APPRAISAL · UMPIRE · CONSULTING
Accuracy over advocacy.
Disputed property losses resolved on the evidence, to a number that holds up.
AppraisalImpartial appraiser
When a loss is covered but its value is disputed, the policy's appraisal clause resolves the amount through appraisers rather than the courtroom. Appointed by one party and impartial in method, Coda establishes that amount on the evidence: scope, measurement, and pricing settled on the merits, neither inflated nor understated, and documented to hold under audit, regulatory review, or litigation. Questions of coverage remain with the carrier.
UmpireNeutral umpire
When two appraisers value the same loss and cannot agree, an umpire decides the difference. Coda reviews both positions on their merits, inspects the property where warranted, and issues a reasoned award addressed to the specific items in dispute. The award is binding as to amount, and never a reflexive split of the difference.
ConsultingClaims advisory
Across a disputed or complex claim, a party often needs senior technical support before a formal appraisal, or instead of one. Coda advises whichever party retains it: scope review, estimate analysis that shows exactly where and by how much positions diverge, panel and umpire strategy, and expert assistance from first notice through settlement or award. Like every Coda engagement, it is grounded in the documented evidence.
Appraiser or umpire, the method does not change: disciplined, documented, and decided on the evidence.
Engagement
Every engagement starts with the full picture: the parties, the policy, and the exact points in dispute. The file is screened for conflicts before it is accepted. Scope, communication, and timing are then set in writing, the panel is established, and a qualified, impartial umpire is identified. Everyone begins knowing how the process will run.
Investigation
The loss is investigated in full. That means inspecting the property where warranted and reviewing scope, measurement, and pricing line by line against the documentation and the policy. Every figure is sourced to the evidence behind it, so any number can be traced back to what supports it. The same standard applies whether Coda is building a valuation or weighing someone else's.
Reconciliation
Positions are reconciled line by line, so it is clear exactly where they diverge, by how much, and why. Where the evidence is clear, the appraisers agree. Where it is not, the umpire decides. Every figure rests on the record, and what the facts settle is settled.
Award
The award is delivered promptly. It is binding as to the amount of loss and comes with a complete, auditable record of how every figure was reached, built to hold up under audit, regulatory review, or litigation. The file closes cleanly, and Coda stays available for the questions that follow.
A sound claims process carries the vast majority of losses to a fair outcome. The rare exception turns on judgment no process or model is built to supply.
Claim technologies move most losses quickly and accurately, and Coda relies on them every day. But any tool carries only the judgment built into it, and a complex loss can sit outside what these systems were meant to see. Coda knows them at the level of their rules, not just their screens, so it can tell where they fit a file and where the file needs judgment beyond what they can give.
Claims operations are measured on cycle time and cost, as they have to be. For most files, speed and accuracy sit comfortably together. The complex dispute is the exception. It needs more time and closer scrutiny than a high-volume workflow is meant to spend, and giving it exactly that is the Coda standard.
The hardest losses to staff are the rare, severe ones, because the experience they require is scarce by definition. When that depth is not on a file, the number can miss in either direction, overstated as easily as understated. Coda answers that directly: one seasoned practitioner owns the file end to end, from first review to final number, and is held to the same method every time.
None of this is a shortcoming of the system; it is the nature of the rare file that falls outside it. The judgment a process or model cannot supply is exactly what Coda brings to that file.
Michael Chancellor
Founder & Managing Principal · Coda Claim Solutions
Houston, Texas
Michael is the founder of Coda and its principal appraiser — retained by carriers and policyholders alike, and bound to neither. A complex, disputed loss turns on technical detail: how the estimate was built, where scope and pricing truly diverge, and whether the documentation survives scrutiny.
He has worked all of it — building these estimates in the field, reviewing them for accuracy at scale, and helping write the standards the industry measures them by. Every Coda file runs to one standard: a senior appraiser owns it start to finish, scope reconciled line by line, the award documented to hold up under internal audit, regulatory review, and litigation.
Field adjuster, trainer, manager, QA leader, and claims-technology executive — every seat in the property-claims lifecycle.
Direct command of the highest-severity, highest-scrutiny files, in the field and under quality assurance.
Quality-assurance accountability for claim accuracy across large claim portfolios.
Wrote estimating protocols and QA guidelines, led a ~50-person QA team, and shaped the SaaS rules the industry uses to measure estimate accuracy at scale.
Start an engagement
Tell us the kind of matter and how to reach you. Every engagement is handled directly, start to finish, and held to the same standard whoever brings it.