Brace yourself for an economic hurricane. 

That was the advice given by JPMorgan Chase CEO Jamie Dimon at a financial conference in June. Just a few days later, Tesla CEO Elon Musk echoed Dimon’s feelings, telling his executives that he has a “super bad feeling” about the current state of the economy amid plans to cut the company’s staff by 10 percent. 

What may be coming

While these major company CEOs feel the economy is trending in the wrong direction, they aren’t the only ones who feel this way. According to a survey by CNBC, more than 80 percent of Americans believe the country’s economy will fall into a recession by the end of 2022. The University of Michigan’s Consumer Sentiment Index is falling to levels not seen in over four decades. Even economists seem more gloomy than normal, saying the odds of a recession in the next year are at 30 percent – twice as high as they presumed just a few months ago. 

Add in worker shortages, supply chain issues, and the rise of inflation, and leaders in the business world are starting to grapple with the new reality, an economic recession that could be deep and lengthy. Companies are readying for a downturn, researching ways to insulate themselves from the worst of what is seemingly coming. 

The past is the key

To solve the issue and prepare themselves for what is next, business leaders would be wise to look to the past. After all, the last U.S. recession was only 15 years ago. Looking back can help companies survive, but also thrive once the recession has reached an end. That’s where Watermark Consulting comes in. 

For over ten years, Watermark has studied the connection between customer experience (CX) and shareholder return (via third-party feedback surveys and public company stock performance numbers). The resulting Customer Experience ROI Study has now become one of the most cited analyses of its kind. While the study showed how CX-leading companies outperform their competition over the long-term, we wanted to analyze the data from just the last recession (2007-09). The results were stunning. 

CX-leading companies weren’t safe from the effects of the last recession, but they clearly fared better than other businesses. While the market as a whole and the CX-lagging companies lost a large amount of their market value, the CX-leading ones actually netted positive shareholder returns.

Customer experience matters 

It has been shown through many different studies that a great customer experience in turn leads to financial performance. It helps raise revenues, and since loyal customers stay around longer, they tend to be less price sensitive. They also entertain ideas for other products and services and they refer new customers to your company. A great customer experience also helps control – if not even reduce – expenses, since less needs to be spent on new business acquisitions (thanks to referrals and repeat business). The cost of serving these customers also decreases as fewer complaints means less pressure on the company’s operating arm. 

There are other conclusions that can be found from Watermark’s CX ROI data, mainly that the company’s customer experience quality really does influence its chances of successfully navigating an economic downturn. 

CX-leading firms appear to be better cushioned from the more severe issues of a recession, and they also seem to bounce back sooner when the economy improves. That is likely due to how customer behavior is shaped by both great product and service experiences. Businesses that offer these outstanding experiences become one of the last places that people make budget cuts, while also being one of the first they return to when their budget is less restricted. 

When an economic downturn is near, many business leaders result to knee-jerk reactions by cutting expenses to try to overcome the impact – cutting travel, freezing hiring, postponing investments, etc. – but the data in the Watermark study shows that if cost-cutting begins to undermine the quality of a customer service experience, then it could damage the company’s ability to battle back following the recession. 

So, how does a CEO or business owner capitalize on client experience to protect their company from the worst effects of the looming recession? Here are three possible strategies: 

1. Give customers a reason to return 

We aren’t quite in a recession just yet, and both consumer and business spending are at strong levels. This means companies have many chances to shape customer impressions. Take advantage of the opportunity before people begin to cut back on spending. Polish and refine your customer experience now so that there is a reason to return in the future. 

2. Cut costs by anticipating avoidable customer questions 

Believe it or not, it is possible to cut costs while also enhancing the customer experience. Shift your focus to upstream improvements that eliminate downstream and costly customer inquiries. You could have better product assembly guides, clearer, and more detailed invoices, or make the process of returns easier. These upstream improvements enhance the customer experience and can be delivered at a more competitive cost. 

3. Reexamine what is important to your consumer 

As economic conditions change, so may your customer’s needs, wants, fears, and aspirations. Product features or experiences that were relevant previously may no longer be as important. New customer requirements may also present a chance to engage consumers in a different, yet more enticing way. 

Prepare your business now

While it is not entirely possible to avoid all the pitfalls of an economic recession, the Watermark analysis does show that a better customer experience can help protect a company from the worst impacts of a downturn while also setting it up for success when the economy improves. If you deliver an experience that customers love, they’ll reward you with their business, either now or in the future. 

An original, unedited version of this article first appeared on 

It’s no secret that the insurance verification process can be a real hassle. But is the extra time and effort required worth the cost? In this blog post, we’ll take a look at the pros and cons of manual insurance verification and offer some tips on how to make the process as painless as possible.

When you consider how much time, energy, and resources go into manually verifying homeowners’ insurance, it is evident that the costly and tedious process is outdated.

Many costs involved

According to numbers gathered by a third party, the true cost of manually verifying insurance can be broken down into numerous categories and steps.

Loan officer and processor

A loan officer that tracks down a client to make corrections and gather information costs on average $1.61 per minute. If just those few details take only five minutes to assemble, the overall cost is now $8.

Add in the duties of the loan processor (follow-up calls, reviewing information, keying in data, etc.) at an average of $.60 per minute for 15 minutes of estimated work, and the total cost of verifying sits at just over $17.

The mortgage side

The responsibilities of the mortgage underwriter – loan parameters, setting and clearing conditions, etc. – cost an average of $.93 per minute. Adding a total of $4.65 for an estimated five minutes of work, the manual cost has increased to $21.70

A mortgage quality assurance assistant adds an extra $1.98 to the cost ($.66 per minute for an average of three minutes) to compare the policy against LOS.

The overall cost

With all the different steps and duties outlined, the cost of manually verifying homeowners’ insurance averages $23.68.

That is a lot of time, effort, and money to complete a somewhat simple task

How LenderDock helps

Through a lightweight integration, you can now couple specific policyholder data with LenderDock and instantly present third-party financial institutions with real-time, verifiable policy information.

When it comes to insurance verification, there are a few key things you need to know.

The process

First and foremost, insurance verification is the process of confirming that an individual has insurance coverage. This can be done through a variety of means, but typically involves contacting the insurance company directly.

There are a few different types of insurance that you may need to verify. The most common is health insurance, but you may also need to verify auto insurance, homeowners’ insurance, or renter’s insurance. Each type of insurance has its own process for verification, so it’s important to be familiar with the process for each type of insurance that you’re verifying.


One of the most important things to remember when verifying insurance is to get a Certificate of Insurance (COI). A COI is a document that verifies that an insurance policy exists and that it meets certain standards. Be sure to get a COI from the insurance company before you begin the verification process.

Without a COI, you may not be able to verify that the insurance policy exists or that it meets the required standards.

Other steps

There are a few other things to keep in mind when verifying insurance. First, you’ll need to make sure that you have the correct information for the individual you’re verifying. This includes their name, date of birth, social security number, and policy number.

You’ll also need to know the dates of coverage for the policy. These are typically listed on the COI. Finally, you’ll need to contact the insurance company directly to verify the policy.

In conclusion

The insurance verification process can seem daunting, but it’s important to remember a few key things. With the right preparation, you can make sure that you have the correct information and confirm that an individual has insurance coverage.

By getting a COI, you can also be sure that the policy meets the necessary standards. With a little bit of effort, you can make sure that your insurance verification process is a success.

In this blog post, we discussed insurance verification and what you need to know about it. We covered topics such as the different types of insurance you may need to verify and how to get a COI. We also discussed some key things to remember when verifying insurance. By following these tips, you can make sure that your insurance verification process is a success.

Why choose LenderDock?

LenderDock is the leading provider of online Property and Casualty Insurance policy verification and automated lien holder process management services. Through a lightweight integration, you can now couple specific policyholder data with LenderDock and instantly present third-party financial institutions with verifiable policy information in real-time.

SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH – June 20, 2022 – LenderDock Inc. and Palomar Insurance (Palomar) have announced a new partnership that strategically supports the goal of having a comprehensive lienholder process automation solution by fully digitizing lienholder verifications, mortgagee correction requests, and escrow payments.

As the company continues to expand, finding a solution that reduces operational costs related to mortgagee communication has been an ongoing effort for Palomar. Having a single provider that addresses the variety of tasks and requests from banks and lenders was pivotal in their decision. Recently, more and more time has been spent manually processing proof of insurance verifications, mass mortgagee change requests, and escrow billing errors. These tasks are impediments to the company’s growth.

In addition to utilizing LenderDock’s Verifi™ and Correxion™ base platform, Palomar looks to implement LenderDock’s Notifi™ and LenderPymts™ services which will facilitate the electronic delivery of loss payee, billing notifications, and digital escrow payment reconciliations.

Palomar is a rapidly growing and innovative insurer that provides specialty insurance to residential and commercial customers in underserved markets. Focusing on earthquake, hurricane, and flood insurance, they leverage proprietary data analytics and a modern approach to deliver unparalleled products and services.

“Palomar is an insurer partner that sees the value of new technology and the impact that it makes when tackling outdated workflows and business processes. We are excited about the opportunity to support their continued growth and expansion.” Frank Eubank, LenderDock CEO

Headquartered in Salt Lake City, Utah, LenderDock Inc. is the leading provider of online Property and Casualty Insurance policy verification and automated lien holder process management services. The policy verification-as-a-service (VaaS) platform offers banks, lenders and all financial third parties the ability to digitally verify and correct home and auto policy-related data in real-time.

SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH, – June 15, 2022 – On Wednesday, LenderDock Inc. and Grange Insurance Association (GrangeAssociation) announced a new partnership that advances the goal of an all-digital lien holder process automation solution by fully digitizing lien holder verifications and mortgagee correction requests.

Grange receives a high volume of calls and policy change requests from lenders that monopolize the time of their Customer Service representatives and Operations team members. They have struggled to manage the volume of large lists received from lenders notifying them of the need to update lien holder information on their policies.

Without an automated and standardized process, it had forced them to review each policy and manually make changes within their system. Due to the number of mortgage transactions in the last few years, they would likely be forced to hire additional staff just to keep up. Yet this is how it has been done at Grange for more than a decade. They needed to find a way for them to better utilize their internal resources for more meaningful activities.

The decision to partner with LenderDock’s cloud-based lien holder process automation platform was based on their long-term strategic objective of improving their operational efficiencies. This partnership’s aim is to help drive down costs, save valuable time and conserve internal resources.

Founded in 1894, Grange Insurance Association has grown into a regional mutual insurance company serving the needs of farming families, “Main Street” communities in urban and suburban markets. They currently offer services in California, Colorado, Idaho, Oregon, Washington, and Wyoming.

“We are thrilled to be partnered with Grange Insurance. They have a long history of being very customer-centric and adapting to the changing market. We are excited to help them leverage new technology that will help accomplish their goals of securing cost savings and operational efficiencies.” – Travis Rodak, LenderDock CTO

Headquartered in Salt Lake City, Utah, LenderDock Inc. is the leading provider of online Property and Casualty Insurance policy verification and automated lien holder process management services. The policy verification-as-a-service (VaaS) platform offers banks, lenders and all financial third parties the ability to digitally verify and correct home and auto policy-related data in real-time.

SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH – June 13, 2022 – LenderDock Inc. and Hippo Insurance (NYSE: HIPO) announced a new partnership that advances the goal of an all-digital lienholder process automation solution by fully digitizing lienholder verifications and mortgagee correction requests.

Hippo has made a concerted effort to focus on improving the customer experience and mitigating friction in providing payment information for escrow billing.

Ease of use and data accuracy were also important enhancements the company is looking for. Despite having implemented its own basic lender portal over a year ago, the company decided to find a more robust and comprehensive solution. Their decision to partner with LenderDock’s cloud-based lienholder process automation platform was due to how closely it aligned with Hippo’s key business objectives; drive better customer experience and reduce manual activity as they scale.

Founded in 2015, the Palo Alto, CA-based insurance company is an Insurtech leader that uses technology to streamline the homeowner’s insurance process. Hippo is currently available in 37 states with more coming soon. The company plans for significant growth and has more than 620 employees, spread across locations in Austin and Dallas, Texas, Palo Alto, Calif., Bedminster, N.J., and Tel Aviv.

“Hippo Insurance embodies the spirit of technology and the critical role it plays in advancing growth, service, and operational efficiencies. It is exciting to work with a partner that shares the same vision of how cloud-based automation solutions are delivering real results in driving down operational costs and boosting internal efficiencies.” – Frank Eubank, LenderDock CEO

Headquartered in Salt Lake City, Utah, LenderDock Inc. is the leading provider of online Property and Casualty Insurance policy verification and automated lien holder process management services. The policy verification-as-a-service (VaaS) platform offers banks, lenders, and all financial third parties the ability to digitally verify and correct home and auto policy-related data in real-time.

When multiple insurance policies cover a significant loss event, priority of coverage often becomes an issue for all of the insurers. Data breach incidents and other cyber loss events are no exception to this general rule. Insureds may request coverage from a broad array of insurance policies for a cyber event, not just from the “cyber insurer,” and multiple insurers may answer the call. This situation can present challenges, in part because the insured’s claims are usually presented on a time-sensitive basis.
For example, a well-insured health care provider is aware of its applicable federal and state breach response laws, and pays for several insurance policies: an information and privacy policy with data-breach notification coverage; a management liability policy; a professional errors and omissions liability policy with medical information protection provisions; and a tower of commercial general liability insurance.

A sample claim scenario may be when an employee’s laptop is lost or stolen. The laptop contains personal health information of more than 10,000 customers, including their medical histories and conditions, prescription information and premium payments. Initially, the notified insurers promptly identify their responsibilities to the insured. The insured complies with the applicable states’ breach notification laws. The insured’s intent may have been to rely on its cyber insurer for reimbursement of its payments for notification costs and credit monitoring costs.

However, different insurers have developed different cyber insurance forms, so the facts of the coverage claim may not squarely match up to the specifically insured cyber perils. Meanwhile, each liability insurer, not just cyber liability insurers, considers the applicable jurisdictions’ law on their duty to defend and whether it makes sense to participate in the insured’s defense and attorney fee reimbursement.


Next, challenges for both liability insurers and property insurers include how they relate to, and cooperate with, each other. Multiple insurers may have concurrent responsibilities for shares of the insured expenses involved in a cyber loss investigation, and eventually for governmental penalties or resolution amounts, and/or liability for settlements or judgments. Some breach events may not fit into cyber coverage at all.

To illustrate, if a hacker sends a phony email that dupes a corporate accounts-payable department into wire transferring money to a fake account, it could be subject to the corporation’s crime coverage. But cyber insurance may not respond merely because the thief uses a computer and an email as instruments of deception.

Sometimes it is possible to harmonize “other insurance” clauses issued by multiple triggered insurers, but more often there are clauses that conflict. Depending on how applicable law resolves such conflicting clauses, the insurers are often left to resolve their differences by cooperation.

Alternatively, when insurers consider what types of risks their policies were intended to cover, they may decide that one type of coverage should stand aside
until after another type of coverage exhausts. For instance, loss coverages may clearly define “loss” to exclude notices to affected parties and the related investigation costs after a data breach event.

Ideally, all insurers can work constructively to agree on reasonable allocations of their mutual responsibilities for the insured risks. Further complications can arise when different retained limits and sub-limits are issued by different insurers. Such risk-limiting agreements can provide the insured with an incentive to participate in, or even direct, prioritization among its multiple insurers.
It may be impossible to fully align the interests of every insurer that is presented with a complex cyber coverage claim. Cooperation can lead to efficient resolution of the issues, ideally with minimal delay and minimized transactional costs.

Best’s Review contributor Michael D. Handler, a member attorney at Cozen O’Connor, is experienced in professional and specialty risks as advisory and litigation counsel. He can be reached at [email protected]