Our Approach

Independent by Design

CAG operates outside carrier systems and internal workflows.
We review the information provided, verify what can reasonably be verified through lawful investigative methods and public sources, and organize our findings into a structured analytical report.

Our role is not to replace adjusters or SIU investigators.
Our role is to provide an independent analytical perspective that strengthens investigative clarity and claim defensibility.

Verification Before Conclusions

A document may look authentic.
A statement may sound reasonable.
A timeline may appear consistent.

Our methodology focuses on determining whether the evidence supports the reported events as a whole.

Verification may include:

• Timeline consistency
• Documentation review
• Public record research
• Open-source intelligence (OSINT)
• Metadata and digital indicators
• Internal consistency checks
• Behavioral observations supported by documented facts

The objective is not to prove fraud. The objective is to determine whether the evidence supports the claim being made

Human Judgement Remains Central

Technology and verification tools support the process, but human reasoning remains essential.
Experience, context, and investigative judgment guide how evidence is interpreted and how inconsistencies are evaluated.

Structured, Defensible Reporting

Every review is organized into a clear framework designed to help claims professionals quickly understand:

• What was reported
• What information was provided
• What was independently verified
• What inconsistencies were identified
• What investigative questions remain
• Why those observations matter

The result is documentation intended to support informed decisions and strengthen claim defensibility.

Our Guiding Principles

Everything we do is grounded in five principles:

• Integrity First — Follow the evidence wherever it leads.
• Clarity Over Assumptions — Separate verified facts from speculation.
• Human Judgment — Experience and reasoning remain essential.
• Confidentiality — Protect client information throughout every engagement.
• Independent Perspective — Provide objective analysis without replacing carrier authority.

Supporting Better Decisions

Not every investigation uncovers fraud.
Not every inconsistency changes an outcome.
But every claim benefits from clear, objective analysis.

That is the approach behind every review CAG performs.

Common Scenarios

• Contradictory statements

• Conflicting documents

• Suspicious medical bills

• Staged-loss indicators

• Documentation inconsistencies

• Provider red flags

• High-exposure or sensitive claim

Common Scenarios

• Unverifiable itineraries

• Altered receipts

• Late-document submissions

• Multiple trips in short timeframe

• Patterns of repeat claims

• Screenshots

• PNG or JPEG photos

• No identification or lost identification

Claim Defensibility Analysis

Claim quality reviews designed to assess whether a file has been investigated thoroughly, documented clearly, and supported in a way that can withstand internal scrutiny, regulatory review, or legal challenge.

Frad Indicator Analysis

Travel Claim Analysis