Identify Subrogation Opportunities
Claims where a third party genuinely caused or contributed to the loss carry real subrogation potential, but adjusters handling a full caseload rarely have time to comb every paying claim for liability signals — a police report noting the other driver's citation, a contract clause shifting fault, a product defect. Lower-value claims get skipped first because the perceived recovery doesn't justify the manual effort, and by the time anyone notices a pattern, the statute of limitations on pursuing that specific claim type in that jurisdiction has often already narrowed or closed.
STARTING PRICE
From €299
Standard tier · Multi-step workflow with AI extraction/decisioning and 2-3 integrations.
Get a quote →Saves roughly 5-8 hrs/week of manual claim-file review for missed recovery potential.
How the automation works
We screen every claim as it moves through processing for subrogation indicators — third-party fault references, contractual liability-shifting language, product or premises defect mentions, and prior-claim patterns pointing to a responsible party — and generate a scored referral with the supporting evidence attached, including the applicable jurisdiction's statute-of-limitations deadline for that claim type. Referrals go to a subrogation specialist who confirms liability and decides whether to pursue recovery; the tool identifies opportunity, it never asserts fault or initiates a recovery action on its own. Because screening runs on every claim regardless of dollar value, lower-value claims that were previously skipped for lack of adjuster time now get the same review as large ones.
Process flow
- 01
Claim enters processing trigger
Every claim is screened as part of standard processing, not selectively based on claim size.
- 02
Scan for liability signals ai
Claim narrative, police reports, contracts and documentation are scanned for third-party fault references, liability-shifting clauses and known defect patterns.
- 03
Attach jurisdiction deadline integration
The applicable statute-of-limitations window for that claim type and jurisdiction is pulled and attached to any flagged referral, so timing isn't a separate manual lookup.
- 04
Score referral confidence ai
Flagged claims are scored on the strength of the liability signal, distinguishing a corroborated fault finding from a disputed or partial one.
- 05
Route to subrogation specialist output
Scored referrals with supporting evidence go to a subrogation specialist who confirms liability and decides whether to pursue — the flag is a recommendation, never an automatic recovery action.
- 06
Track referral outcome output
Pursued, declined and expired referrals are logged, feeding back into how future signals get scored.
Inputs
- Claim narratives and adjuster notes
- Police and incident reports
- Applicable contracts and policy language
- Jurisdiction statute-of-limitations data
- Prior confirmed subrogation outcomes
Outputs
- Scored subrogation referrals
- Evidence packages per referral
- Jurisdiction deadline flags
- Referral outcome log
Works with
Prefer a fully custom build instead of an off-the-shelf integration? We scope both options during your free consultation — most jobs like this one work fine on standard connectors, but higher-volume or non-standard systems sometimes need bespoke API work, reflected in the complex tier.
Where this goes wrong if you get it wrong
- Flagging a claim for subrogation must never delay or reduce what's paid to the insured — making the insured whole comes first regardless of subrogation status in nearly every jurisdiction, and a screening process that even appears to hold up payment pending a fault review creates real liability.
- Statute-of-limitations windows for subrogation actions vary by state and by claim type, and a system that flags opportunity without attaching the specific applicable deadline will surface real recoveries after the window to actually pursue them has closed.
- A police report or contract clause citing partial or disputed fault is not the same as confirmed liability, and treating it as fully-attributed will send a specialist chasing a recovery that collapses on first contact with the other party's insurer — the referral needs a confidence score, not a binary flag.
- Low-dollar claims get skipped for subrogation review under manual processes because the recovery doesn't seem to justify adjuster time, but that's a labor-cost argument that doesn't apply once screening is automated — under-tuning confidence thresholds to suppress small-claim referrals just reintroduces the same blind spot on purpose.
Frequently asked questions
Does this decide who's at fault?
No. It flags claims with liability signals worth a specialist's attention and attaches the supporting evidence — a subrogation specialist confirms fault and decides whether to pursue recovery.
Does a subrogation flag delay the claimant's payout?
No — the insured is paid according to their policy regardless of subrogation status. Recovery from a third party happens after, and separately from, making the insured whole.
How does this catch opportunities on small claims?
Every claim is screened regardless of dollar value, since the manual time cost that causes small claims to get skipped for review doesn't apply once the screening itself is automated.
What happens to the statute-of-limitations deadline once a claim is flagged?
It's pulled and attached to the referral automatically based on jurisdiction and claim type, so the recovery window is visible to the specialist from the moment the referral is created.