For those who haven't been paying attention, Deft has aggressively pivoted from a firm historically focused solely on complex post-loss matters to one centered on a claims handling model that begins at policy inception, if not earlier, over the past two years. While much of the high-net-worth and large commercial property sectors have opted—shortsightedly, I would argue—for reductions in loss adjustment expenses as their primary means to combat excessive loss ratios, Deft has developed a program aimed at sustainably reducing loss ratios through a comprehensive approach to risk management. By engaging at policy inception, we establish relationships with both property and human elements from day one. This not only enables us to predict and prevent losses based on decades of claims experience but also positions us to efficiently settle claims when prevention efforts fall short. We continue to prove that this reconnection of underwriting and claims significantly reduces loss ratios in challenging markets like Florida, California, Texas, and Louisiana, surpassing any previous hypotheses.
This approach involves greater pre-loss carrier involvement through Deft's Risk Management Program to complement producers' efforts in educating clients, leveraging competent contractors for capital expenditures and efficient restoration, and where applicable, property management and board alignment—all adding up to the winning formula. Note that public adjusters and plaintiff attorneys do not have a seat at this table by design. To my colleagues and friends on that side of the aisle, I have no doubt that there will be ample work beyond the small segment of property insurers and producers willing to adopt Deft's holistic risk management solution at this stage. As I've consistently stated, if my team fails to deliver efficient and accurate claims settlements on behalf of our clients, we will collaborate with open arms in hopes that such representation can succeed where we have fallen short. We simply seek the opportunity to settle claims without resorting to costly representation preemptively. Furthermore, we advocate for reducing reliance on experts to assess post-loss matters when superior pre-existing condition data is readily available to us.
The message should be very clear: increased involvement pre-loss leads to fewer, better-informed, and more efficient post-loss outcomes. Aligning with Deft's shift to a predict-and-prevent mentality through our pre-loss interactions with both building and human elements is the solution for excessive loss ratios—not slashing claims handling expenses, which will only result in costly dispute resolution down the road.
-JK
