Indiana · Insurance Adjuster Sample Interactive Mind Map
Indiana Adjuster Regulations
A visual breakdown of the Indiana rules an adjuster is tested on — a state where the absence of a rule is frequently the right answer.
Indiana is a deceptively hard state to study, for one structural reason: it has almost no insurance regulation. Its Administrative Code contains no unfair claims settlement practices rule, no claim-handling timelines, no matching rule, no total-loss valuation methodology, and no adjuster rule of any kind. The places a national course tells you to check the Administrative Code are places where there is nothing to check. Indiana's answers live in statute and case law.
It starts with the license itself. Indiana licenses independent adjusters under IC 27-1-28 and public adjusters under a wholly separate chapter — and issues no company or staff adjuster license at all, because the definition turns on independent-contractor tax treatment and simply never reaches employees. Between that exclusion, the self-insured exclusion and the third-party-administrator exclusion, a very large share of Indiana claims are lawfully adjusted by unlicensed people.
Then come the traps. Worker's compensation is a separate line of authority, not something the license hands you. The 40-hour prelicensing requirement has no statute or rule behind it. The Comparative Fault Act does not reach governmental entities, so a collision with a county snowplow is decided under contributory negligence — a total bar. The famous 70% total-loss threshold does not apply to insurers. Nobody can sue you under the unfair practices article, because IC 27-4-1-18 says so expressly. And on a punitive damages award, the plaintiff keeps 25% and the State of Indiana takes 75%.
This mind map lays out the licensing chapter, the exam and CE rules, the unfair claims and bad faith framework, the deadlines that do not exist, and the auto, property and worker's compensation rules — then gives you ten scenario questions built on the places Indiana departs from the national rule.
Indiana licenses exactly two kinds of adjuster — and the one most states license, it does not.
Independent adjusters under IC 27-1-28. Public adjusters under a wholly separate chapter, IC 27-1-27. There is no company or staff adjuster license, because IDOI does not require one.
Independent adjusters under IC 27-1-28. Public adjusters under a wholly separate chapter, IC 27-1-27. There is no company or staff adjuster license, because IDOI does not require one.
| Credential | Lines of authority | Fee & term |
|---|---|---|
| Independent adjuster — IC 27-1-28 | Property & casualty and/or Worker’s compensation | $40 · 2 years |
| Public adjuster — IC 27-1-27, a certificate of authority | none | $50 · expires Dec 31 |
| Temporary emergency adjuster — IC 27-1-28-11 | none | $20 · ≤90 days |
| Company / staff adjuster | No license exists. None required. | |
Worker’s compensation is a LINE you qualify for individuallythe emergency license is obtained BY THE INSURER
🧾
The definition turns on your TAX treatment, not your job title
IC 27-1-28-6(a) is a two-part test. An independent adjuster is a person that “(1) contracts for compensation with insurers or self-insurers to investigate, negotiate, or settle property, casualty, or worker’s compensation claims; and (2) for tax purposes is treated by the insurers or self-insurers in a manner consistent with treatment of an independent contractor rather than an employee under Title 26, Subtitle C of the Internal Revenue Code.”
Prong (2) is doing the real work. Indiana defines its adjuster credential by federal tax treatment. If the carrier withholds for you as an employee, you fall outside the definition — and therefore outside the licensing requirement entirely.
That is why Indiana has no staff adjuster license. It did not carve one out. The definition simply never reaches employees.
Prong (2) is doing the real work. Indiana defines its adjuster credential by federal tax treatment. If the carrier withholds for you as an employee, you fall outside the definition — and therefore outside the licensing requirement entirely.
That is why Indiana has no staff adjuster license. It did not carve one out. The definition simply never reaches employees.
✅ IC 27-1-28-6(b) — FOURTEEN exclusions
📌 What it means on the ground
(b)(7) Carrier staff
“An officer, director, manager, or employee of an authorized insurer, a managing general agent, a surplus lines insurer, a risk retention group, or an attorney in fact of a reciprocal insurer”The carrier’s own adjusters are unlicensed
IDOI states it flatly: “Indiana does not require licensure for staff adjusters.”(b)(10) Self-insured
“Under a self-insured arrangement, an individual who adjusts claims on behalf of the individual’s employer”In-house claims staff, exempt
The self-insured manufacturer’s claims manager needs nothing(b)(12) TPA comp adjusters
“A person that is authorized to adjust worker’s compensation or disability claims under the authority of a third party administrator”Most Indiana comp files
Given how much Indiana comp runs through TPAs, this exclusion does enormous work(b)(1) Attorneys
Admitted to practice in Indiana AND “acting in a professional capacity as an attorney”Both halves required
An out-of-state attorney is not exempt; neither is an Indiana attorney doing something other than practicing law(b)(4) Fraud investigators
Exempt only if they “do not adjust losses or determine claim payments”The tripwire is the verb
An SIU investigator who gathers and refers is exempt. The moment they decide what gets paid, the exemption is gone.Put (b)(7), (b)(10) and (b)(12) togetherA very large share of Indiana claims are lawfully adjusted by people holding no license at all. The Indiana question is never “what kind of adjuster are you?” It is “are you an independent contractor for tax purposes, contracting with an insurer or self-insurer?” Everything follows from that. If you studied a state that licenses company adjusters, do not carry the expectation across the border.
📋
Worker’s compensation is a LINE you qualify for — not a bonus attached to the license
IC 27-1-28-14(a): “An independent adjuster may qualify for an independent adjuster license under this chapter in one (1) or more of the following lines of authority: (1) Property and casualty insurance. (2) Worker’s compensation insurance.”
Read “one (1) or more.” These are two separate lines, examined individually. Holding the Indiana license does not automatically authorize you in both.
The flip side matters just as much: there is no separate Indiana worker’s compensation adjuster credential — no endorsement, no second license, no distinct exam. Comp sits inside IC 27-1-28 as a line, and Pearson VUE tests Indiana comp law (IC 22-3-2, IC 22-3-3) as a content area inside the single Independent Adjuster exam. Compare the states that split the credential and run a separate workers compensation adjuster exam — Indiana does not.
IC 27-1-28-14(b) closes it out: an independent adjuster “is not required to hold another independent adjuster, insurance producer, or insurance administrator license in Indiana.”
Read “one (1) or more.” These are two separate lines, examined individually. Holding the Indiana license does not automatically authorize you in both.
The flip side matters just as much: there is no separate Indiana worker’s compensation adjuster credential — no endorsement, no second license, no distinct exam. Comp sits inside IC 27-1-28 as a line, and Pearson VUE tests Indiana comp law (IC 22-3-2, IC 22-3-3) as a content area inside the single Independent Adjuster exam. Compare the states that split the credential and run a separate workers compensation adjuster exam — Indiana does not.
IC 27-1-28-14(b) closes it out: an independent adjuster “is not required to hold another independent adjuster, insurance producer, or insurance administrator license in Indiana.”
📑
Public Adjusters — and the Thing They May Not Do
IC 27-1-27, substantially rewritten by P.L.226-2023
- IC 27-1-27-1.5(1): a public adjuster may not FILE THE CLAIM. The prohibition is on filing “with an insurer … on behalf of an insured person.” The insured must present their own claim — the adjuster advises and assists. In most states the public adjuster files as a matter of course
- No auto, no bodily injury — may not “act in any manner in relation to claims for personal injury or automobile liability”
- May not bind the insured in settlement
- No second hat: may not perform “the role of a roofing contractor … the role of an appraiser … or any other role” on the same claim at the same time. That catch-all is what makes it impossible to serve as the insurer’s independent adjuster on a claim where you are the insured’s public adjuster
- $10,000 surety bond, renewed annually, proof not more than 6 months old · $50 annually · expires December 31 of the year issued, so a November certificate lasts about seven weeks
- No prelicensing education. No continuing education at all. And no reinstatement path — IDOI: an expired public adjuster “must complete all initial resident licensing requirements”
- No percentage fee cap exists in Indiana. The statute regulates disclosure and timing of compensation, not its size
- Acting without a certificate is a Class B infraction, and the compensation contract “is void” — IC 27-1-27-11
🕑
Two three-business-day windows — and they are not the same window
IC 27-1-27-19 — VOIDABLE. Runs from the day the INSURER is provided a copy of the contract.
IC 27-1-27-20 — RESCINDABLE. Runs from the day “the insured submits to the insurer the claim to which the contract relates.”
Both require written notice by registered or certified mail, personal service, or email to the address on the contract. Under both, the adjuster returns anything of value within fifteen (15) business days.
Material describing “Indiana’s three-day public adjuster cancellation right” in the singular is incomplete.
And the quick-pay rule — IC 27-1-27-18. If the insurer pays or commits in writing to pay the policy limit within five business days of the loss report, the public adjuster gets no percentage commission — only reasonable compensation based on time spent and expenses incurred — and must tell the insured the recovery might not increase.
IC 27-1-27-20 — RESCINDABLE. Runs from the day “the insured submits to the insurer the claim to which the contract relates.”
Both require written notice by registered or certified mail, personal service, or email to the address on the contract. Under both, the adjuster returns anything of value within fifteen (15) business days.
Material describing “Indiana’s three-day public adjuster cancellation right” in the singular is incomplete.
And the quick-pay rule — IC 27-1-27-18. If the insurer pays or commits in writing to pay the policy limit within five business days of the loss report, the public adjuster gets no percentage commission — only reasonable compensation based on time spent and expenses incurred — and must tell the insured the recovery might not increase.
No appointment. Anywhere. Ever.IC 27-1-28-10 states the entire gate: “A person shall not: (1) act as an independent adjuster in Indiana; or (2) hold the person’s self out as an independent adjuster in Indiana; unless the person is licensed or exempt from licensure under this chapter.” Licensure or exemption — that is all. Appointment appears nowhere in the twenty-four sections of IC 27-1-28. Do not reason across from IC 27-1-15.6-14, which is a conditional producer rule. Note also that holding yourself out is independently prohibited, so a business card can violate the section before you touch a claim.
Indiana asks more up front than almost any adjuster state — and less in one place that saves you real money.
40 hours of prelicensing before you may sit. A certificate that dies at six months. And zero dollars of fingerprinting, because Indiana requires none.
40 hours of prelicensing before you may sit. A certificate that dies at six months. And zero dollars of fingerprinting, because Indiana requires none.
📚
The 40 hours is mandatory — and no statute or rule imposes it
This is not trivia. It tells you which source governs when something changes.
IC 27-1-28-12(b)(5), the only statutory hook, requires merely “a prelicensing course of study for the line of authority in which the individual has applied.” It states no hours. And IC 27-1-28-2 grants rulemaking power that has never been exercised for adjusters.
760 IAC 1-40 does not reach you. It is captioned “Agent Prelicensing Study Program”; its “Affected” line is IC 27-1-15.5, the agent chapter; and its hours table at 760 IAC 1-40-6 has exactly four rows — Life 24, Health 24, Life and Health 40, Property and Casualty 40 — with no adjuster row. Across all ninety-one rules in 760 IAC Article 1, not one rule title contains the word “adjuster.”
Comply with the 40 hours. Cite it to IDOI. Never cite a statute or an IAC section for it.
IC 27-1-28-12(b)(5), the only statutory hook, requires merely “a prelicensing course of study for the line of authority in which the individual has applied.” It states no hours. And IC 27-1-28-2 grants rulemaking power that has never been exercised for adjusters.
760 IAC 1-40 does not reach you. It is captioned “Agent Prelicensing Study Program”; its “Affected” line is IC 27-1-15.5, the agent chapter; and its hours table at 760 IAC 1-40-6 has exactly four rows — Life 24, Health 24, Life and Health 40, Property and Casualty 40 — with no adjuster row. Across all ninety-one rules in 760 IAC Article 1, not one rule title contains the word “adjuster.”
Comply with the 40 hours. Cite it to IDOI. Never cite a statute or an IAC section for it.
Two different six-month rules — keep them apartThe course completion certificate is valid six months: Pearson VUE, Independent Adjuster row — “Testing must be completed within six (6) months of the Course Completion Date on the certificate.” The other “six (6) months” on IDOI’s adjuster page is the public adjuster surety bond freshness rule — “Proof of $10,000 surety bond … not more than six (6) months old.” Different licenses, different documents, same number.
| Exam | Questions | Seat time | Fee |
|---|---|---|---|
| Independent Adjuster (effective 3/1/21) | 100 scored + 5 pretest | 105 min | $69 |
| Public Adjuster | 60 scored | 60 min | $50 |
you answer 105 items in 105 minutes — a minute apieceretake wait: 48 hours
❓
The passing score is 70 — and the handbook cannot decide what that means
This is a real conflict inside a single document, and you should know about it rather than trust either half.
Page 10, table lead-in: “The following table shows the scaled score needed to pass each exam” → Independent Adjuster … 70.
Page 11, Score Explanation: “Candidates need to achieve 70% to pass the IDOI exams.”
Those are different claims. A scaled score need not correspond to any particular number of correct answers; 70% means seventy of one hundred. And the handbook never explains a conversion — the words “raw score,” “equating,” “converted” and “percentage of questions you answered correctly” appear nowhere in it.
Other states resolve this expressly — their handbooks state that raw scores “are converted into scaled scores” and warn that the reported score is “neither the number … nor the percentage of questions you answered correctly.” Indiana’s says no such thing.
So build no strategy on either reading. Treat 70 as the number and target a consistent 80%+ on practice exams. That margin covers you whichever interpretation is right.
Page 10, table lead-in: “The following table shows the scaled score needed to pass each exam” → Independent Adjuster … 70.
Page 11, Score Explanation: “Candidates need to achieve 70% to pass the IDOI exams.”
Those are different claims. A scaled score need not correspond to any particular number of correct answers; 70% means seventy of one hundred. And the handbook never explains a conversion — the words “raw score,” “equating,” “converted” and “percentage of questions you answered correctly” appear nowhere in it.
Other states resolve this expressly — their handbooks state that raw scores “are converted into scaled scores” and warn that the reported score is “neither the number … nor the percentage of questions you answered correctly.” Indiana’s says no such thing.
So build no strategy on either reading. Treat 70 as the number and target a consistent 80%+ on practice exams. That margin covers you whichever interpretation is right.
🔑
Five Ways to Skip BOTH the Course and the Exam
Split across two sections, which is why most summaries catch only one
- 1 · Approved claims certification — IC 27-1-28-15(e). A program with a department-approved precertification course, exam and CE. IDOI names it: an active Uniform Claims Certification (UCC). The same certification separately exempts you from CE under IC 27-1-28-19(b)(3)
- 2 · Current out-of-state license — IC 27-1-28-16(a)(1), same line, in a state that requires a prelicensing exam
- 3 · Recently expired — IC 27-1-28-16(a)(2), that same license, expired less than 90 days ago. Routes 2 and 3 need certification of good standing from the other state
- 4 · Five years of experience — IC 27-1-28-16(a)(3): “provides proof from contracting insurers that the individual has participated in claims adjudication in the same line of authority during the five (5) years immediately preceding the date of application.” No license required in any state — only insurer letters
- 5 · New Indiana resident — IC 27-1-28-16(c)(1), licensed in an exam-requiring state, establishes Indiana residency, applies within 90 days
Route 4 is the one people miss — and the one exception that costs moneyThe five-year route does not require you to hold, or ever to have held, an adjuster license anywhere. For a career staff or TPA adjuster coming out of an exempt role, it converts unlicensed experience directly into an Indiana license. But note the discipline in the wording: “in the same line of authority” — five years of property and casualty does not waive the worker’s compensation exam. And IDOI carves out three states: California, Hawaii and New York residents “must complete an approved Indiana Independent Adjuster pre-licensing education course and the Indiana Independent Adjuster exam.” They are not reciprocal — a fully licensed California adjuster starts from zero.
🛡️
No fingerprints. No criminal background check. Not for adjusters, and not for producers either.
IC 27-1-28-12(b) is the exhaustive approval checklist — six findings: age 18; eligible to designate Indiana as home state; “trustworthy, reliable, and of good reputation”; no act grounding discipline under section 18; completed the prelicensing course; passed the written exam. No fingerprinting. No criminal history check. Nothing of the kind appears anywhere in the chapter’s twenty-four sections.
And the producer-versus-adjuster contrast some guides draw here does not exist: IC 27-1-15.6-6(b) mirrors the adjuster checklist. Indiana requires fingerprints of neither.
The proof this is deliberate: the Navigator license does require one — IDOI says a Navigator applicant “will need to complete a criminal background check,” citing IC 27-19-4. The Department knows how to impose one when the legislature directs it. For adjusters, it has not.
Budget zero for this line item. In Florida, New York or South Carolina it is a real cost. In Indiana it is not a step.
And the producer-versus-adjuster contrast some guides draw here does not exist: IC 27-1-15.6-6(b) mirrors the adjuster checklist. Indiana requires fingerprints of neither.
The proof this is deliberate: the Navigator license does require one — IDOI says a Navigator applicant “will need to complete a criminal background check,” citing IC 27-19-4. The Department knows how to impose one when the legislature directs it. For adjusters, it has not.
Budget zero for this line item. In Florida, New York or South Carolina it is a real cost. In Indiana it is not a step.
| Fee | Amount |
|---|---|
| Resident individual application · business entity · renewal | $40 |
| Reissuance within 12 months of expiration | $80 |
| Nonresident / Designated Home State — application and renewal | $90 |
| DHS reissuance within 12 months | $180 |
| Temporary emergency adjuster | $20 |
| Public adjuster certificate, annually | $50 |
| Fingerprints · background check · appointment | $0 |
IDOI adds that the $90 applies “unless a retaliatory fee applies”plus an electronic processing fee
⚠️
Lose your home state license and the Indiana one dies the same day
IC 27-1-28-17(f) — the harsh branch. If a nonresident’s home state license “terminates for any reason other than issuance of a new resident independent adjuster license in a new home state,” the Indiana license “also terminates immediately” and must be “immediately surrendered.” No grace period. No notice period.
IC 27-1-28-17(g) — the survivable branch. If it terminated because you moved and obtained a new resident license elsewhere, the Indiana license survives — and you have 30 days to notify Indiana and every other state that issued you a nonresident license. Subsection (h) mirrors this when an Indiana resident license terminates.
And reciprocity never stops being tested. IC 27-1-28-17 states it three separate times — at issuance (a)(3), to maintain (d)(2), and to renew (e)(2). If your home state changes its posture, your Indiana license is exposed though you did nothing wrong.
IC 27-1-28-17(g) — the survivable branch. If it terminated because you moved and obtained a new resident license elsewhere, the Indiana license survives — and you have 30 days to notify Indiana and every other state that issued you a nonresident license. Subsection (h) mirrors this when an Indiana resident license terminates.
And reciprocity never stops being tested. IC 27-1-28-17 states it three separate times — at issuance (a)(3), to maintain (d)(2), and to renew (e)(2). If your home state changes its posture, your Indiana license is exposed though you did nothing wrong.
🎓
24 hours of CE — and ZERO ethics hours
If you hold an Indiana producer license you will remember a three-hour ethics rule. It does not follow you here.
The statute specifies no ethics allocation. IC 27-1-28-19(a) says twenty-four hours every two years and stops.
No rule fills the gap. Both Administrative Code CE rules are dead letters — 760 IAC 1-47 is repealed, and 760 IAC 1-50 expired “under IC 4-22-2.5, effective January 1, 2002” (and was a producer rule anyway).
IDOI’s own CE table settles it. The Independent Adjuster row reads simply “24”. The Producer row reads “24 (3 of which must be an Ethics course if Accident & Health and/or Life licensed…).” And the list of “License Types With No CE Requirements” includes Public Adjuster.
Two IDOI rules do sit on top: “You may not take the same course more than once in a license renewal period,” and there is no carryover — the CE audit standards bar “hours used to satisfy previous license renewal periods.”
The statute specifies no ethics allocation. IC 27-1-28-19(a) says twenty-four hours every two years and stops.
No rule fills the gap. Both Administrative Code CE rules are dead letters — 760 IAC 1-47 is repealed, and 760 IAC 1-50 expired “under IC 4-22-2.5, effective January 1, 2002” (and was a producer rule anyway).
IDOI’s own CE table settles it. The Independent Adjuster row reads simply “24”. The Producer row reads “24 (3 of which must be an Ethics course if Accident & Health and/or Life licensed…).” And the list of “License Types With No CE Requirements” includes Public Adjuster.
Two IDOI rules do sit on top: “You may not take the same course more than once in a license renewal period,” and there is no carryover — the CE audit standards bar “hours used to satisfy previous license renewal periods.”
🌪️
Emergency adjusters — Indiana runs this backwards, and only ONE official can start it
IC 27-1-28-4 defines “catastrophe” as “an event that is the subject of a declaration by the commissioner” meeting one of five severity criteria. The Insurance Commissioner alone. Not the Governor. Not the President. Many states accept any of the three, and say so expressly. A presidential disaster declaration for an Indiana tornado outbreak, standing alone, does NOT open this route.
The INSURER applies, not you. IC 27-1-28-11(a): the insurer may contract with an unlicensed but otherwise qualified individual “if the insurer obtains for the individual a temporary emergency independent adjuster license.” An unlicensed adjuster cannot cure the carrier’s failure to file.
The clock starts when you begin WORKING. Subsection (b): the insurer must file “not more than five (5) days after the individual begins to adjust claims.” Not after deployment, not after the contract, not after the declaration.
Ninety days — and it travels. Within the window, the license reaches “any other catastrophe that occurs within the ninety (90) day period … without the insurer applying for an additional” license. Fee: $20.
The INSURER applies, not you. IC 27-1-28-11(a): the insurer may contract with an unlicensed but otherwise qualified individual “if the insurer obtains for the individual a temporary emergency independent adjuster license.” An unlicensed adjuster cannot cure the carrier’s failure to file.
The clock starts when you begin WORKING. Subsection (b): the insurer must file “not more than five (5) days after the individual begins to adjust claims.” Not after deployment, not after the contract, not after the declaration.
Ninety days — and it travels. Within the window, the license reaches “any other catastrophe that occurs within the ninety (90) day period … without the insurer applying for an additional” license. Fee: $20.
Start with a negative, because it kills a whole family of wrong answers.
Indiana has no unfair claims settlement practices REGULATION. It did not adopt the NAIC model rule. Indiana’s unfair claims law is entirely statutory.
Indiana has no unfair claims settlement practices REGULATION. It did not adopt the NAIC model rule. Indiana’s unfair claims law is entirely statutory.
🚫
760 IAC 1-67 is “Privacy of Consumer Information” — not the claims rule
The complete rule list for 760 IAC Article 1 — rules 1 through 83 — contains no rule titled “Unfair Claims Settlement Practices,” “Claims Settlement,” or anything equivalent. The only claims-adjacent rules are 760 IAC 1-1 (auto policy form) and 760 IAC 1-23 (accident and sickness claim forms), and neither imposes any timeline.
760 IAC 1-67 is sometimes miscited as Indiana’s unfair claims rule. It is titled “Privacy of Consumer Information.” Its section 5 is “Information to be included in privacy notices,” and its violation clause merely deems a breach “an unfair method of competition … subject to the provisions of IC 27-4-1.”
A study guide that points you at the Administrative Code for claim practices is pointing at nothing.
760 IAC 1-67 is sometimes miscited as Indiana’s unfair claims rule. It is titled “Privacy of Consumer Information.” Its section 5 is “Information to be included in privacy notices,” and its violation clause merely deems a breach “an unfair method of competition … subject to the provisions of IC 27-4-1.”
A study guide that points you at the Administrative Code for claim practices is pointing at nothing.
IC 27-4-1-4.5 — sixteen enumerated practicesMisrepresenting policy provisions · failing to acknowledge and act reasonably promptly · failing to adopt reasonable investigation standards · refusing to pay without a reasonable investigation · failing to affirm or deny within a reasonable time after proofs of loss · not attempting in good faith to settle where liability has become reasonably clear · compelling litigation by offering substantially less than amounts ultimately recovered · advertising-based lowballing · settling on an altered application · payments without a coverage statement · a known policy of appealing arbitration awards · duplicate-information proof demands · leveraging one coverage part against another · failing to explain a denial or compromise · ascribing fault in the obvious absence of it · and the IC 27-4-1.5 auto repair practices.
⚖️
Item (15) is not in the NAIC model. It is distinctly Indiana — and it is aimed at you.
“In negotiations concerning liability insurance claims, ascribing a percentage of fault to a person seeking to recover from an insured party, in spite of an obvious absence of fault on the part of that person.”
In plain terms: assigning a rear-ended claimant 15% of the fault to shave the settlement is not merely aggressive negotiation in Indiana. It is an enumerated unfair claim settlement practice.
And it reaches you personally. IC 27-1-28-14(g) is one sentence long: “An independent adjuster is subject to IC 27-4-1-4.5.” The sixteen practices attach to the licensee, not merely to the carrier whose claims you handle.
No national course teaches this, because no model act contains it.
In plain terms: assigning a rear-ended claimant 15% of the fault to shave the settlement is not merely aggressive negotiation in Indiana. It is an enumerated unfair claim settlement practice.
And it reaches you personally. IC 27-1-28-14(g) is one sentence long: “An independent adjuster is subject to IC 27-4-1-4.5.” The sixteen practices attach to the licensee, not merely to the carrier whose claims you handle.
No national course teaches this, because no model act contains it.
🔄
The frequency trigger is in a DIFFERENT section — and uses DIFFERENT words
Two errors travel together here.
IC 27-4-1-4.5 contains NO frequency requirement. Its entire introduction is “The following are unfair claim settlement practices:” A single act violates it the moment it occurs.
The frequency element lives one section away, in IC 27-4-1-4(a)(16): “Committing or performing, with such frequency as to indicate a general practice, unfair claim settlement practices (as defined in section 4.5 of this chapter).”
So the ladder has two rungs. One act = an unfair claim settlement practice. Frequency = an unfair method of competition, which is the thing the Commissioner sanctions under IC 27-4-1-6.
And note the exact words: “a general practice,” NOT “a general business practice.” The NAIC model says general business practice, and virtually every national course repeats it. Indiana dropped the word “business.”
IC 27-4-1-4.5 contains NO frequency requirement. Its entire introduction is “The following are unfair claim settlement practices:” A single act violates it the moment it occurs.
The frequency element lives one section away, in IC 27-4-1-4(a)(16): “Committing or performing, with such frequency as to indicate a general practice, unfair claim settlement practices (as defined in section 4.5 of this chapter).”
So the ladder has two rungs. One act = an unfair claim settlement practice. Frequency = an unfair method of competition, which is the thing the Commissioner sanctions under IC 27-4-1-6.
And note the exact words: “a general practice,” NOT “a general business practice.” The NAIC model says general business practice, and virtually every national course repeats it. Indiana dropped the word “business.”
🔒 What Indiana takes AWAY
No private right of action under the unfair practices article — IC 27-4-1-18 says so expressly
No unfair claims regulation, and no numeric claim-handling deadlines of any kind
Third-party claimants cannot sue for bad faith at all — Cain v. Griffin
No statutory bad faith action. Indiana bad faith is 100% common law
No insurance-specific fee-shifting statute for a prevailing insured
⚡ What Indiana GIVES
A tort action for bad faith — Erie Ins. Co. v. Hickman, 622 N.E.2d 515 (Ind. 1993)
Bad faith runs to any policy-defined insured, not just the policyholder — Schmidt v. Allstate (2020)
It is a jury question — Cosme v. Clark (Ind. 2024) reversed a directed verdict for the insurer
Commissioner penalties of $25,000 per act, $50,000 where knowledge is shown, plus suspension or revocation
Adjuster discipline: 13 grounds, $50–$10,000, in addition to any other penalty
🚫
Nobody can sue you under the unfair practices article — expressly
IC 27-4-1-18: “This article does not create a cause of action other than an action by: (1) the commissioner to enforce his order; or (2) a person … to appeal an order of the commissioner.”
This is cleaner and stronger than reasoning from implied-right-of-action doctrine. It is an express statutory bar covering the whole of IC 27-4-1 — reaching section 4, section 4.5, and IC 27-4-1.5 alike.
Be warned: at least one widely consulted multi-state insurance compendium answers “Yes” to whether Indiana’s Unfair Claims Practices Act creates a private right of action. That is wrong. Follow the statute.
What a violation IS good for: evidence supporting the common-law bad faith tort. The statute supplies the standard of conduct; Hickman supplies the remedy.
This is cleaner and stronger than reasoning from implied-right-of-action doctrine. It is an express statutory bar covering the whole of IC 27-4-1 — reaching section 4, section 4.5, and IC 27-4-1.5 alike.
Be warned: at least one widely consulted multi-state insurance compendium answers “Yes” to whether Indiana’s Unfair Claims Practices Act creates a private right of action. That is wrong. Follow the statute.
What a violation IS good for: evidence supporting the common-law bad faith tort. The statute supplies the standard of conduct; Hickman supplies the remedy.
⚖️
Erie Insurance Co. v. Hickman — the Four Prongs and the Limit
622 N.E.2d 515 (Ind. 1993) — note the citation, not 622 N.E.2d 745
- The Court granted transfer “to reaffirm the existence of a duty that an insurer deal in good faith with its insured, and to recognize a cause of action in tort for the breach of that duty.”
- The obligation to refrain from: “(1) making an unfounded refusal to pay policy proceeds; (2) causing an unfounded delay in making payment; (3) deceiving the insured; and (4) exercising any unfair advantage to pressure an insured into a settlement of his claim.”
- The limit, and it matters just as much: “This new cause of action does not arise every time an insurance claim is erroneously denied. For example, a good faith dispute about the amount of a valid claim or about whether the insured has a valid claim at all will not supply the grounds for a recovery in tort.”
- Proof standard — Freidline v. Shelby Ins. Co., 774 N.E.2d 37 (Ind. 2002): “with clear and convincing evidence, that the insurer had knowledge that there was no legitimate basis for denying liability.”
- Negligence is not enough — Allstate v. Fields (Ind. Ct. App. 2008): “Poor judgment or negligence does not amount to bad faith; the additional element of conscious wrongdoing must be present.”
| Who is claiming | Bad faith tort? |
|---|---|
| Named insured | Yes |
| Policy-defined or additional insured — Schmidt | Yes |
| Third-party beneficiary — Cain | Contract only |
| Third-party claimant | No |
the line is contractual status, not privitybut an insured MAY assign a bad faith claim
💰
The plaintiff keeps only 25% of a punitive award. Indiana keeps the rest.
IC 34-51-3-4 caps punitive damages at “the greater of: (1) three (3) times the amount of compensatory damages … or (2) fifty thousand dollars ($50,000).” That is the part national materials teach.
Here is the part they omit. IC 34-51-3-6 requires the defendant to pay the award to the clerk of the court, who pays the plaintiff “twenty-five percent (25%) of the punitive damage award” and “the remaining seventy-five percent (75%) … to the treasurer of state, who shall deposit the funds into the violent crime victims compensation fund.”
The state’s interest vests when the verdict is announced, not when payment is made. And IC 34-51-3-3 bars instructing the jury about the split — jurors set a number without knowing three-quarters of it leaves the plaintiff.
Do the arithmetic on the statutory floor: a $50,000 punitive award nets the insured $12,500.
Here is the part they omit. IC 34-51-3-6 requires the defendant to pay the award to the clerk of the court, who pays the plaintiff “twenty-five percent (25%) of the punitive damage award” and “the remaining seventy-five percent (75%) … to the treasurer of state, who shall deposit the funds into the violent crime victims compensation fund.”
The state’s interest vests when the verdict is announced, not when payment is made. And IC 34-51-3-3 bars instructing the jury about the split — jurors set a number without knowing three-quarters of it leaves the plaintiff.
Do the arithmetic on the statutory floor: a $50,000 punitive award nets the insured $12,500.
Two Indiana questions have no answer — do not let anyone sell you oneThe limitations period for the bad faith tort. Hickman calls it a tort, pointing at two years — but IC 34-11-2-4 reaches only injury to person, character, or personal property, and bad faith damages are usually pure economic loss. No published Indiana appellate decision resolves it. Whether an adjuster is personally liable. There is no controlling Indiana authority. The Hickman duty is “implied in all insurance contracts” and runs from the insurer; IC 27-4-1-18 forecloses any statutory claim against anyone. Assume neither immunity nor liability. What is certain is that your real exposure in Indiana is regulatory.
This is the single most likely place to give a wrong answer about Indiana.
For property and casualty claims, Indiana has no numeric claim-handling deadlines at all. The NAIC model schedule that national courses teach is not Indiana law.
For property and casualty claims, Indiana has no numeric claim-handling deadlines at all. The NAIC model schedule that national courses teach is not Indiana law.
⏳
15 / 15 / 10 / 30 — Indiana adopted NONE of them
A nationally written course will teach the model schedule: 15 days to acknowledge, 15 days to supply proof-of-loss forms, 10 days after proof to affirm or deny, 30 days for status updates.
Indiana has adopted none of these numbers.
Three findings converge. One: no claims regulation exists — 760 IAC Article 1 has no claim-handling rule. Two: the statute uses only reasonableness language — “reasonably promptly,” “prompt investigation,” “within a reasonable time after proof of loss statements have been completed,” “prompt, fair, and equitable settlements … in which liability has become reasonably clear.” Three: IDOI publishes no timeframes.
The correct Indiana answer to “how many days do I have to acknowledge a claim?” is “promptly and reasonably — Indiana sets no number.” If an exam item offers 15, 10 or 30 days as a general claim-handling deadline, it is offering you the model act.
Indiana has adopted none of these numbers.
Three findings converge. One: no claims regulation exists — 760 IAC Article 1 has no claim-handling rule. Two: the statute uses only reasonableness language — “reasonably promptly,” “prompt investigation,” “within a reasonable time after proof of loss statements have been completed,” “prompt, fair, and equitable settlements … in which liability has become reasonably clear.” Three: IDOI publishes no timeframes.
The correct Indiana answer to “how many days do I have to acknowledge a claim?” is “promptly and reasonably — Indiana sets no number.” If an exam item offers 15, 10 or 30 days as a general claim-handling deadline, it is offering you the model act.
| The deadlines that DO exist | Days | Authority |
|---|---|---|
| Commissioner delivers a consumer complaint to the insurer | 10 business | IC 27-4-1-5.6 |
| Insurer’s written report responding to that complaint | 20 business | IC 27-4-1-5.6 |
| Health clean claim — pay or deny, electronic | 30 | IC 27-8-5.7-6 |
| Health clean claim — pay or deny, paper | 45 | IC 27-8-5.7-6 |
| Report administrative or criminal action against your license | 30 | IC 27-1-28-22 |
| Report change of legal name or home state address | 30 | IC 27-1-28-14(h) |
| Acknowledge, investigate, affirm, deny or pay a P&C claim | none | — |
10 and 20 are BUSINESS days, and run from the COMPLAINT30/45 are health lines only, and run to PROVIDERS
🔍
Three ways to misstate the 10 and 20 days
1. They are BUSINESS days, not calendar days.
2. They run from the COMPLAINT, not from the claim.
3. The ten days is the COMMISSIONER’s obligation. Only the twenty is the insurer’s.
IC 27-4-1-5.6: “The commissioner shall, within ten (10) business days from the date of receipt of a written complaint, deliver a copy of the complaint to the insurer,” and the insurer must, “within twenty (20) business days from the date of receipt,” provide “a written report” explaining its actions and the reasons for any inaction.
These are the only numeric deadlines in Indiana’s unfair claims scheme, and they are frequently repackaged as though they were claim-handling deadlines. They are not.
Note also: “Each insurer shall provide to each current policyholder a one (1) time written notice of the remedies provided under this section.”
2. They run from the COMPLAINT, not from the claim.
3. The ten days is the COMMISSIONER’s obligation. Only the twenty is the insurer’s.
IC 27-4-1-5.6: “The commissioner shall, within ten (10) business days from the date of receipt of a written complaint, deliver a copy of the complaint to the insurer,” and the insurer must, “within twenty (20) business days from the date of receipt,” provide “a written report” explaining its actions and the reasons for any inaction.
These are the only numeric deadlines in Indiana’s unfair claims scheme, and they are frequently repackaged as though they were claim-handling deadlines. They are not.
Note also: “Each insurer shall provide to each current policyholder a one (1) time written notice of the remedies provided under this section.”
🏥
The 30/45-day rule is health-lines-only, and it runs to PROVIDERS
IC 27-8-5.7 (insurers) and IC 27-13-36.2 (HMOs) are provider-payment statutes. The obligation is owed to the provider who submitted the claim, not to the insured member — and neither reaches property, casualty, auto or worker’s compensation at all.
A course teaching “Indiana gives you 30 or 45 days to pay a claim” as a general rule is wrong twice — on the lines it covers and on who may invoke it.
Two details worth having: failure to notify the provider of deficiencies within the window “establishes the submitted claim as a clean claim”; and interest accrues from day 31 (electronic) or day 46 (paper) at a rate IDOI publishes annually by bulletin. Never quote a rate without pulling the current-year bulletin.
A course teaching “Indiana gives you 30 or 45 days to pay a claim” as a general rule is wrong twice — on the lines it covers and on who may invoke it.
Two details worth having: failure to notify the provider of deficiencies within the window “establishes the submitted claim as a clean claim”; and interest accrues from day 31 (electronic) or day 46 (paper) at a rate IDOI publishes annually by bulletin. Never quote a rate without pulling the current-year bulletin.
Worker’s compensation is the exception that proves the ruleIndiana comp has real, hard deadlines — and they live in Title 22, outside Title 27 and outside the Insurance Commissioner’s jurisdiction entirely. 7 days for the employer to report an injury causing death or medical care beyond first aid · 14 days for the first TTD installment · 14 days from then to file the payment report and tender the compensation agreement · and 30 days from the employer’s knowledge to deny or report inability to determine liability. See cluster 5.
Indiana’s substantive rules are mostly about what is NOT there.
No standard fire policy. No valued policy law. No matching rule. No anti-steering law. No fraud bureau. No SIU requirement. The absence of a rule is frequently the right answer.
No standard fire policy. No valued policy law. No matching rule. No anti-steering law. No fraud bureau. No SIU requirement. The absence of a rule is frequently the right answer.
| Automobile | Indiana |
|---|---|
| Minimum liability limits | 25 / 50 / 25 |
| UM bodily injury minimum | 25 / 50 |
| UIM bodily injury minimum — its own floor | $50,000 |
| Tort or no-fault | Tort · no PIP |
| Comparative fault bar (statute states no percentage) | 51% |
| Salvage title scope | 7 model years |
| Auto BI and PD statute of limitations | 2 years |
PD rose from $10,000 to $25,000 on 7/1/201825/50/10 is out of date and still in print everywhere
🚗
The 70% total-loss threshold does NOT apply to insurers
Read the structure of IC 9-22-3-3(a), not the number.
(a)(1) — the insurer prong: “An insurance company has determined that it is economically impractical to repair the wrecked, destroyed, or damaged vehicle and has made an agreed settlement with the insured or claimant.” There is no percentage anywhere in it.
(a)(2) — where the 70% lives: it applies only where the owner “is a business that insures its own vehicles” or “acquired the vehicle after the vehicle was wrecked” — then repair cost must exceed “seventy percent (70%) of the fair market value” immediately before the loss.
And it is a TITLING rule, not a mandate on the insurer. Nothing in IC 9-22-3 tells an insurer when it must declare a total loss. An Indiana adjuster is not statutorily compelled to total a vehicle at 70%.
Note also the percentage is of “fair market value” — not actual cash value — and IC 9-22-3-2 defines it by naming the sources: “the average trade-in value found in the NADA Official Used Car Guide, vehicle valuations determined by CCC Information Services, Inc., or valuations determined by such other authorities as are approved by the bureau.” That is unusually prescriptive and directly useful in a valuation dispute.
(a)(1) — the insurer prong: “An insurance company has determined that it is economically impractical to repair the wrecked, destroyed, or damaged vehicle and has made an agreed settlement with the insured or claimant.” There is no percentage anywhere in it.
(a)(2) — where the 70% lives: it applies only where the owner “is a business that insures its own vehicles” or “acquired the vehicle after the vehicle was wrecked” — then repair cost must exceed “seventy percent (70%) of the fair market value” immediately before the loss.
And it is a TITLING rule, not a mandate on the insurer. Nothing in IC 9-22-3 tells an insurer when it must declare a total loss. An Indiana adjuster is not statutorily compelled to total a vehicle at 70%.
Note also the percentage is of “fair market value” — not actual cash value — and IC 9-22-3-2 defines it by naming the sources: “the average trade-in value found in the NADA Official Used Car Guide, vehicle valuations determined by CCC Information Services, Inc., or valuations determined by such other authorities as are approved by the bureau.” That is unusually prescriptive and directly useful in a valuation dispute.
🏛️
Comparative fault does NOT reach government defendants — contributory negligence still does
This is the most consequential trap in Indiana auto adjusting.
IC 34-51-2-2: “This chapter does not apply in any manner to tort claims against governmental entities or public employees under IC 34-13-3” — the Indiana Tort Claims Act. IC 34-51-2-1(b) likewise excludes medical malpractice claims against qualified health care providers.
For those defendants, Indiana’s common-law contributory negligence rule survives: ANY fault by the claimant, however slight, is a COMPLETE BAR.
Concretely: a collision with a city police cruiser, a county snowplow, a municipal bus, or a public school vehicle is decided under contributory negligence. A claimant who is 5% at fault recovers nothing — and would have recovered 95% from a private defendant.
A course teaching “Indiana is a 51% modified comparative fault state” full stop will produce a wrong answer every time a government vehicle is involved. Note too that IC 34-51-2-6 contains no percentage at all — it bars recovery where the claimant’s fault is “greater than the fault of all persons whose fault proximately contributed,” which the nonparty defense can quietly shift.
IC 34-51-2-2: “This chapter does not apply in any manner to tort claims against governmental entities or public employees under IC 34-13-3” — the Indiana Tort Claims Act. IC 34-51-2-1(b) likewise excludes medical malpractice claims against qualified health care providers.
For those defendants, Indiana’s common-law contributory negligence rule survives: ANY fault by the claimant, however slight, is a COMPLETE BAR.
Concretely: a collision with a city police cruiser, a county snowplow, a municipal bus, or a public school vehicle is decided under contributory negligence. A claimant who is 5% at fault recovers nothing — and would have recovered 95% from a private defendant.
A course teaching “Indiana is a 51% modified comparative fault state” full stop will produce a wrong answer every time a government vehicle is involved. Note too that IC 34-51-2-6 contains no percentage at all — it bars recovery where the claimant’s fault is “greater than the fault of all persons whose fault proximately contributed,” which the nonparty defense can quietly shift.
🔧 Aftermarket parts — Indiana DOES regulate this
📌 But read the two limits
IC 27-4-1.5-8
Written notice before directing exterior repair, offering OEM new, non-OEM new, or used body parts, and letting the insured “indicate in writing” the type approvedLimit one — FIRST PARTY ONLY
IC 27-4-1.5-3 defines “insured” as a person entitled to the coverage. Third-party claimants get nothing from this chapterEach failure is an unfair practice
§§ 9 through 13 — no notice, no selection, wrong parts used, refusal to pay for chosen parts, and no delegation escape via agent or body shopLimit two — FIVE YEARS
Applies “only in the five (5) years after the model year of the motor vehicle”IDOI Bulletin 71
Notice within 10 days of claim receipt; insured gets “not less than twenty (20) days” to select; repairs prohibited without approval or waiver in that windowQuote the statute, not the bulletin
Bulletin 71 (1991) says “six years of manufacture”; the statute says five years after the model yearIndiana has NO anti-steering lawMany states prohibit an insurer from requiring or steering an insured to a particular repair facility. Indiana does not. IC 27-4-1.5 addresses body parts only, and none of the sixteen practices in IC 27-4-1-4.5 mentions repair shops. Bulletin 71 confirms the boundary from the other side: the parts-notice rules apply “irrespective of an insurer’s policy regarding body shop selection.” That is a constraint on parts, not a prohibition on steering. Do not import a “right to choose your own shop” rule from national material.
🏠
“Indiana gives you two years to sue on a homeowners policy” is FALSE
IC 27-1-13-17 is a floor on what the insurer may WRITE into the policy — not a limitations period. It voids any residential policy clause limiting suit to “less than two (2) years from the date of loss.”
State Farm Fire & Cas. Co. v. Riddell National Bank (Ind. Ct. App. 2013), per the Indiana Judiciary’s own summary: the statute “does not establish a two-year statute of limitations for insurance claims. Rather, this statute merely voids policy provisions requiring claim filing in a time period less than two years.” Because the policy carried a conformity-to-state-law clause, the ten-year period of IC 34-11-2-11 applied instead, and the claim was timely despite a one-year clause in the contract.
Printing “Indiana: 2 years to sue” would teach an error that could cost a claimant eight years of rights.
One honest caveat: IC 34-11-2-11’s ten years covers contracts “other than those for the payment of money,” while IC 34-11-2-9(b) sets six years for written contracts for the payment of money. Indiana courts have applied the ten-year rule, but the tension is genuine. Do not present ten years as unqualified.
State Farm Fire & Cas. Co. v. Riddell National Bank (Ind. Ct. App. 2013), per the Indiana Judiciary’s own summary: the statute “does not establish a two-year statute of limitations for insurance claims. Rather, this statute merely voids policy provisions requiring claim filing in a time period less than two years.” Because the policy carried a conformity-to-state-law clause, the ten-year period of IC 34-11-2-11 applied instead, and the claim was timely despite a one-year clause in the contract.
Printing “Indiana: 2 years to sue” would teach an error that could cost a claimant eight years of rights.
One honest caveat: IC 34-11-2-11’s ten years covers contracts “other than those for the payment of money,” while IC 34-11-2-9(b) sets six years for written contracts for the payment of money. Indiana courts have applied the ten-year rule, but the tension is genuine. Do not present ten years as unqualified.
| Cancellation & nonrenewal | New-policy window | Nonrenewal notice |
|---|---|---|
| Residential property — IC 27-7-12 | 60 days | 20 days |
| Commercial P&C — IC 27-1-31 | 90 days | 45 days |
| Personal auto — IC 27-7-6 | 60 days* | 20 days |
| Nonpayment cancellation — all three | 10 days | |
| Commercial nonrenewal — municipality or county | 60 days | |
producer who procured the policy gets 10 days head start*the auto rule is drafted as an exemption running the other way — and a RENEWAL policy is protected from day one
Two property negatives Indiana candidates get wrong — and one ironic wrinkleNo standard fire policy. Indiana mandates no form, and repealed the one rule it had: 760 IAC 1-2, Fire Insurance-Policy Form (Repealed). The wrinkle: the only occurrence of the phrase “standard fire policy” in the entire Indiana Code is IC 27-1-27-6 — the subject list for the public adjuster licensing exam. Indiana tests it without imposing it. No valued policy law. A full-text search returns zero Indiana results. The trap is geographic intuition — Ohio, Wisconsin, Minnesota, Missouri and Kansas all have one. Indiana does not. Total fire losses pay per policy terms, under the broad evidence rule of Travelers Indem. Co. v. Armstrong.
⛏
Mine subsidence — Indiana-specific, on the exam, and the workflow is unlike anything else you adjust
IC 27-7-9-3: “mine subsidence” is the collapse of an underground coal mine resulting in damage to a structure. Expressly excluded: earthquake, landslide, volcanic eruption, and collapse of storm or sewer drains.
Mandatory OFFER, elective purchase. Coverage must be made available in the designated counties; the premium must be “stated separately”; and it must be included if the insured requests it. Deductible: 2% of the insured value, minimum $250, maximum $500. Up to $15,000 temporary living expenses.
The workflow — IC 27-7-9-9.5(b): “The adjustment of a claim … is the sole responsibility of the insurer until the insurer makes a preliminary determination that the loss MAY involve mine subsidence. Upon such a determination, those persons retained by the commissioner … shall assist … and the costs of the event shall be paid from the fund.”
Note may, not does. You adjust normally; the instant you form that preliminary view, IDOI’s engineers step in and the Fund picks up the cost. IDOI also notes permanent repairs may be deferred until subsidence activity ceases — so do not push a claimant to rebuild on your usual timetable.
On the coverage cap: the statute states no dollar figure, tying it to the amount in force and reinsured by the Fund. The per-structure dollar cap is an administrative figure that has been raised more than once without legislation — verify it with IDOI rather than memorizing one.
Mandatory OFFER, elective purchase. Coverage must be made available in the designated counties; the premium must be “stated separately”; and it must be included if the insured requests it. Deductible: 2% of the insured value, minimum $250, maximum $500. Up to $15,000 temporary living expenses.
The workflow — IC 27-7-9-9.5(b): “The adjustment of a claim … is the sole responsibility of the insurer until the insurer makes a preliminary determination that the loss MAY involve mine subsidence. Upon such a determination, those persons retained by the commissioner … shall assist … and the costs of the event shall be paid from the fund.”
Note may, not does. You adjust normally; the instant you form that preliminary view, IDOI’s engineers step in and the Fund picks up the cost. IDOI also notes permanent repairs may be deferred until subsidence activity ceases — so do not push a claimant to rebuild on your usual timetable.
On the coverage cap: the statute states no dollar figure, tying it to the amount in force and reinsured by the Fund. The per-structure dollar cap is an administrative figure that has been raised more than once without legislation — verify it with IDOI rather than memorizing one.
💳 Guaranty Association — IC 27-6-8
$300,000 per covered claim — but worker’s compensation is UNCAPPED: “the full amount”
NO $100 deductible. Indiana omitted the NAIC model floor — it pays from the first dollar
Unearned premium: lesser of 80% or $650 × months remaining (max 12) — about $7,800, not a flat $10,000
Net worth: no first-party payment above $25M; right of recovery above $50M
Vintage trap: $100,000/claim + $300,000/occurrence is pre-2013 law
🚫 Fraud — almost none of it is what you expect
IC 35-43-5-4.5 was REPEALED by P.L.174-2021, effective 7/1/2021. Material citing it teaches repealed law
Claim fraud is now general fraud under IC 35-43-5-4 — Class A misdemeanor at base, Level 6 felony at $750
The section actually titled “Insurance fraud” — IC 35-43-5-4.7 — is a Class A INFRACTION and does not cover claim fraud
No general reporting duty. No fraud bureau. No SIU or antifraud plan requirement. The only mandate is vehicle theft — IC 27-2-14-2, reported to law enforcement, not IDOI, with no deadline
Fraud warning required on preprinted CLAIM forms only — never on applications
📝
The required fraud warning is out of date on its own face
IC 27-2-16-3(a) compels insurers to print, on “all preprinted claim forms … required as a condition of payment of a claim,” a statement that “clearly states in substance”: “A person who knowingly and with intent to defraud an insurer files a statement of claim containing any false, incomplete, or misleading information commits a felony.”
But since July 1, 2021 that is not accurate. Filing a false claim is at base a Class A misdemeanor under IC 35-43-5-4, becoming a Level 6 felony only at $750 of loss. The mandated sentence was never conformed to the 2021 recodification. Insurers must still print it as written — but it now overstates the floor offense level. Know both facts.
Three more points: applications are NOT covered — the chapter is titled “Insurance Claim Form Notice” and Indiana has no application-fraud warning requirement at all. “In substance” is a safe harbor, not a magic incantation. And subsection (b) supplies the only consequence of omission: the lack of the statement “does not constitute a defense against a prosecution under IC 35-43-5.”
But since July 1, 2021 that is not accurate. Filing a false claim is at base a Class A misdemeanor under IC 35-43-5-4, becoming a Level 6 felony only at $750 of loss. The mandated sentence was never conformed to the 2021 recodification. Insurers must still print it as written — but it now overstates the floor offense level. Know both facts.
Three more points: applications are NOT covered — the chapter is titled “Insurance Claim Form Notice” and Indiana has no application-fraud warning requirement at all. “In substance” is a safe harbor, not a magic incantation. And subsection (b) supplies the only consequence of omission: the lack of the statement “does not constitute a defense against a prosecution under IC 35-43-5.”
🩹
In Indiana, the EMPLOYER picks the doctor
IC 22-3-3-4(a): “After an injury and prior to an adjudication of permanent impairment, the employer shall furnish or cause to be furnished, free of charge to the employee, an attending physician for the treatment of the employee’s injuries…”
The duty to furnish carries the right to select, and the enforcement is sharp: “The refusal of the employee to accept such services … shall bar the employee from all compensation otherwise payable during the period of the refusal” — with written notice of the consequences required on a Board-prescribed form.
No employee choice. No panel. No free change of physician. No statutory second opinion. The only escape hatches are an emergency or the employer’s failure to provide care.
A national comp module teaching employee choice, panel selection, or one free change must be overridden for Indiana.
The duty to furnish carries the right to select, and the enforcement is sharp: “The refusal of the employee to accept such services … shall bar the employee from all compensation otherwise payable during the period of the refusal” — with written notice of the consequences required on a Board-prescribed form.
No employee choice. No panel. No free change of physician. No statutory second opinion. The only escape hatches are an emergency or the employer’s failure to provide care.
A national comp module teaching employee choice, panel selection, or one free change must be overridden for Indiana.
| Worker’s compensation — 2026 numbers | Figure |
|---|---|
| Waiting period — benefits begin with the | 8th day |
| First 7 days paid back only if disability continues longer than | 21 days |
| Compensation rate · maximum duration | 66⅔% · 500 wks |
| Maximum average weekly wage, injuries on/after 7/1/2026 | $1,316 |
| Maximum weekly TTD (arithmetic, not printed in the statute) | $877.33 |
| Maximum total compensation | $439,000 |
| Employee notice to employer · filing with the Board | 30 days · 2 yrs |
| Burial allowance | $10,000 |
| Bad faith / lack of diligence award — IC 22-3-4-12.1 | $500–$20,000 |
$1,316 caps the WAGE INPUT, not the benefit7/1/2026 is the LAST step in the schedule — SB 265 died in committee
🗑️
Three comp traps that cost adjusters real money
1. The Board’s own published rate chart is a decade stale. The WCB PPI weekly benefits PDF is dated 2014 and its wage table stops at the 7/1/16–6/30/2020 row. An adjuster relying on that official-looking state PDF computes a 2026 injury at $1,170 / $780 / $390,000 instead of $1,316 / $877.33 / $439,000. Cite IC 22-3-3-22 as amended by P.L.160-2022 — not the chart.
2. The 30-day notice rule is NOT a forfeiture deadline. IC 22-3-3-1: late notice merely suspends compensation until notice is given, and defective notice bars compensation only if the employer proves prejudice, and “only to the extent of such prejudices.” The whole rule is switched off if the employer has actual knowledge. An adjuster who denies outright for “no notice within 30 days” is misapplying the statute.
3. Paying TTD RESTARTS the two-year filing clock. IC 22-3-3-3: where temporary disability compensation is paid, the limitation period “begins to run on the last date for which the compensation was paid.” Compute the bar date from the accident date after paying TTD and you will be wrong, sometimes by years.
2. The 30-day notice rule is NOT a forfeiture deadline. IC 22-3-3-1: late notice merely suspends compensation until notice is given, and defective notice bars compensation only if the employer proves prejudice, and “only to the extent of such prejudices.” The whole rule is switched off if the employer has actual knowledge. An adjuster who denies outright for “no notice within 30 days” is misapplying the statute.
3. Paying TTD RESTARTS the two-year filing clock. IC 22-3-3-3: where temporary disability compensation is paid, the limitation period “begins to run on the last date for which the compensation was paid.” Compute the bar date from the accident date after paying TTD and you will be wrong, sometimes by years.
PPI is DEGREE-based and MARGINAL — do not convert it to weeksIndiana does not pay PPI in weeks and does not pay a percentage of the TTD rate. Whole body = 100 degrees. IC 22-3-3-10(f) fixes the enumerated losses: thumb 12, index finger 8, hand below the elbow 40, arm above the elbow 50, foot below the knee 35, leg above the knee 45, eye 35, hearing one ear 15, both ears 40. For injuries on and after 7/1/2026 the bands are $1,970 (degrees 1–10), $2,197 (11–35), $3,585 (36–50), $4,569 (above 50) — and they stack like tax brackets. A 20-degree rating pays (10 × $1,970) + (10 × $2,197) = $41,670. You do not apply a single rate across the whole rating.
⚖️
Comp bad faith is a DOLLAR RANGE, and the Board’s jurisdiction is exclusive
IC 22-3-4-12.1(a): the Board “has the exclusive jurisdiction to determine whether the employer, the employer’s worker’s compensation administrator, or the worker’s compensation insurance carrier has acted with a lack of diligence, in bad faith, or has committed an independent tort in adjusting or settling the claim.”
(b): the award “shall be at least five hundred dollars ($500), but not more than twenty thousand dollars ($20,000), depending upon the degree of culpability and the actual damages sustained” — capped at $20,000 for the life of the claim, with attorney fees not exceeding 33⅓%.
Three things to take from this:
1. It is a dollar range, not a percentage add-on. Many states use a 10%–50% multiplier. Indiana does not.
2. Jurisdiction is exclusive — there is no separate civil bad-faith action for comp claim handling, so the Hickman tort does not run to a comp claim.
3. The TPA is a named liable party. Given that TPA comp adjusters are exempt from licensing under IC 27-1-28-6(b)(12), this is where their accountability actually sits.
(b): the award “shall be at least five hundred dollars ($500), but not more than twenty thousand dollars ($20,000), depending upon the degree of culpability and the actual damages sustained” — capped at $20,000 for the life of the claim, with attorney fees not exceeding 33⅓%.
Three things to take from this:
1. It is a dollar range, not a percentage add-on. Many states use a 10%–50% multiplier. Indiana does not.
2. Jurisdiction is exclusive — there is no separate civil bad-faith action for comp claim handling, so the Hickman tort does not run to a comp claim.
3. The TPA is a named liable party. Given that TPA comp adjusters are exempt from licensing under IC 27-1-28-6(b)(12), this is where their accountability actually sits.
Ten scenarios — each one a place Indiana departs from the national rule.
Read the fact pattern before the options. Most of these have a plausible wrong answer that is simply the majority rule somewhere else.
Read the fact pattern before the options. Most of these have a plausible wrong answer that is simply the majority rule somewhere else.
🎯
Top Exam Tips — Indiana Adjuster Regulations
1. Two licenses only — independent (IC 27-1-28) and public (IC 27-1-27). No company or staff adjuster license exists.
2. Worker’s compensation is a LINE of authority, qualified for individually — and there is no separate comp adjuster credential.
3. The definition turns on independent-contractor TAX treatment, which is why employees are outside it entirely.
4. 40 hours of prelicensing — imposed by IDOI, not by any statute or IAC rule. Certificate dies at 6 months.
5. Passing score 70 — the handbook calls it a scaled score once and 70% once, and explains no conversion.
6. Five waiver routes, including five years of insurer-verified experience with no license anywhere. But CA, HI and NY get none.
7. No fingerprints, no background check, no appointment — for adjusters or producers.
8. 24 CE hours, ZERO ethics hours. No repeats, no carryover. Public adjusters: no CE at all.
9. Only the Insurance Commissioner declares a catastrophe — and the INSURER files within 5 days of the adjuster starting work.
10. Indiana has NO unfair claims regulation and NO numeric P&C claim deadlines. The NAIC 15/15/10 schedule is not Indiana law.
11. IC 27-4-1-18: no private right of action under the whole article. And the frequency test says “a general practice,” not “a general business practice.”
12. Punitive damages: the plaintiff keeps 25%; Indiana takes 75% for the violent crime victims compensation fund.
13. Comparative fault does not reach governmental entities or med-mal — contributory negligence, a total bar, still governs those.
14. The 70% salvage threshold does not apply to insurers — their trigger is economically impractical to repair plus an agreed settlement.
15. Records: Indiana sets no retention period. Your contract does.
2. Worker’s compensation is a LINE of authority, qualified for individually — and there is no separate comp adjuster credential.
3. The definition turns on independent-contractor TAX treatment, which is why employees are outside it entirely.
4. 40 hours of prelicensing — imposed by IDOI, not by any statute or IAC rule. Certificate dies at 6 months.
5. Passing score 70 — the handbook calls it a scaled score once and 70% once, and explains no conversion.
6. Five waiver routes, including five years of insurer-verified experience with no license anywhere. But CA, HI and NY get none.
7. No fingerprints, no background check, no appointment — for adjusters or producers.
8. 24 CE hours, ZERO ethics hours. No repeats, no carryover. Public adjusters: no CE at all.
9. Only the Insurance Commissioner declares a catastrophe — and the INSURER files within 5 days of the adjuster starting work.
10. Indiana has NO unfair claims regulation and NO numeric P&C claim deadlines. The NAIC 15/15/10 schedule is not Indiana law.
11. IC 27-4-1-18: no private right of action under the whole article. And the frequency test says “a general practice,” not “a general business practice.”
12. Punitive damages: the plaintiff keeps 25%; Indiana takes 75% for the violent crime victims compensation fund.
13. Comparative fault does not reach governmental entities or med-mal — contributory negligence, a total bar, still governs those.
14. The 70% salvage threshold does not apply to insurers — their trigger is economically impractical to repair plus an agreed settlement.
15. Records: Indiana sets no retention period. Your contract does.
IC 27-1-28-6(a)
The two-part definition — contracting for compensation and independent-contractor tax treatment. Employees fall outside it.
IC 27-1-28-6(b)
Fourteen exclusions. Carrier staff, self-insured employees and TPA comp adjusters are all exempt — a large share of Indiana claims are adjusted unlicensed.
IC 27-1-28-14(a)
Two lines of authority — property and casualty, worker’s compensation — qualified for in “one (1) or more.”
IC 27-1-28-14(g)
One sentence: “An independent adjuster is subject to IC 27-4-1-4.5.” The sixteen unfair practices attach to you personally.
IC 27-1-28-4
“Catastrophe” — declared by the Insurance Commissioner alone. Not the Governor, not the President.
IC 27-1-28-11
Temporary emergency license — the INSURER applies, within 5 days of the adjuster beginning work; 90 days, $20, travels to other catastrophes.
IC 27-1-28-16(a)(3)
The five-year experience waiver — insurer letters, no license anywhere, same line of authority only.
IC 27-1-28-20
Records: keep a copy of each contract and “comply with the record retention policy agreed to in the contract.” Indiana states no year count.
IC 27-1-27-1.5
A public adjuster may not file the claim, touch auto or bodily injury, bind the insured, or serve in “any other role” on the same claim.
IC 27-4-1-4.5(15)
Ascribing fault “in spite of an obvious absence of fault” — an unfair practice found in no NAIC model.
IC 27-4-1-4(a)(16)
The frequency trigger — “with such frequency as to indicate a general practice.” Not “a general business practice.”
IC 27-4-1-18
“This article does not create a cause of action” except by or against the commissioner. No private right of action, for anyone.
Erie v. Hickman
622 N.E.2d 515 (Ind. 1993) — the bad faith tort: unfounded refusal, unfounded delay, deceit, unfair pressure. A good faith dispute is not bad faith.
IC 34-51-3-6
Punitive damages: the claimant receives 25%; 75% goes to the state’s violent crime victims compensation fund.
IC 34-51-2-2
Comparative fault “does not apply in any manner” to governmental entities — contributory negligence bars any claimant at fault.
IC 9-22-3-3(a)(1)
The insurer’s total-loss trigger: “economically impractical to repair” plus an agreed settlement. No percentage.
IC 27-1-13-17
A floor on the policy’s suit clause — two years — not a statute of limitations. The default is ten years.
IC 27-7-9-9.5(b)
Mine subsidence: the insurer adjusts alone until a preliminary determination the loss MAY involve subsidence, then IDOI experts assist and the Fund pays.
IC 27-6-8-7(a)(1)
Guaranty association — $300,000 per claim, worker’s comp uncapped, and no $100 deductible.
IC 22-3-4-12.1
Comp bad faith — $500 to $20,000, Board jurisdiction exclusive, and the TPA is a named liable party.
Like learning this way? There's a whole library of them.
If the old manual you inherited from the office breakroom isn't cutting it and this format fits how your brain actually works, you'll want the rest. There are 56 Interactive Mind Maps like this one in the TESTivity Platinum Insurance Adjuster package — covering the full curriculum, right alongside the practice questions, exam simulators, and study guides.
🧭
Studying for a different state?
This concept is the same wherever you sit for the exam — but your study guide and prep package should match your state. Find your state's L&H and P&C guides here →