say Delgado was speeding, and what answers it?
Pinecrest’s letter says Mr Delgado was travelling about 41 mph and entered on a stale yellow, with no source. Three exhibits answer it: the recorder shows 36 mph at five seconds and 34 mph at one second, braking from 1.4 seconds, in a 35 mph zone; the city log has the northbound signal green until 5:42:21 pm, after the 5:42:04 impact; and Alan Pruett says “normal speed”.
What would the forum reject in this draft?
Three items would hurt this filing: Rule 2-1 · 3-5, the rental invoice is cited but not attached; Rule 1-3(d), the deductible is inside company-paid damages; Rule 3-7(c), Alan Pruett is quoted but his statement is not in evidence. The arbitrator may only consider what is listed and attached, and nothing can be amended after filing. Each note in the margin has its fix.
Request a three-person panel for Delgado
Done. Company-paid damages are $15,833.40, above the $15,000 threshold for a three-person panel (Rule 3-3). With speed and signal disputed, three arbitrators lower the risk of a split. The panel fee is added to the filing.
Which responses to other carriers are due in the next 15 days?
Two, both drafted: Mbeki, filed by Tri-County Auto, due Tue 20 Oct, rental days disputed; and Huang, filed by Northfield Indemnity, due Tue 27 Oct, 100% liability accepted with $1,488.10 disputed under Rule 2-5. Neither has used its one extension (Rule 2-9).
13 screens from the working solution, on its sample data. Pick one to see it large.
Limits, approvals, clocks and how drafts are written are settings. Changes apply to drafts started from then on.
| Setting | Default | Choose from |
|---|---|---|
| Supervisor approval for filings above | $25,000 | $10,000 · $25,000 · $50,000 |
| Liability compromise below 100% | Goes to the supervisor | On · Off |
| Claims counsel reviews | Legal fees, affirmative pleadings, Special forum | On · Off |
| Warn before a response due date | 10 days | 5 · 10 · 15 days |
| Demand follow-up if the other carrier has not replied | 30 days | 21 · 30 · 45 days |
| Award payment request when an award is unpaid | Day 31 | Day 31 · Day 35 |
| Suggest a three-person panel | At $15,000 and above | On · Off |
| Rules edition | Revised 1 Jan 2025 | Rev. 21 Oct 2024 · Rev. 1 Jan 2025 |
Every figure is labelled: a target the solution is built to, an estimate, a typical published result, or a proven one.
“demo” = seen in the working solution, on its sample recovery files · “target” = the design goal, measured in the live solution · “estimated” = our estimate · “typical” = published figures (Guidewire press release, 12 Dec 2024 — 1.1M inter-company arbitration disputes filed in 2023; Genpact, Maximize subrogation opportunities — about 15% of recoverable claims missed, citing NASP). Rule numbers refer to the Arbitration Forums, Inc. Rules, effective 21 Oct 2024, revised 1 Jan 2025. People, companies, claims and cases named on this page are fictional — characters and sample data in the working solution.
Software that helps a recovery unit win back what it paid its insured for a loss someone else caused — first with a demand to the other carrier, then, when liability or damages are disputed, with an arbitration filing. Subrogation Demand & Arbitration drafts the demand package or the contention from the claim file, every fact cited to its page, attaches the exhibits and checks the forum rules before a specialist files.
The forum rules checker has twelve checks and runs the ones that apply to each draft — evidence attached, the deductible kept out of company-paid damages, every party named, witnesses listed with their statements, damages disputed on the right step and more. Nine block filing when they fail and three advise, such as a three-person panel at $15,000 and above. Each finding sits beside the paragraph it concerns, with its fix.
No. Agents draft and check; the specialist edits, decides and files. Agents never file, never concede or set liability and never claim an amount that was not paid. Filings over $25,000 and any compromise below 100% go to the recovery supervisor.
Yes. Filings against our insureds are picked up with their response due date, the answer is drafted point by point, and disputed damages are raised on the Feature Response step so they are considered. It shows whether the one extension has been used and warns 10 days before the response is due.
Yes. The working solution includes a homeowners water-loss demand to a contractor’s carrier, with a damages summary tied to the payment ledger, the forensic report cited, and weak points to consider before sending — such as offering a joint inspection of the failed part.
The claim file and payment ledger in your claims system, police crash reports and recorded statements, event data recorder and signal timing data, photographs, estimates and invoices, the other carrier’s replies and filings, and the edition of the forum rules you file under.
Yes. The supervisor approval limit, compromise approvals, counsel review, response-date warnings, demand follow-up, award payment requests, redaction, letterhead and the rules edition are all settings. Changes apply to drafts started from then on and are kept as a new version.
The Agentic Solution Engine builds and deploys it from your requirements and documents — your letter templates, approval limits and a sample of past recovery files — and it goes live once every quality gate has passed. We will walk you through it on your own disputed files first.
Referrals in days, not weeks, after first notice, each with its evidence.
1-min demoDocument Fraud DetectionEvery claim document over a set amount tested for edits before it is paid.
1-min demoFraud Network AnalysisOrganized rings seen across claims, not missed one claim at a time.
1-min demoWe’ll run Subrogation Demand & Arbitration on a sample of your own disputed files.