Absolutely. We provide transparent, project-specific fee proposals based on the scope of work, project duration, and the level of expertise and technology required. Whether it’s a fixed-fee engagement for a specific assessment or an hourly rate for ongoing advisory, we’ll provide a detailed breakdown so there are no surprises.

An expert is most valuable when disputes involve scope, methodology, valuation, causation, or sequencing, rather than simple line‑item pricing differences. Matters escalate when early technical opinions are not grounded in defensible construction analysis or when valuation questions drift into coverage issues.

Industry commentary consistently points to disagreement over what is being appraised, not just how much it costs. Common pitfalls include scope boundaries, causation debates, matching issues, ordinance and law considerations, and the failure to satisfy policy conditions before appraisal is invoked.

Our role is to help keep appraisal focused on amount‑of‑loss questions, supported by transparent construction methodology.

Neutrality is grounded in process, documentation, and independence. Zelle and other insurance‑law resources emphasize that credible appraisers and umpires must separate valuation analysis from coverage determinations and avoid advocacy positions.

At Build | Intel, neutrality is maintained by clearly defining scope, disclosing assumptions, and applying repeatable methods grounded in construction practice.

We believe the best qualities for a neutral umpire are as follows:

·         Evaluate two competing positions and rule on the differences rather than splitting the difference.

·         Ensure every piece of evidence: Xactimate, forensic reports, protocols for cleaning/drying are given equal airtime, nothing ignored.

·         Listen, observe, hear every word from both parties.

·         Require joint inspections and joint meetings only, no deviations.

·         No winners/losers, goal is a mutual escape from litigation costs and delays and fair agreement for policyholders.

·         Our umpires perform line-by-line reconciliation. Break dispute down to small manageable items.

·         We reserve the right to hire a fourth expert if a competing forensic or technical issue hits a dead-in. Fourth experts hired only after both parties agree to that expert.

·         We provide a “draft” award with reasoning. This allows appraisers to point out factual errors, and we encourage a debate per this draft award to ensure fairness.