Insurance Inspections and New Technology Explained

Published Date: 08/21/2024

The insurance industry stands at a technological crossroads. New tools—satellite imaging, drones, AI-powered risk modeling, and digital self-inspections—have the potential to revolutionize how insurers evaluate properties. Yet many consumers today feel blindsided, frustrated, and even violated by how these innovations are being used.



That tension took center stage at the Summer 2024 National Council of Insurance Legislators (NCOIL) Meeting, where insurance expert, agency owner, and radio host Karl Susman delivered candid remarks about inspections, consumer perception, and the urgent need for clear regulatory guidelines.

His message was simple but powerful: technology isn’t the enemy—poor rollout and lack of transparency are.

Inspections Aren’t New, But the Process Is

Susman began by reminding lawmakers that inspections have always been part of insurance underwriting.

“When an insurance company is insuring a property, they’re going to look at the property. That’s just part of the process,” he said.

Decades ago, inspections were often handled by agents themselves. Susman recalled walking around homes with a measuring wheel, tracking the perimeter by hand. Consumers didn’t love it, but they at least knew who was on their property and why.

As insurers grew larger and more centralized, inspections shifted to in-house staff and then to third-party vendors. Each step added distance between insurer and policyholder—and with that, growing mistrust.

When company employees started showing up, homeowners assumed they were “on the insurer’s side” and there to find every flaw. So carriers pivoted again and outsourced inspections to independent firms.

The result was often confusion and confrontation. Inspectors arrived unannounced, sent cryptic text messages, or appeared on properties without clear identification. Susman shared stories of inspectors being chased off by homeowners, sometimes at gunpoint.

“It’s a difficult job for inspectors,” he said. “But it’s also invasive for consumers. You’ve got strangers showing up with no clear explanation of who they are or what they’re doing. It’s not a good experience for anyone.”

The Rise and Challenges of Self-Inspections

To address those concerns, some carriers turned to self-inspections—inviting homeowners to use their phones to take photos or videos of their properties through apps or web portals.

On paper, it looked like a win-win: no strangers at the door, fewer privacy worries, and lower inspection costs. In reality, it introduced new problems.

“Consumers are smart,” Susman said with a smile. “If there’s an area that doesn’t look so good, it just might not show in that picture.”

Without oversight, self-inspections produced inconsistent and sometimes incomplete data. Later, when aerial or satellite images revealed obvious issues—overgrown trees, damaged roofs, debris—carriers questioned why those risks weren’t disclosed earlier.

“All of a sudden there were things that were clearly there years ago that they were just now finding,” Susman said.

Self-inspections are still being refined, but compliance, accuracy, and consistency remain real challenges.

Aerial and Satellite Imagery: Powerful but Poorly Rolled Out

From Google Maps to drone flyovers, insurers now have access to near-constant visual data on insured properties. In theory, these tools can sharpen underwriting, prevent losses, and help detect fraud. According to Susman, the technology isn’t the problem—its rollout is.

“The industry failed horrifically in rolling this technology out,” he said. “Number one, they didn’t tell anybody about it.”

Many agents only learned about aerial imaging after clients received non-renewal or cancellation letters citing “roof condition” or “debris on property” based on images homeowners didn’t even know existed.

“We’d ask, ‘How do you know that?’” he recalled. “And they’d say, ‘We just know.’ Eventually they’d admit they were using Google Maps—or satellite photos from four years ago.”

Homeowners were being judged on outdated images taken before roofs were replaced or repairs were made. That fueled a perception that carriers were hiding behind vague data.

“The messaging was so bad,” Susman said. “Consumers thought, ‘They’re trying to get me.’ Suddenly we’re defending ourselves against outdated images and vague data. That’s no way to build trust.”

The Real Issue: Communication and Transparency

Despite the criticism, Susman was clear: aerial imagery and other technologies have enormous potential to improve risk management for everyone.

“If this had been rolled out properly, we wouldn’t even be having this conversation,” he said. “It really is a good thing for everybody. It eliminates bad information, reduces invasions of privacy, and helps everyone get accurate data.”

The missing piece is transparency.

Consumers should be told:

• When and how their properties are being viewed
• What the inspection data shows
• How they can address identified issues

That, Susman argued, largely didn’t happen. Instead, people were blindsided by decisions based on images they didn’t know existed.

“Consumers should be told when and how their properties are being viewed, what the data shows, and how they can address it,” he said. “That didn’t happen. Instead, they were blindsided.”

Why Clear Inspection Guidelines Are Essential

Susman urged legislators and regulators to create clear rules governing how inspection and imaging data are collected, used, and shared.

“We need guidelines that consumers understand and carriers can follow,” he said. “That benefits everyone.”

Insurers and consumers, he emphasized, actually share the same fundamental goal: preventing loss.

“Insurance companies would prefer you never have a claim,” Susman said. “And consumers would love never to have a loss. So we’re on the same page.”

The challenge is turning that shared objective into a transparent, fair process.

If insurers can use technology to spot potential problems—like standing water on a flat roof, overloaded decks, or hazardous trees—they should share that information with the property owner.

“Let the homeowner fix it before it becomes a claim,” he suggested.

Fewer losses mean lower costs for carriers and potentially lower premiums and better availability for policyholders.

The Timeliness Problem: Old Images, New Decisions

Another concern is the age of the images used to make underwriting decisions.

“If you’re non-renewing me today,” Susman said, “then the risk better look like that today—not six months ago, not twelve months ago.”

With modern imaging capabilities and rapidly falling costs, he argued there’s no reason carriers should rely on years-old photos to make current decisions.

“With the cost savings we’re talking about, it shouldn’t be difficult to have another company come out and do a flyover every few months,” he said. “That doesn’t sound unreasonable. It’s only getting cheaper.”

He believes that up-to-date imaging should be used as an early-warning system, not just a basis for cancellations.

“If the carrier sees something concerning, they should notify the consumer proactively,” he said. “Give them a chance to fix it before it becomes a reason for cancellation or non-renewal.”

A Better Model: Collaboration, Not Confrontation

In the long run, Susman believes the solution is collaboration between regulators, insurers, and consumers—not confrontation.

“Technology isn’t going away,” he said. “It’s been here. What we need to do now is get a handle on it and make sure the information provided to carriers is also provided clearly to consumers—and in time for them to take action.”

His vision centers on three goals:

• Carriers use technology to identify risk earlier
• Consumers receive clear, timely information and opportunities to fix issues
• Regulators ensure that data use is fair, transparent, and accountable

If regulators require carriers to share inspection data with policyholders in real time—or close to it—everyone stands to gain:

• Fewer surprises for consumers
• Fewer large claims for insurers
• Stronger trust in the system overall

“If we can put together guidelines that require carriers to share data with policyholders in real time,” Susman said, “we’ll reduce losses, improve relationships, and restore faith in the system.”

From Inspections to Innovation: Using Tech Wisely

Susman’s remarks point to a larger truth: insurance must modernize without losing public trust.

Automation, AI, and imaging tools are powerful—but only as effective as the confidence they inspire. Without clear communication and responsible rollout, even the best technology can erode that trust.

“Nobody wants a loss,” he repeated. “If carriers use this technology to prevent them, everybody wins.”

The goal, in his view, isn’t to slow innovation—it’s to humanize it.

The Takeaway: Guidelines, Not Guesswork

Susman’s comments resonated because they balanced realism with optimism. He didn’t argue against technology or regulation. Instead, he called for better alignment between the two.

“We’re all beating the same drum,” he said. “We just need to make sure we’re in rhythm.”

A standardized framework for how property data is gathered, verified, and communicated could bring that rhythm back to an industry struggling to catch up with its own tools.

If insurers commit to sharing inspection data clearly and promptly—and consumers are given time and guidance to respond—everyone benefits:

• Fewer claims
• More stable premiums
• Higher trust and transparency

“Loss prevention is good for everybody—the carrier, the consumer, and the community,” Susman said.

Closing Thoughts: Technology With Trust

Karl Susman’s remarks at the NCOIL Summer 2024 Meeting captured the growing friction between technological capability and consumer expectations. But they also offered a path forward built on communication, collaboration, and common sense.

“The technology exists. It’s not going away,” he said. “What we have to do now is use it wisely—to protect consumers, not punish them.”

That’s the balance the insurance industry must strike in the digital era: smarter data, stronger safeguards, and a shared commitment to fairness.

Because as Susman reminded everyone in the room, insurance only works when both sides trust each other.