Document the loss.
Justify the scope.
Your inspection photos and a voice memo become a full narrative report — scope of damage, cause analysis, an estimate-ready scope table, and a section that shows why the scope you are asking for follows from what you documented in the field.
Free plan: 3 reports per month. No credit card required.
- 7 sections
- every policyholder report
- ~90 sec
- upload to Word doc
- Zero
- invented facts or figures
The report argues its own scope.
A carrier-side report states the scope. Yours has to survive someone reading it for a reason to pay less. So the policyholder version adds Basis for Recommended Scope — it introduces no new observations, it connects the ones you already documented to the repair you are recommending.
North and East Slope Replacement The field notes document approximately eleven hail strikes per one hundred square feet on the north slope, with significant granule loss across both the north and east slopes. This density and distribution of impacts is not confined to a discrete, patchable area; it extends across the measured field of both affected slopes. Spot repair of individual strikes is not practicable at this impact frequency — each strike represents a discrete point of mat bruising and granule loss, and the sheer number of impacts distributed across the slope surface means that any repair limited to individual strikes would leave a substantial portion of damaged shingle material in service. The south and west slopes are documented as clean, which establishes a defined boundary for the scope of replacement at the north and east slopes and supports a slope-by-slope replacement recommendation rather than a whole-roof replacement at minimum.
The continuity of the north and east slope surfaces as described in the field notes and Photo 2 — a continuous field of three-tab asphalt shingles — means that partial repair within those slopes would result in a visually discontinuous surface where new material meets aged material across the same unbroken plane. [ADJUSTER TO CONFIRM — verify material availability and match.]
Turbine Vent — Replacement The turbine vent housing is dented and has lost its paint coating. The field notes explicitly characterize this as a replace rather than repair item, and the observed physical deformation of the housing supports that determination. A dented turbine vent housing cannot be restored to its pre-loss geometry and function through repair in the field.
Generated from six captioned photos and a 90-second voice memo on a demo hail claim. No human edits.
What it is doing there
- Bounding the ask. It scoped replacement to the north and east slopes and said the south and west were clean — a limit a reviewer can verify, not a whole-roof reach.
- Tying damage to the cause. Interior ceiling damage is carried back to the hail-damaged vent boot, so the consequential item is not left floating.
- Flagging the policy line. Where coverage of consequential interior damage matters, it stops and writes
[ADJUSTER TO CONFIRM — verify against policy].
What it refuses to write.
An overreaching report hands the other side a reason to discount all of it — including the parts you documented properly. Three things are held out of every policyholder report on purpose.
Three inputs, one document.
Photograph the loss
Drag in your inspection photos. Each one comes back with a one-sentence caption naming location, scope, and terminology — no speculation about cause.
Talk it through
Record the walkthrough the way you would describe it on the drive home. The transcript becomes the substantive backbone of the narrative. Exact measurements can be entered as structured field data, which overrides everything else.
Review and export
Every section is editable, and any single section can be regenerated on its own. Export to Word when it reads the way you would have written it.
Working both sides of the claim?
Report audience is a per-claim setting, not an account type. Carrier files keep the neutral six-section format and the carrier-specific formatting conventions; policyholder files get the seven-section version above. Same workspace, same capture flow.
Questions worth asking.
- How is this different from the carrier-side report?
- Report audience is a setting on each claim. Set it to Policyholder and the report gains a "Basis for Recommended Scope" section that justifies the scope from your documented observations, and it drops the carrier-specific formatting conventions — those exist to satisfy a carrier intake desk, which is not who you are writing for. Everything factual is generated the same way from the same inputs.
- Does it write coverage arguments for me?
- No, by design. It never quotes or characterizes policy language, coverage, limits, endorsements, deductibles, or code-upgrade provisions — none of that is in its inputs, so anything it produced there would be invention. Where the scope turns on a policy question it writes [ADJUSTER TO CONFIRM — verify against policy] and leaves the judgment to you.
- Will it inflate the scope to help my file?
- No, and that is the point. It is instructed that completeness and clear justification are the goal and that exaggeration is not — no inflated quantities, no damage beyond what your notes describe, no severity your observations do not support. On our own demo claim it recommended cosmetic dent repair on a gutter rather than replacement, because the field notes called the gutter functional.
- Who is the author of record?
- You are. You hold the license, you review every section in the editor, and you sign what goes out — the same relationship you would have with a draft from a junior associate. Every exported Word document carries an author-of-record and software-assist disclosure.
- I work both sides. Can I do that on one account?
- Yes. The audience is set per claim, not per account, so carrier files and policyholder files live side by side in the same workspace and each generates in its own voice.
- Is there really a free plan?
- Yes — 3 generated reports per month, all core features, no credit card. Enough to run it against a file you have already written by hand and compare.