The schedule is the risk
The slip tells you what is being offered. The schedule of values tells you what you are actually taking on.
And it is the document most likely to be wrong, stale, or assembled by somebody who was not thinking about insurance when they built it. SnapLine reads the schedule as a schedule, reconciles it against the rest of the submission, and shows an underwriter where each number came from.
What a schedule looks like by the time it reaches you
Rarely one tab. Frequently several, one of which is the real one. Columns named by the insured's facilities manager rather than by any convention. Total insured value given as a summary figure on the slip and as a column sum in the workbook, and the two do not always agree.
The fields that decide the risk are the ones that go missing first:
- Building value, contents value and business interruption, separately rather than as a blended figure
- Year built, and whether it refers to original construction or the last major renovation
- Construction class, where the slip and the schedule frequently use different vocabularies for the same wall
- Occupancy, which is the field most likely to be inherited from last year's submission
- Protection and sprinkler detail, often present as a free-text note rather than a coded value
- Square footage, and whether it covers the whole site or the insured portion
- Location address quality, which decides whether anything downstream can geocode it
SnapLine extracts across those, holds the disagreements open rather than resolving them quietly, and marks absences as absences.
| Loc | Address | Occupancy | Values | Year built | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Building | Contents | ||||
| 1 | 12 Harbour Row, Dunmorrow | Warehouse | 4,120,000 | 980,000 | 1998 |
| 002 | UNIT 4B CARRICK TRADING EST | Light Ind. | £2,340,000 | no value given | 2004 |
| 3.0 | Eastgate Retail Pk | Retail | 3.88m | 1,240,000 | 2019 (refurb) |
| 4 | as above | no value given | 2,010,000 | 610,000 | Victorian |
| 5 | Lamberton Mill, Ravensgate | vacant? | 1,950,000 | - | no value given |
| subtotal to here | 14,300,000 | ||||
| 6 | Northgate Depot (see email) | Storage | TBC | no value given | 1976 |
| … 61 further locations | |||||
- Summary
- Values
- Sheet3
- Values (2)
Occupancy data goes stale
A tenant leaves. The building sits empty, or half empty, and the occupancy description on the schedule carries forward from the previous renewal because nobody had a reason to change it. The risk changed. The record did not.
Atlas surfaces vacancy across a portfolio rather than one submission at a time, so the question becomes a book-level one: where has the occupancy data stopped agreeing with the risk? Atlas is licensed separately from SnapLine. If this is the part that matters to you, say so when you book and the call covers both scopes.
Multi-location, multi-source
A single-location risk is a document problem. A multi-location risk is a reconciliation problem. The same site appears in the schedule, in the loss run, in a photograph with no address attached, and in an email saying one of the locations was disposed of in the spring.
SnapLine keeps those references tied together and keeps them tied to their sources. When an underwriter questions a value on a location, the answer is a region of a document rather than a confidence score.
Send us the worst schedule you have
Not the clean one. The workbook with the renamed columns and the tab nobody can account for.
Five sample submissions come pre-loaded in the demo and you can put up to three of your own alongside them. After that, a fixed-scope Proof of Value runs across twenty of your live submissions and ends in a written report.