Responding to Requests for Information Without Losing Control of the Claim

Convert the request into a tracker

List every question, due date, responsible person, required document, response status and submission reference. Break compound questions into separate rows. Ask for clarification promptly where the request is genuinely ambiguous.

Do not assume that sending more material answers the question. State the answer directly, then identify the evidence supporting it.

Preserve the question-and-answer relationship

Use the insurer's numbering and quote or paraphrase each request accurately. Provide a concise response beneath it, followed by document references. If information is unavailable, explain the enquiries made and what alternative evidence exists.

Avoid defensive explanations about why a small builder or subcontractor did not create a document unless the absence itself is material. Focus on the evidence that proves the work.

Keep versions and totals consistent

An updated scope or quotation should include a revision number, date and change schedule. Reconcile any change to quantities or totals. Do not send a replacement spreadsheet that silently removes previously claimed items.

Check names, unit references, dates and issue numbers across all attachments before submission. Minor inconsistencies can create unnecessary follow-up.

Close the submission formally

Provide an indexed covering response listing every attachment. Send through the required portal or email channel and retain proof of upload or delivery. Ask the insurer to confirm whether any questions remain outstanding.

Continue to meet urgent notification and mitigation duties while the response is being prepared. An RFI should not freeze necessary site protection.

Translating common insurer wording into the next evidence task

• Insufficiently particularised usually means the item needs a precise unit, room, wall, elevation, dimension, issue number and plan location.
• Unsupported by contemporaneous evidence usually means the file lacks dated photographs, measurements, inspection notes or trade records made while the condition was visible.
• Outside the original contractual scope usually requires the signed contract, relevant plan or specification, variation and an explanation of the first builder's obligation.
• Not demonstrated to be defective usually requires observation, testing, applicable requirement, technical opinion and a reason the work is not merely unfinished.
• Inadequately costed usually requires quantities, rates, labour, plant, access, demolition, testing, certification, reinstatement, margin and GST.
• Not connected to the first builder usually requires a baseline, construction chronology, first-builder records and separation from replacement-builder or owner work.
• Unsupported by an appropriate rectification methodology usually requires a complete sequence from investigation and removal through compliant installation, testing, certification and reinstatement. The correct response is not to resend the full archive. Answer the stated concern directly, then cite the smallest group of documents that proves the answer.

Practical takeaway: Treat each request as a small evidence project. Direct answers, stable numbering and controlled attachments reduce delay and make omissions visible before submission.

How ARK Houses can help

ARK Houses prepares itemised technical responses to insurer questions and links each answer to the relevant evidence. We focus on the construction issue the assessor has raised rather than overwhelming the claim with unrelated documents.

Discuss Your Builder Recovery Project