@Dash pull everything on the Fairfield claim. They say the AC unit was hit by lightning on 14 August.
Live in Slack or Microsoft Teams
Check a claim against the weather record
A storm damage claim is checked against the policy, the claim file, the attached photographs and the public weather record for that date and location. Dash returns one answer with the source behind every line, and says plainly where the evidence supports the claim and where it does not.
Get started for free Chat with Dash, the AI teammate that works inside Slack and Microsoft Teams.
The policy covers it. The date does not hold up, and the photographs point at a different date rather than a different cause.
- Policy · active since 2019 · storm damage covered · no exclusions applied to external plant
- Claim · filed 21 Aug · states lightning strike on 14 Aug
- Weather record · no recorded strike within 20 miles of the property on 14 Aug
- Nearest recorded activity · 2 Aug · strikes 6 miles north-west
- Prior claims · one, 2021, roof, settled
The four photographs in the file were taken on 19 August by their timestamp. The corrosion visible on the housing is not consistent with damage twelve days old.
This reads as a wrong date on the form rather than an invented event. There was a real storm on 2 August, the property is inside its path, and 14 August is the Thursday of the following week. A claimant fabricating a strike would be unlikely to name a date the record can disprove in one lookup.
Every line links to the document or record it came from. Nothing here is a decision, it is what the file says.
So what do we actually ask them?
Not whether there was lightning. Ask when they first noticed the unit had stopped working, and whether anyone was at the property during the first week of August.
If the answer puts the failure in that week the claim is straightforward and the form gets corrected. If it puts it in the middle of August then the 2 August storm is not the cause and the assessment changes. Either way the date question answers itself without accusing anyone of anything.
Teams @Dash pull everything on the Fairfield claim. They say the AC unit was hit by lightning on 14 August.
The policy covers it. The date does not hold up, and the photographs point at a different date rather than a different cause.
- Policy · active since 2019 · storm damage covered · no exclusions applied to external plant
- Claim · filed 21 Aug · states lightning strike on 14 Aug
- Weather record · no recorded strike within 20 miles of the property on 14 Aug
- Nearest recorded activity · 2 Aug · strikes 6 miles north-west
- Prior claims · one, 2021, roof, settled
The four photographs in the file were taken on 19 August by their timestamp. The corrosion visible on the housing is not consistent with damage twelve days old.
This reads as a wrong date on the form rather than an invented event. There was a real storm on 2 August, the property is inside its path, and 14 August is the Thursday of the following week. A claimant fabricating a strike would be unlikely to name a date the record can disprove in one lookup.
Every line links to the document or record it came from. Nothing here is a decision, it is what the file says.
So what do we actually ask them?
Not whether there was lightning. Ask when they first noticed the unit had stopped working, and whether anyone was at the property during the first week of August.
If the answer puts the failure in that week the claim is straightforward and the form gets corrected. If it puts it in the middle of August then the 2 August storm is not the cause and the assessment changes. Either way the date question answers itself without accusing anyone of anything.