Editor's note: This article is sponsored content by LexisNexis.
Attorney involvement continues to be a major factor in claims, and increased rep rates are contributing to rising BI severity costs. Today, BI paid amounts account for a larger share of claims dollars than they did just four years ago, rising from less than 20% in 2022 to more than 26% in 2025, according to the 2026 LexisNexis “U.S. Auto Insurance Trends Report.”
The complexion of a claim is changing. Attaining critical insights at FNOL, and before, is how carriers can reclaim the driver’s seat. Whether claims teams are working against delayed accident notifications, incomplete claimant information, or AI agents creating more sophisticated consumers, focusing on informed first contact at the earliest opportunity is how insurers can get ahead.
Here, Tanner Sheehan, vice president and general manager, U.S. claims, at LexisNexis Risk Solutions, reveals how accelerating the time to first contact helps carriers mitigate rising BI costs by establishing rapport between carriers and claimants and potentially driving down attorney representations rates.
Q: Do you think we’ve seen the tipping point when it comes to attorney-repped claims, or is this just the beginning?
Tanner Sheehan: Oh, we’re well past the tipping point. The question now is whether we’ve reached the peak. And I think the answer there is, “Probably not.”
Our research shows that 93% of consumers who hired an attorney for an injury claim are likely to do it again. Further areas of our research show that advice from friends and family is a leading reason why people hire attorneys. So, what you have is a very satisfied customer in that 93%, and those folks are telling their friends and family who have claims about that experience. The snowball has started rolling, and I don’t see it stopping.
Q: Why is the speed of contacting a claimant an important factor in mitigating attorney involvement?
Tanner Sheehan: We call it “the race for rapport.” After the accident happens, carriers need to do everything they can to establish contact with claimants and assure them that their needs will be taken care of. If they can do this with speed and empathy, they have a good chance of working one-on-one with the claimant. The issue is that the attorney is trying to do exactly the same thing, and the attorneys are doing a better job through advertising and making sure they’re the first call the claimant makes.
Q: What happens when carriers miss the window to reach out to the claimant early?
Tanner Sheehan: People get upset. Our 2024 consumer study found that claimants very often have to contact the at fault insurance company first, rather than the other way around. In the study, 71% of respondents who wound up hiring an attorney, but originally hadn’t planned to, say they were the ones to contact the carrier first. When people think they’re not going to get help, they go and find it themselves, and very often that’s with an attorney.
Q: What should carriers be doing right now to improve speed and early engagement?
Tanner Sheehan: It’s hard to control when the claim gets reported to you, but once it does it should be treated like an all-out race to make contact with the claimant. One of our flagship solutions, LexisNexis Claims Datafill, is designed to help carriers do exactly that. With a name and address, or a phone number, or a license plate and state, we give carriers a host of information about the driver or owner of the vehicle, from phone numbers to home addresses to email addresses. There was a time when carriers were waiting to get this information from the police report, but that’s just too slow in almost every case. They need reliable data, and they need that data automated into their claims system and served up on a silver platter to their adjusters, and that’s what we specialize in.
Q: What common gaps do you see among carriers that are struggling in this area?
Tanner Sheehan: Claims Datafill is a very popular solution in the market, however, there are carriers that don’t leverage it. Some of them are waiting on that police report, which is not good enough. There are other carriers who integrate our data and automate its ordering, but only use it in pieces and parts, or only leverage it for one purpose when it’s good for several purposes—or don't train adjusters properly on how critical it is. Then there are carriers that have a connection to us but don’t automate that connection, leaving it to the adjuster’s judgement to order the data. That approach creates inconsistent results to put it mildly.
Q: In a world where answers are one prompt away, how are consumer actions evolving during the claims process?
Tanner Sheehan: Here’s what we know consumers are doing with AI, and we know from carriers that these aren’t one-offs. They are using AI to create well-structured claim narratives or FNOL descriptions. They are referencing or interpreting specific policy language when explaining or challenging coverage. They are creating well-organized documentation like timelines, inventories, photos and summaries of estimates and bills. And they are even writing their own demand letters (or other written communications) that mimic those typically generated by attorneys. In other words, they’re empowering themselves.
Q: Given this, how can carriers adapt?
Tanner Sheehan: As an industry, it’s hard to say this is a bad thing. After all, we’re consumers too, and I think most of us would say we’d do the same thing. For adjusters, this makes their job easier in some ways and harder in others, but there’s no doubt they’ll have to be on their game now more than ever. This is when information sharing among carriers comes into play.
Consumers are becoming more sophisticated, the plaintiff’s bar has continued to level up its game, and carriers who want to adapt will leverage the right data—but maybe more importantly share and tap into industry-wide data that isn’t public today—to sharpen their advantage and keep pace with change.