DIY vs. In-Person Inspections: Choosing the Right Path for Property Assessment
As technology continues to reshape the insurance industry, one trend has emerged with growing popularity: do-it-yourself (DIY) inspections and policyholder data verification processes. As an insurer conducting risk assessments, understanding when and how to use DIY inspections versus traditional in-person assessments can improve efficiency, reduce costs, and enhance the overall customer experience.
The Rise of DIY Insurance Technology
DIY InsurTech tools offer a fast, flexible, and cost-effective way to assess property conditions. Using guided mobile apps or web platforms, homeowners can:
Take photos and/or video of the interior and exterior areas of their property
Answer structured questions in an intuitive, efficient survey workflow
Document and record key features and characteristics of their property
These tools have become particularly useful for insurers aiming to streamline underwriting workflows.
One of the primary drivers of this shift is convenience. Homeowners and buyers can conduct inspections on their own schedule without needing to coordinate with a field inspector. The speed of a DIY process allows for quicker policy issuance.
Cost savings are another major benefit. Without travel, scheduling, or administrative overhead, DIY inspections reduce expenses for companies and customers alike. They also engage the policyholder directly, providing a more transparent and educational experience. Many customers feel more in control when they can document and view their property’s condition firsthand.
During the COVID-19 pandemic, the need for contactless processes accelerated the adoption of remote inspections. What started as a safety measure has now evolved into a mainstream option for many routine property assessments.
When to Choose DIY — and When Not To
Despite the benefits, DIY inspections are not a one-size-fits-all solution. Certain situations still call for the expertise and judgment of an in-person professional.
A DIY approach works best when the property is straightforward, the person performing the inspection is tech-savvy, and the risk of hidden or structural damage is low. For example, newer homes with standard layouts, visible wear and tear, or simple updates are ideal candidates.
On the other hand, high-value homes, older properties, or those with complex electrical, plumbing, or roofing systems may warrant a more thorough in-person evaluation. Similarly, if fraud concerns exist or if the person inspecting lacks comfort with mobile technology, an in-person visit provides greater accuracy and accountability.
It’s also important to consider regulatory requirements. In some jurisdictions or underwriting guidelines, physical inspections may still be mandatory—especially when certain thresholds or risk factors are involved.
Making the Right Call
The decision between DIY and in-person inspections hinges on balancing efficiency with risk. A helpful rule of thumb is to use DIY when speed and convenience are paramount and the margin for error is low. Choose in-person inspections when the stakes are higher, the risks are less visible, or when expert interpretation is required.
Ultimately, combining both options—using DIY tools for simple cases and in-person assessments for complex situations—can lead to a smarter, more flexible inspection strategy. As digital tools continue to evolve, professionals who can guide customers toward the right method will be well-positioned to deliver value and build trust in a modern marketplace.
| When to Choose DIY Inspections | When to Choose In-Person Inspections |
|---|---|
|
Newer homes with standard layouts |
Older or high-value homes |
|
Simple wear and tear is visible; Low risk of hidden or structural damage |
Complex systems (plumbing, electrical, roofing); Risk of concealed damage or serious issues |
|
Policyholder is tech-savvy |
Policyholder is uncomfortable with mobile technology |
|
Speed and convenience are the priority |
Thoroughness and accuracy are more important |
|
DIY is allowed by local regulations/guidelines |
Physical inspection is required by regulation/underwriting |
|
Low risk of fraud or accountability concerns |
High-stakes scenarios or fraud concerns |
How JMI Reports Manages DIY Inspections
JMI offers a streamlined approach to DIY property inspections through our innovative tools, including RiskVUE-IQ and QuickVUE™. These platforms empower policyholders to conduct self-assessments, providing insurers with accurate, timely data for underwriting decisions.
How Our DIY Tools Work
RiskVUE-IQ is a standalone, mobile-friendly web application that guides homeowners through a structured inspection process. Users capture photos and input key property details such as occupancy status, age of the home, square footage, and foundation type. The process is designed to be completed in 10 minutes or less, enhancing user compliance and satisfaction. It offers a number of benefits for insurers:
Rapid Turnaround: Insurers receive comprehensive reports within one day of the DIY inspection, expediting the underwriting process.
Cost Efficiency: Offers up to 40% savings compared to traditional in-person inspections.
High Compliance: The user-friendly interface achieves an average completion rate of 65% among homeowners.
Actionable Insights: The platform provides over twenty critical data points, including risk scoring based on the property's likelihood of future loss.
Integration with Other JMI Reports Tools
RiskVUE-IQ and QuickVUE seamlessly integrate with JMI's BlueSkyVUE™ platform, allowing insurers to manage both DIY and traditional inspections within a unified system. This integration supports efficient data collection, quality assurance, and underwriting decision-making.