“Will This Cost Me Anything?” What I’ve Learned About the Real Cost of Going Without a Public Adjuster

Most people worry that hiring a public adjuster will cost them part of their settlement—what they don’t see is how much going alone can really cost.

When people find me online or get my number from a contractor or friend, their first question is almost never about my experience, my strategy, or my track record.

The first question is usually: "Will this cost me anything?”

The second comes right after: "How am I supposed to get my home or business fixed if I have to pay you a percentage of my insurance money?”

I’ve heard some version of those two questions more times than I can count. They’re fair questions. They come from stress, fear, and confusion—not from bad intentions. Over time, I’ve realized those questions say a lot about where a policyholder’s head is when they reach out to me.

This is my attempt to answer them honestly, from my side of the table.

Why So Many People Think Public Adjusting Should Be Free

By the time someone calls me, they’re usually exhausted. They’ve been living with:

• Surprise expenses they didn’t budget for

• Disrupted living or working conditions

• Confusing letters from the insurance company

• A real fear that the settlement won’t actually cover repairs

In that moment, it feels like everything and everyone should just be there to help:

• “The insurance company has adjusters working ‘for free.’”

• “The contractor came out and inspected ‘for free.’”

• “Why should I have to pay out of my claim to get help on my side?”

There’s also a big misunderstanding about what insurance premiums really buy.

Most people believe, understandably, that premiums should buy them a fair outcome. So when the outcome isn’t fair, they feel wronged—and they hope someone will step in and fix it without adding another bill to the pile.

From where I sit, that mindset is usually a mix of:

• Financial fear

• Desperation

• Confusion about how claims really work

• A belief that the carrier should pay for the professionals who fight against the carrier

I don’t judge anybody for thinking that way. But I do know this:

That belief is wrong—and it can be very expensive in the long run.

“If You Take a Percentage, Will I Still Have Enough To Fix My Home?”

This is the most human, honest concern I hear.

People worry that if they hire me, I’ll just take a slice of an already too-small pie—and they’ll still be short on funds to repair their property.

Here’s what I’ve seen, case after case:

I don’t reduce the recovery. My job is to increase it.

When I’m involved, I’m looking for things that were:

• Undervalued or missed entirely

• Required by building code but left out of the carrier’s scope

• Properly owed overhead & profit

• Supplements the carrier didn’t volunteer

• Accurate quantities and methods that reflect how the work must actually be done

In many files, the difference between the original offer and the properly documented, negotiated settlement is far larger than my fee.

In plain English:

Most policyholders who hire a public adjuster end up with more—even after the fee—than they would have gotten on their own.

Not because I “inflate” anything, but because I know how to read the policy, apply code, build a proper estimate, and push the claim through the process the way the carrier understands.

Policyholders don’t know this unless I take the time to explain it. That’s on me.

The Clients Who Don’t Want To Pay Anyone

Let me say something that’s a little uncomfortable, but true from my experience.

The people who absolutely do not want to pay any professional—contractor, attorney, consultant, or public adjuster—are often the same people who:

• Expect miracles from a broken claim

• Refuse or delay providing documents and photos

• Fight every bit of process and structure

• Blame the adjuster when the funds don’t magically cover everything

• Have unrealistic expectations about timelines, code upgrades, and depreciation recovery

They’re not bad people. Many are scared, frustrated, and overwhelmed. But they can be emotionally expensive, time-consuming, and very high-risk relationships.

When someone comes in hot with: "Listen, I don’t think I should have to pay you anything, but I want you to fix this claim,”

what I hear underneath is: "I value the money more than the expertise.”

And that mindset makes it very hard to do good work together.

Should I Take Every Client Who Calls Me?

No. And I don’t.

Here’s how I look at it:

If someone refuses to accept these basic points:

• My work has value

• My expertise is what drives results

• My fee structure is lawful and standard for this profession

…then we’re probably not a good long-term fit.

But I also don’t automatically walk away from everyone who’s nervous about fees. A lot of people just need information. They need someone to slow down and walk them through:

• How I create value

• Why the fee exists in the first place

• What a realistic recovery might look like

• How I handle supplements

• What happens if the carrier underpays or drags things out

If the hesitation is coming from fear and confusion, that’s workable. If it’s coming from entitlement, deep distrust, or a hunt for free labor, that’s usually not.

Part of my job is deciding which is which.

Protecting Clients and Myself

Public adjusting works best when both sides step into the relationship with:

• Clear expectations

• Mutual respect

• A shared understanding of the goal: proper indemnity, not a lottery ticket

I have a strong desire to help as many people as I can. But if I say “yes” to every single file, especially when the client is openly hostile to the idea of paying for help, I put us both at risk:

• They expect too much.

• I can’t ethically deliver what they’re imagining.

• Everyone ends up unhappy.

On top of that, I’m working under state-specific consumer protection laws and strict rules for public adjusters. When I’m dealing with elderly, disabled, or otherwise vulnerable policyholders, I have to be even more careful:

• Extra clear communication

• Transparent disclosures

• No assumptions about what they understand—especially about fees

Protecting vulnerable clients isn’t just the “right thing to do. "In many places, it’s legally required.

What That First Fee Conversation Tells Me

These days, I pay a lot of attention to how that first conversation about my fee goes.

If someone:

• Asks questions

• Listens

• Wants to understand the process

• Is willing to work as a team

…that’s usually a very good sign.

If someone:

• Dismisses the fee outright

• Wants the outcome but not the partnership

• Treats my work as something that “should be free”

…that tells me a lot about how the claim will feel six months down the road.

Saying “no” to a poor-fit client doesn’t mean I don’t care. Sometimes it just means I’m protecting them from unrealistic expectations—and protecting myself from a relationship where I know I can’t win for either of us.

I’ll be sharing more in future posts about how I explain my value, how I reframe the fee conversation, and how I try to build trust from the very first call—whether someone ends up hiring me or not.

Important Note

I’m a Licensed Public Adjuster in Texas and Florida, and I also work as a claims consultant in other states. I’m not an attorney, and nothing I share—online or in person—should be taken as legal advice. For legal questions about contracts, lawsuits, or your statutory rights, you should talk to a licensed attorney in your state.

—Gyorgy Toldy Licensed Public Adjuster – TX & FL Owner, White Rock Public Adjusting LLC