The_Assessor_Spring 2026 web - Flipbook - Page 24
JOURNAL
TOTAL LOSSES
THE OUTCOME IS NO
LONGER ENOUGH –
TOTAL LOSS
DECISIONS
MUST BE
EVIDENCED
An interview on motor claims, Consumer Duty, and why
evidence-led decision-making is becoming critical in total loss.
s regulatory
expectations around
transparency and
customer outcomes
continue to rise –
alongside a growing volume of total
loss claims across the market – the way
insurers evidence total loss decisions
are coming under increasing scrutiny.
A
Richard Eadie, Managing Director of
Service Certainty, brings more than
20 years of industry experience, having
started his career in engineering
and total loss assessment. Working
directly within the claims process gave
him early insight into the growing
disconnect between insurer
decision-making, evidential
transparency, and customer
understanding – long before the issue
became a regulatory focus.
Recognising the need for a more
robust, evidence-led approach to
total loss decision-making, Service
Certainty became the 昀椀rst business
in the sector to champion structured
evidential reporting and auditable
decision support. At a time when the
market largely relied on outcomes
alone, the business identi昀椀ed the
increasing importance of being able
to clearly demonstrate how and why a
decision had been reached – not only
to support operational consistency,
but to strengthen customer trust and
regulatory con昀椀dence.
Today, with Consumer Duty placing
greater emphasis on fair value,
transparency, and demonstrable
24
customer outcomes, the industry
is increasingly moving toward the
principles Service Certainty identi昀椀ed
years ago: that the outcome alone is
no longer enough – insurers must also
be able to evidence the journey behind
the decision.
How is the approach to total
loss decisions evolving in today’s
market?
Richard: “We’re seeing a clear shift
toward more evidence-led
decision-making.
“Total loss assessments have always
involved professional judgement,
but insurers are now under greater
pressure to demonstrate how and
why decisions were reached. That
means decisions increasingly need to
be supported by structured, reliable
evidence from the outset – not only
to improve consistency, but to ensure
outcomes can be clearly justi昀椀ed later
if challenged.
“The focus is no longer just on
reaching the right outcome. It’s on
being able to evidence how that
outcome was achieved.
“Not forgetting of course that
consumers expect decisions to be
taken fast to give them the certainty
they want after such a dif昀椀cult moment,
a balance that needs to be struck”
What’s driving that shift?
“A major factor is the changing
regulatory environment.
“Under the FCA’s Consumer Duty,
there’s a strong emphasis on fair
value, good customer outcomes, and
importantly, the ability to demonstrate
both.
“In a total loss scenario, that creates
a much greater need for transparency
around valuation and settlement
decisions. Insurers increasingly need a
documented rationale that shows how
a 昀椀gure was reached, what evidence
supported it, and how that decision
was communicated to the customer.
“The expectation now is not simply
that decisions are fair, but that they are
demonstrably fair.”
Where do insurers typically look to
strengthen that process?
“A lot of the attention is now focused
on the earliest stages of the claim, not
only to make quick decisions but to
capture everything required to ensure
that decision is demonstrably fair.’
“From my background in engineering,
I’ve seen how much the quality of the
initial evidence in昀氀uences everything
that follows. Where information is
accurate, consistent, and captured
properly at the outset, decisions tend
to be more robust and far easier to
support later in the process.
“Where evidence is incomplete or
inconsistent, that’s where variation,
delays, and disputes are more likely to
emerge. So, insurers are increasingly
looking at how they strengthen that
evidential foundation from day one.”
THE ASSESSORS JOURNAL | SPRING 2026 | www.iaea-online.org/news/the-assessor
