Adjusting: how claims are evaluated and settled in insurance

Which of the following denotes a process of adjusting claims?

• A. Adjudging
• B. Adjusting
• C. Adopting
• D. Advertising

Answer: (B)

The term "adjusting" specifically refers to the process of evaluating and settling claims related to insurance or other financial agreements. In the context of claims management, adjusting involves reviewing the details of a claim, assessing damages or loss, verifying policy coverage, and determining the appropriate compensation according to the terms of the policy. This leads to a resolution of the claim, which can include payments made to the policyholder or negotiating settlements. It is a critical function in the insurance industry, as it ensures that claimants receive fair compensation for their claims based on the coverage they have, thereby helping maintain trust in the insurance process. The other terms do not relate to this process. "Adjudging" typically concerns making a judgment or decision, often in a legal context. "Adopting" refers to taking on or accepting something, usually in a broader or more personal context. "Advertising" is focused on promoting products or services to potential consumers. Therefore, adjusting clearly stands out as the appropriate term associated with the claims process in insurance and finance.

What does "adjusting" really mean in the claims world—and why should you care as a court reporter?

Let me start with a plain-English version you can tuck into your mental glossary: adjusting is the process of evaluating and settling claims. If you’re listening to a deposition, a hearing, or a settlement conference that centers on an insurance claim or a financial loss, you’re likely to hear that term used. It’s specific, practical, and it matters because the way people talk about it and the exact words used in transcripts can change the meaning of what happened.

A quick map of the four terms you’ll probably see in related discussions

• Adjudging: this is about making a decision or ruling. It’s a courtroom-style word that signals a decision has been reached, often after weighing arguments and evidence.

• Adjusting: the process of evaluating and settling claims. It covers everything from inspecting damages to calculating payout and negotiating settlements.

• Adopting: taking on or accepting something, whether a position, a policy, or a method. It’s broader and more about acceptance than the nuts-and-bolts process.

• Advertising: promoting products or services. It’s the opposite side of the table compared to claims handling—more marketing than claims work.

Now, why “adjusting” sits at the center of this cluster

In the simplest terms, adjusting is the meat of claim handling. A person or an organization—often an insurance company—receives a claim. The adjuster looks at the details: what happened, what was damaged, what the policy covers, who was involved, and how the numbers stack up. Then they decide what, if anything, will be paid and negotiate toward a settlement if needed. This entire arc from initial report to final payout or settlement is the adjusting process.

Think of it like balance and verification. You’ve got the claimant’s story on one side and the policy terms on the other. The adjuster’s job is to weigh both sides fairly, verify facts, and arrive at a resolution that aligns with the contract. When you’re transcribing or captioning, that process is reflected in the language—words that convey the steps, the checks, and the negotiations. Getting those words right isn’t just about grammar; it’s about faithfully capturing how the claim moved from question to closure.

A reporter’s ear: where this terminology shows up in transcripts

In real-life sessions—depositions, hearings, or settlement meetings—you’ll hear phrases like:

• “The adjuster reviewed the claim file and requested additional documentation.”

• “We need to verify policy coverage before determining liability.”

• “The parties negotiated a settlement based on the estimated damages.”

• “The claim was adjudicated once the documentation was complete.”

Your job as a court reporter is to preserve the exact sequence of actions, the subtle shifts in tone, and the precise wording that explains how the resolution came to be. One misheard term could tilt the reader’s understanding. If you capture “adjudicating” when the speaker meant “adjusting,” readers might think a ruling occurred rather than a process of evaluation and settlement. So you develop a sensitivity to context—the same word can mean different things in different settings, and you learn to hear the clues that tell you which term applies.

A tiny glossary you can use on the fly

• Adjudging: decision-making, often with a verdict or ruling after considering evidence.

• Adjusting: the methodical process of evaluating a claim, verifying coverage, and settling amounts.

• Adopting: accepting something as a policy, method, or position; a broader step than a single claim.

• Advertising: promoting goods or services; not part of the claims process but a familiar term that can appear in broad business discussions.

Why this distinction matters in the RPR world

Accuracy really matters when you’re recording the proceedings that involve claims. The difference between adjusting and adjudicating isn’t just a vocabulary footnote—it’s about the chain of events. If a reader later skims the transcript to understand how a claim concluded, they’ll rely on the exact language to follow the narrative: what was evaluated, what was verified, what numbers were used, and how the final resolution was reached. Clarity here protects all parties’ interests and keeps the transcript trustworthy.

The practical side: what adjusting looks like in a typical claim setting

• Detail review: The adjuster pulls the claim file, notes what happened, and checks for inconsistencies or missing documents.

• Damages assessment: They estimate the financial impact—property loss, medical costs, lost income, replacements, repairs.

• Coverage verification: They confirm what the policy actually covers and any exclusions that apply.

• Calculation and negotiation: They compute a payout or negotiate a settlement amount with the claimant, attorneys, or other stakeholders.

• Resolution: The claim is settled, paid, or, if needed, escalated to adjudication or litigation.

As a reporter, you’ll encounter these steps in the workflow of many cases. The vocabulary you carry into the room matters, because it frames the narrative for the audience who will read your transcript later. You’ll want to be ready to distinguish between when someone says, “We are adjusting the claim” and when someone says, “The claim was adjudicated.” The first signals a process; the second signals a conclusion. Keeping that distinction crisp is part of professional precision.

A few tips to sharpen your ear and your transcripts

• Listen for actions, not just nouns. The word “adjusting” often accompanies verbs like “review,” “verify,” “evaluate,” and “settle.”

• Watch for numbers and policy language. Damages, limits, deductibles, and coverage terms frequently anchor the discussion and the transcript’s most important sections.

• Note the speaker’s role. An adjuster, a claims manager, or an attorney might be using similar vocabulary but with slightly different shades of meaning.

• Use context clues. If the speaker cites a policy clause or mentions a loss date, you’re probably in a claims discussion rather than a courtroom ruling.

• Keep a mental glossary handy. In fast-paced proceedings, having a quick reference of terms can keep your notes clean and your transcripts accurate.

A relatable analogy to keep things simple

Think of adjusting like calibration on a scale. The claim is a bundle of facts, receipts, and policy language. You add up the evidence on one side and weigh it against the policy’s provisions on the other. If the scale tips toward a fair payout, that’s adjusting in action. If a judge or a jury weighs in with a verdict, that’s adjudicating. Both are crucial, but they’re different steps in the journey. As a reporter, you’re charting that journey with careful, precise language that helps readers reconstruct the full timeline.

A note on the human side

Behind every claim are people with real stakes. A claimant might be navigating loss, frustration, or uncertainty. A claims professional is trying to be fair while upholding policy limits and legal requirements. In your transcripts, you don’t want to strip the human element out. You want to capture the nuance—the pauses, the clarifications, the negotiations that feel almost like a dance. That human touch, paired with exact terminology, helps your audience feel the weight of the moment without getting lost in jargon.

Bringing it home: the value of precise terminology in the RPR landscape

When you’re documenting matters that hinge on how a claim moves from concern to closure, the exact phrase matters. Adjusting isn’t just a word; it’s a map of action. It tells readers where the process stands and what remains to be done. It’s this kind of precision—blended with a touch of narrative clarity—that elevates transcripts from a mere record to a trustworthy account that professionals can rely on.

If you’ve ever found yourself in a situation where “adjusting” and “adjudicating” got tangled in a sentence, you’re not alone. It happens, especially in high-pressure settings where people are thinking through outcomes quickly. The antidote is listening closely, keeping your mental glossary fresh, and letting the context guide your transcription decisions. In the long run, that approach pays off: clearer records, fewer questions, and a smoother read for anyone revisiting the material later.

A closing thought

Language in the claims world is practical and precise. It’s not about sounding flashy; it’s about conveying exact meaning so a reader can follow the thread from claim receipt to resolution. By staying attentive to terms like adjusting—and by distinguishing it from adjudicating, adopting, or advertising—you’ll sharpen your craft and contribute to transcripts that stand up under scrutiny, time after time.

If you’re curious to explore more terminology that crops up in real-world proceedings, I’ve found that listening to a few deposition recordings or hearing transcripts can be a helpful, low-stress way to tune your ear. You’ll start noticing how professionals pivot between process-oriented terms and decision-oriented ones, and you’ll pick up subtle cues in tone and emphasis that reveal where a case is headed next. That’s the kind of fluency that makes a big difference when you’re the person capturing the conversation in front of you.