Supercharging Loss Run Analysis for Complex Submissions with Doc Chat – Underwriter | Commercial Auto, GL/Construction, Property

Supercharging Loss Run Analysis for Complex Submissions with Doc Chat – Underwriter | Commercial Auto, GL/Construction, Property
At Nomad Data we help you automate document heavy processes in your business. From document information extraction to comparisons to summaries across hundreds of thousands of pages, we can help in the most tedious and nuanced document use cases.
Thank you! Your submission has been received!
Oops! Something went wrong while submitting the form.

Supercharging Loss Run Analysis for Complex Submissions with Doc Chat – Underwriter | Commercial Auto, GL/Construction, Property

Loss runs are the heartbeat of profitable underwriting—but they’re also the bottleneck. Underwriters in Commercial Auto, General Liability & Construction, and Property & Homeowners regularly receive broker submissions that include hundreds or even thousands of pages of loss run reports, prior carrier claims summaries, and supporting exhibits. Manually sifting through this volume to identify frequency, severity, trending, and anomalies is slow, error-prone, and increasingly out of step with today’s speed of business. That’s exactly why Nomad Data built Doc Chat for Insurance—a purpose-built suite of AI agents that automates end-to-end document review and delivers instant, defensible insights for underwriting decisions.

If you’re searching for loss run report automation for underwriters or evaluating an AI review of complex broker submission loss runs, this guide shows how Doc Chat transforms loss run analysis from an hours-to-days task into minutes—without sacrificing accuracy, auditability, or compliance. By ingesting entire submission packets, normalizing inconsistent formats across carriers, and answering underwriting questions in real time, Doc Chat equips underwriters to spot patterns and outliers faster, price more precisely, and respond to brokers with confidence.

The Underwriter’s Challenge: Volume, Variability, and Velocity

In all three lines—Commercial Auto, General Liability & Construction, and Property & Homeowners—underwriters need a complete, accurate picture of historical loss activity to assess risk selection, pricing, and terms. Yet broker submissions arrive in wildly different formats and quality levels. One carrier’s loss run shows paid and incurred with detailed transactional history; another collapses rows, merges columns, or omits reserves altogether. Some include litigation indicators, subrogation, or recovery notes; others bury that detail in attachment pages or send it separately as a prior carrier claims summary. It’s not just time-consuming—it’s risky. Missed exclusions, duplicate claims, or misunderstood coverage triggers can lead to pricing errors, underestimated exposures, and unexpected loss ratios.

Commercial Auto: Exposure Alignment and Nuclear Severity

Commercial Auto underwriters must reconcile loss history against exposure fundamentals like number of units, miles driven, driver lists, radius of operation, and garaging. But loss runs often omit key cues like vehicle class, VIN linkages, or claimant type. High-severity bodily injury losses may be interspersed with property damage fender-benders; reserve changes and re-opened claims might mask true severity trends. When broker packets include vehicle schedules, MVR summaries, FNOL forms, ISO claim reports, and prior carrier claims summaries, the manual synthesis becomes overwhelming. One missed large loss, a pattern of similar BI claims across years, or a cluster of litigated claims can materially shift pricing and retention strategy.

General Liability & Construction: Classification Nuance and Completed Ops

GL and Construction loss runs demand understanding of operations by class code, subcontractor mix, wrap-up implications, and completed operations exposure. Frequency in premises claims may be acceptable, while even a few severity spikes in products or completed ops could drive terms and deductibles. Submissions may include OSHA 300/300A logs, ACORD 126/125/131, certificates, job schedules, and broker submissions with inconsistent narratives. Underwriters must detect inflation in medical-only claims migrating to indemnity, repetitive injury patterns by site or subcontractor, or reserve strengthening trends as litigations develop—often buried across dozens of PDF appendices.

Property & Homeowners: COPE Detail, Cat Exposure, and Water Loss Trends

Property and Homeowners underwriting hinges on COPE details (Construction, Occupancy, Protection, Exposure), statement of values (SOV), geography, and cat perils. Yet loss runs may mix weather and non-weather events, blur sublimits, or omit cause-of-loss categorization. Water damage frequency, number of fire incidents, or theft clusters can be scattered across multiple carriers’ run formats. Without systematic normalization and analysis, it’s easy to miss that three “small” water claims are really a systemic plumbing issue, or that wind/hail frequency spikes are concentrated in a subset of rooftops with inadequate protection.

How Loss Run Analysis Is Handled Manually Today

Ask any underwriter what happens when a complex submission lands and you’ll hear the same story: downloads, copy-paste, Excel gymnastics, and a lot of hope that nothing critical is buried in page 87. The steps vary by team, but they generally look like this:

  • Collect loss runs and attachments from email or portal, often across multiple prior carriers and policy periods.
  • Open each PDF, identify column structures (claim number, date of loss, paid, incurred, reserve, cause, status, litigation flag), and manually re-key or copy data into a master spreadsheet.
  • Normalize inconsistent fields (e.g., “BI” vs. “Bodily Injury,” “Indemnity” vs. “Indem”), fix date formats, and align transaction-level vs. claim-level data.
  • De-duplicate claims that appear on multiple runs, reconcile re-opened claims, and track reserve changes over time.
  • Cross-reference with prior carrier claims summaries, ISO claim reports, and broker narratives when fields are missing or ambiguous.
  • Manually compute frequency, severity, paid-to-incurred ratios, time-to-close, and lag analysis; bucket by cause-of-loss, location, contract/site, or unit.
  • Review attachments like FNOL forms, OSHA logs, driver lists, and SOV/COPE exhibits to reconcile exposure versus total loss dollars.
  • Summarize findings in an underwriting memo; produce versioned outputs for referral, reinsurance, or pricing model inputs.

The result: days to weeks of effort per large account, high potential for missed red flags, and significant variation in the thoroughness of analysis from one desk to another. It’s precisely the kind of manual, repetitive processing that drains underwriting cycles and erodes consistency.

What Modern Loss Run Report Automation for Underwriters Should Deliver

A best-in-class solution should ingest entire submission packets—loss run reports, prior carrier claims summaries, broker submissions, and related exhibits—then normalize, analyze, and answer questions in real time. That’s what Doc Chat by Nomad Data provides. It’s not a generic summarizer; it’s a suite of insurance-trained AI agents tuned to loss runs, coverage language, and underwriting workflows across Commercial Auto, GL/Construction, and Property.

Core Capabilities Tailored to Loss Runs and Submissions

  • Mass Ingestion at Scale: Load entire claim files and submission packets—thousands of pages at once. Doc Chat handles variable structures across carriers and years.
  • Normalization Across Formats: Harmonizes field names, date formats, paid/incurred/reserve structures, cause-of-loss labels, and litigation indicators—even when embedded in dense tables or free text.
  • Automated Frequency/Severity Analysis: Calculates per-period frequency, severity distributions, paid vs. incurred progression, reopened rates, time-to-close, and loss triangles where data allows.
  • Exposure-Aware Insights: Connects loss dollars to exposure bases (e.g., mileage, number of vehicles, payroll, receipts, TIV) to generate frequency per exposure unit and loss ratios by segment.
  • Anomaly and Pattern Detection: Flags outliers (large losses, clustered dates/locations, repeated mechanisms of injury, repeated claimant/provider names) and reveals hidden trends (reserve strengthening, subrogation gaps, high reopened rates).
  • Real-Time Q&A Across the Whole File: Ask, “List all BI claims over $250K in the last 36 months,” or “Show all water losses by building with total paid and time-to-close,” and get instant answers with page-level citations.
  • Export-Ready Outputs: Push clean datasets into rating tools, Excel, or underwriting workbenches. Generate standardized underwriting memos aligned to your playbook.

AI Review of Complex Broker Submission Loss Runs

Unlike generic tools, Doc Chat was designed to crack the hardest part of loss run analysis: making sense of inconsistent, incomplete, multi-carrier packets. It can reconcile names and policy numbers across carriers, detect missing periods, and correlate claim numbers with narrative references found in separate broker submissions. When a GL & Construction account has a handful of completed ops claims that look innocuous at first glance, Doc Chat can highlight that severities spiked post-closeout and that reserve changes coincide with litigation milestones—a key signal for attachment points and deductibles. For Property risks, Doc Chat can distinguish weather vs. non-weather losses, classify causes (water, fire, theft, wind/hail), and quickly show whether small, frequent water losses are correlated to specific buildings, vintages, or protection classes.

Cross-Document Intelligence: Connecting Loss Runs, Claims Summaries, and Exhibits

Real underwriting work isn’t confined to a single document. It’s the synthesis of multiple source types into defensible decisions. Doc Chat connects the dots between:

Loss run reports: Transactional claim histories, paid/incurred, reserves, cause-of-loss codes, claim status, reopened flags, subrogation, salvage.

Prior carrier claims summaries: Roll-ups by coverage part, year, or location; sometimes the only place litigation or subrogation is explicit.

Broker submissions: Narrative context, exposure updates, risk mitigation measures, property improvements, safety programs, driver training, subcontractor controls.

Doc Chat consolidates these into a unified analytical fabric. It can validate that the sum of losses by year matches aggregate figures in a prior carrier summary; highlight gaps where the broker narrative cites a loss not present in the run; and pinpoint whether mitigation steps cited in the submission actually align with the timing of reduced frequency or faster claim closures. The result is a more complete, auditable story about the risk.

Line-of-Business Nuance, Encoded

Commercial Auto

Doc Chat calculates frequency per 100 vehicles or per million miles, segments by claim type (BI, PD, UM/UIM), and spotlights high-cost BI severity. It can identify recurring issues like rear-end collisions in dense urban operations, map losses to garaging locations, and isolate litigated claims. It also correlates driver lists and MVR summaries when included in the packet to show whether prior violations align with loss history. Underwriters can ask: “Which units or routes have the highest frequency?”; “How many claims closed without payment vs. those that resulted in indemnity?”; or “List all third-party BI claims over $100K with reserve strengthening in the last 12 months.”

General Liability & Construction

For GL & Construction, Doc Chat breaks results down by premises vs. products vs. completed operations, tagging repetitive mechanisms of injury and identifying subcontractor-related trends when the submission includes vendor or site-level detail. It underscores OSHA recordables in the context of the loss run, providing a consistent lens across OSHA 300/300A, ACORD 126/125/131, and loss narratives. Ask: “Summarize all completed ops claims closed in the last 24 months and their average time-to-close,” or “Show products claims per $1M receipts by product family.”

Property & Homeowners

For Property & Homeowners, Doc Chat merges SOV data with loss runs to compute frequency per location, cause-of-loss clustering, and severity by construction type and protection class. It flags high-frequency water damage by building stack, rising severity in a subset of roofs, or suspicious bursts of small theft claims. Ask: “List all water losses by building with total paid, reserves, and average time-to-close,” or “Show wind/hail frequency and severity by roof age and protection class.”

From Hours to Minutes: Real-Time Q&A and Page-Level Proof

Underwriters don’t just need dashboards. They need answers—fast, accurate, and backed by evidence. Doc Chat’s real-time Q&A lets you type natural-language queries across the entire submission packet and get immediate answers with clickable citations back to the precise page or row. That means your referral notes, pricing justifications, and broker responses are both rapid and defensible. As highlighted in our client story with Great American Insurance Group, page-level explainability is essential for trust and auditability—see how adjusters leveraged this capability in complex files in Reimagining Insurance Claims Management: GAIG Accelerates Complex Claims with AI.

Why Keyword Tools Fail—and How Doc Chat Goes Beyond Extraction

Traditional tools break the moment formats change or when the insight you need isn’t spelled out in a single field. Loss runs routinely require inference across multiple tables, attachments, and narratives. Doc Chat was built precisely for that challenge. It doesn’t just scrape fields—it reads like an expert, applies your underwriting standards, and assembles the insight you actually need. For a deeper dive into why this matters, explore Beyond Extraction: Why Document Scraping Isn’t Just Web Scraping for PDFs.

Outputs Underwriters Can Use Immediately

Doc Chat produces the artifacts underwriters and risk analysts need to move fast and stay consistent:

  • Standardized Loss Analytics: Frequency/severity by period, cause-of-loss, unit/location, litigation status, and reopen rate.
  • Exposure-Indexed Metrics: Per-vehicle, per-million-miles, per-$1M payroll/receipts, per-$1M TIV.
  • Outlier and Anomaly Flags: Large loss outliers, reserve strengthening patterns, clusters by date/location/mechanism, repeated claimant/provider patterns.
  • Underwriting Summary Memos: Auto-generated narratives aligned to your playbook, including coverage cautions, pricing levers, and recommended terms (deductibles/retentions, sublimits, exclusions, attachments).
  • Clean Data Exports: Structured CSV/Excel segments for pricing models, referral packs, reinsurance submissions, and portfolio reviews.

Business Impact: Faster Quotes, Better Decisions, Lower Leakage

When loss run review shrinks from days to minutes, everything improves:

Time savings: Doc Chat ingests entire claim files and submission packets at scale, collapsing manual review time by orders of magnitude. In medical and complex claims contexts, our systems process hundreds of thousands of pages in minutes, and the same architectural advantages apply to underwriting submissions. The practical outcome: more quotes turned around each week and fewer late responses.

Cost reduction: By automating extraction, normalization, and analysis, underwriters and assistants spend less time on data wrangling and more on risk selection and negotiation. Teams handle more volume without incremental headcount, and overtime drops during seasonal surges.

Accuracy and consistency: Machines don’t fatigue. Doc Chat applies the same rigor on page 1 as page 1,000 and follows your underwriting playbook every time. That means fewer missed red flags, fewer pricing errors, and better alignment with appetite.

Higher hit ratios and better pricing adequacy: Fast, insight-rich responses delight brokers and differentiate your submission experience. More importantly, analytics that capture true frequency/severity—and their drivers—enable appropriately priced terms and protect your loss ratio.

Auditability and defensibility: Every metric and narrative comes with citations. Supervisors, reinsurers, and regulators can trace conclusions back to source pages instantly.

Why Nomad Data: The Best Partner for Underwriting Teams

Most AI tools give you generic models and hope they fit. Nomad takes a different path. We train Doc Chat on your underwriting playbooks, your document types, and your standards—the Nomad Process. That yields a solution tailored to Commercial Auto, GL/Construction, and Property & Homeowners underwriting, your terminology, and your decision frameworks.

White glove service: We partner with underwriting leaders and frontline underwriters to encode rules, capture unwritten heuristics, and bake in appetite signals. We do the heavy lifting so your teams can focus on risk.

Rapid implementation: Most customers are live in one to two weeks—starting with drag‑and‑drop uploads and moving to seamless integrations via API, SFTP, or your underwriting workbench.

Enterprise-grade trust: SOC 2 Type 2 controls, document-level traceability, and page-level citations. As shared by carriers in production, explainability builds trust and accelerates adoption.

Scales with your needs: Whether you’re piloting with a single practice or scaling across all lines, Doc Chat handles surges without adding headcount. Read how similar principles accelerated complex document work in AI's Untapped Goldmine: Automating Data Entry.

How Doc Chat Automates the End-to-End Loss Run Workflow

Let’s map today’s manual steps to Doc Chat’s automated pipeline for an AI review of complex broker submission loss runs across our three lines of business:

1) Intake & Classification: Drag-and-drop PDFs, spreadsheets, and scanned documents. Doc Chat automatically classifies loss run reports vs. prior carrier claims summaries vs. broker submissions vs. attachments (e.g., OSHA logs, SOV/COPE, driver lists, vehicle schedules).

2) Extraction & Normalization: Using insurance-tuned parsing, Doc Chat extracts key fields—claim number, DOL, paid, incurred, reserves, cause-of-loss, status, litigation, subrogation, salvage, and more—and standardizes them across formats and carriers.

3) Deduplication & Reconciliation: The system de-duplicates claims appearing across multiple runs, links narrative references in submissions to specific claims, and flags missing periods or mismatches between roll-ups and line-item totals.

4) Analytics & Anomaly Detection: Frequency/severity, paid-to-incurred ratios, reserve development, reopened rates, time-to-close, exposure-indexed metrics (per vehicle, miles, payroll, receipts, TIV). Outlier and cluster detection highlight the “why” behind the numbers.

5) Real-Time Q&A & Memo Generation: Ask questions in natural language and receive instant, cited answers. Generate underwriting memos that summarize insights by coverage part, period, and exposure—aligned to your playbook.

6) Export & Integration: Push clean data to Excel, rating worksheets, or your underwriting workbench. Append citations for referral packs and reinsurance.

Concrete Examples by Line

Commercial Auto

Submission includes three years of multi-carrier runs, a driver list, and a vehicle schedule. Doc Chat:

• Normalizes runs and links claims to garaging locations. • Computes frequency per million miles and highlights routes with elevated BI severity. • Flags a cluster of litigated claims coinciding with a change in driver hiring standards. • Generates a memo recommending increased retention, targeted safety training, and specific deductibles—cited to source pages.

General Liability & Construction

Submission includes ACORD apps, OSHA logs, and loss runs with mixed premises and completed ops. Doc Chat:

• Segments claims by coverage part and mechanism of injury. • Shows that completed ops claims spike post-project closeouts with reserve strengthening tied to litigation. • Computes loss ratios by class code proxy (from narrative) and recommends endorsements and aggregate deductibles. • Produces summarized findings aligned to your GL playbook.

Property & Homeowners

Submission includes SOV/COPE and multi-carrier loss runs. Doc Chat:

• Categorizes losses into water, fire, theft, wind/hail; separates weather vs. non-weather. • Identifies high-frequency water losses in a subset of buildings with older plumbing. • Computes severity distributions by construction/protection class and recommends water-detection sensors and sub-limits for high-frequency buildings. • Outputs a clean dataset for pricing and CAT modeling workflows.

From Backlog to Advantage: Speed and Scale Without Sacrificing Quality

Underwriting backlogs don’t just frustrate brokers—they reduce bind rates and compress the time available for rigorous analysis. Doc Chat removes the backlog by handling the mountains of documentation that used to slow teams down. As described in our medical-file post, systems at Nomad routinely handle massive volumes at machine speed—eliminating the bottleneck while improving thoroughness and consistency. See the paradigm shift in high-volume document review in The End of Medical File Review Bottlenecks.

Security, Governance, and Auditability That Underwriters and Compliance Trust

Insurance is a high-trust, highly regulated domain. Doc Chat supports SOC 2 Type 2 controls, maintains document- and page-level traceability for every answer, and offers easy verification through citations directly back to source content. This level of explainability is vital for internal audit, reinsurers, and regulators—and for building confidence across your underwriting, actuarial, and compliance teams.

Implementation in 1–2 Weeks: Start with Drag-and-Drop, Scale to Integration

Doc Chat was built to deliver value immediately. Day one, underwriters can drag-and-drop submission packets and start asking questions. As adoption grows, we integrate with your underwriting workbench, data lake, or workflow stack via API or SFTP. Most teams are fully live within one to two weeks with white glove onboarding, including playbook encoding, output templates, and pilot coaching.

Frequently Asked Questions

Does Doc Chat replace underwriters? No. Doc Chat removes the rote work—reading, extracting, normalizing—so underwriters can focus on judgment: risk selection, pricing, terms, and negotiation.

How does it handle inconsistent formats? Doc Chat was designed for variability. It harmonizes fields across different carrier layouts, even when critical information is embedded in tables or free text.

Will we get the same output every time? Yes—with your playbook. We configure standardized memo formats, dashboards, and exports so results are consistent, defensible, and easy to compare.

How do we know it’s right? Every answer and metric includes citations back to the source page or row. You can verify in one click.

What about data security? Nomad maintains enterprise-grade security and governance. Data remains protected, and we support strict audit requirements with full traceability.

Tying It All Together: A Better Way to Underwrite Loss History

Loss runs are too important to be slowed by manual review. With Doc Chat, underwriters in Commercial Auto, GL/Construction, and Property & Homeowners get a precise, comprehensive, and instantly explainable view of loss history—across any carrier or format. You’ll accelerate submissions, strengthen pricing adequacy, and build a defensible record of the decisions you make.

If your team is exploring loss run report automation for underwriters or evaluating an AI review of complex broker submission loss runs, Doc Chat provides the fastest path to results. Pair our white glove service with a 1–2 week implementation timeline, and your underwriters will be answering better questions—and getting better answers—by the end of the month.

Ready to turn loss runs into a competitive advantage? See Doc Chat for Insurance in action.

Learn More