Case Study: How Pro Insurance Claims
Recovered €254,000 After a Commercial Fire
Numbers tell part of the story. Client experiences tell the rest. This is an account of one of the claims we’re most proud of — a commercial fire claim where our involvement turned a deeply inadequate initial settlement into a full and fair recovery.
The client’s name has been changed for privacy, but the details and figures are real.
The Background
James runs a medium-sized manufacturing business from a purpose-built commercial unit. In early autumn, an electrical fault started a fire in the plant room that spread rapidly before firefighters could contain it. The damage was extensive: a significant portion of the building was structurally compromised, specialist manufacturing equipment was destroyed, and the business was unable to operate from the premises for over four months.
James had comprehensive commercial combined insurance and notified his insurer the same day. The insurer appointed a loss adjuster promptly.
The Initial Assessment — and What It Got Wrong
The loss adjuster’s report covered the physical damage to the building and the direct loss of equipment at replacement cost. Their settlement offer came to £163,000.
James felt this was too low — he’d already received informal quotes from contractors suggesting the rebuild alone would cost significantly more — but didn’t know how to challenge it. A colleague recommended Pro Insurance Claims.
What Pro Insurance Claims Found
Our assessment took three site visits over two weeks, including specialist structural and electrical sub-contractor surveys.
The adjuster’s report had missed or undervalued the following:
- Structural damage to the adjacent section of the building — smoke and heat penetration had compromised steelwork not visible during the standard inspection
- Business interruption — 19 weeks of lost revenue, correctly calculated against James’s trading accounts, had been omitted entirely
- Specialist equipment reinstatement — the adjuster had priced replacement at catalogue cost rather than the true installed cost, including commissioning and calibration
- Professional fees — architect and structural engineer fees for the reinstatement project were not included
- Increased cost of working — the temporary premises James had leased to maintain partial operations were claimable under his policy’s additional cover
The Negotiation
Pro Insurance Claims prepared a fully documented counter-schedule totalling £298,000 and entered formal negotiation with the insurer’s loss adjusting team. The negotiation took six weeks, involved two rounds of formal correspondence and a joint site visit, and was conducted entirely by our team — James was kept fully informed but didn’t need to engage in any of it directly.
The Outcome
The final agreed settlement was £254,000 — £91,000 more than the initial offer. After Pro Insurance Claims’ fee, James received a net improvement of approximately £72,000 compared to what he would have accepted had he managed the claim himself.
Pro Insurance Claims clients receive, on average, 30% higher settlements than those who deal directly with their insurer. That’s not a coincidence — it’s the result of expert negotiation.
The Broader Pattern
James’s experience is not unusual. Across fire, flood, storm, agricultural, commercial, and marine claims, the pattern is consistent: initial offers are conservative, consequential losses are regularly missed or minimised, and professional negotiation delivers substantially better outcomes.
Our 97% success rate isn’t built on exceptional cases. It’s built on consistent, professional application of expertise across every claim we handle.
Your situation is unique — and so is the claim it generates. Pro Insurance Claims takes the time to understand both, and to ensure your settlement reflects your full and legitimate entitlement
Don’t Settle for Less
Talk to Pro Insurance Claims about your claim — free initial consultation, no obligation, no upfront fee.