Resources are finite. Property owners and their advocates need to allocate resources correctly. People do not have time for wild goose chases. Of all the wise fights to fight, perhaps the wisest and most cost effective is to push hard for a true, neutral umpire in appraisal.
Appraisal is the out-of-court dispute resolution process to resolve the amount of loss. In some states like Minnesota that includes the cause of the loss. It is an important process and can be a fair one if a true neutral umpire presides over the process. A true neutral umpire is one that will listen to all the evidence and render a fair decision without appeasing the insurer or insured. A good umpire is not beholden to insurers, or insureds, and will make a fair judgment call.
In the appraisal process, the insured property owner names an individual to serve as an appraiser. The insurance company names an appraiser too. These two individuals then choose a neutral umpire. To my way of thinking, it is critical that the appraiser for the property owner be strong and not accept any umpire candidate beholden to insurance companies. No umpire should fear insurance companies to the point they are afraid insurers will never hire them again if they fairly hear the evidence.
I encourage property owner appraisers to be strong on this issue of neutrality: only neutrals can be umpires. If ultimately the two appraisers cannot agree on a neutral umpire, one of the most cost-effective and wisest uses of resources is to go to court and ask a judge to nominate a neutral umpire.
Assuming the only dispute in court is who should serve as a neutral umpire, a court filing that only asks the judge to decide who will serve as a neutral umpire is very cost-effective. There should be no discovery or trial, both of which are time-consuming and expensive. When I make these motions, I can be efficient with my time as I have made such a motion many times and I know how to argue them. When a judge nominates a true neutral umpire, the result will be far better than an umpire who favors insurance companies. At a minimum, the process is usually fair: there is no built-in advantage for the insurer. An umpire selected by a judge is only beholden to the court, and the court only wants a fair process.
To be clear, many umpires who are not court appointed are fair and good umpires. I do not encourage people to run to the courthouse and ask a judge to appoint an umpire. An appraiser for the property owner should try and reach an agreement with the appraiser for the insurance company to nominate someone neutral and fair. The point of this post is to encourage property owners to select an appraiser that will be strong on the issue of naming a true, neutral umpire, and for property owners to consider going to court to fight for neutrality if needed. There is no reason to concede and allow an unfair umpire to serve on the appraisal panel. Filing in court for a fair and neutral umpire is cost-effective and a good value. A little money spent on neutrality goes a long way to an effective result.
Please email me if you have any questions about nominating a neutral umpire. My e-mail address is: ed@beckmannlawfirm.com.