Published studies
Florida OPAGA 2010 study
- PA-handled claims: 574% higher settlement vs. non-PA for similar claims
- Hurricane claims: 747% higher with PA
- Specific to catastrophe claims
Industry data
- Consistent across multiple studies
- Florida data shows 2-10x settlement multiples depending on claim type
- Larger / more complex claims show larger multiples
What drives the impact
Documentation
- Full scope captured
- Hidden damage identified
- Proper Xactimate estimation
- Expert reports when warranted
Negotiation
- Statute citations
- Policy language specificity
- Carrier-pattern recognition
- Escalation threats credible
Time allocation
- PA dedicated time to claim
- Policyholder often without capacity
- Follow-through on every deadline
Outcome optimization
- Supplemental filings
- RCV holdback tracking
- Code-upgrade inclusion
- Matching-statute invocation
Caveats on the data
- Selection bias: more complex claims go to PAs
- Some of the multiple reflects initial-offer lowballing
- Not every claim benefits proportionally
- Small claims less affected
Practical implication
For claims large enough or complex enough to warrant PA involvement:
- Expect 30-200% improvement over unrepresented outcomes
- Net of fee, still materially better
- Non-financial benefits (time, stress, expertise) meaningful