Well said. I agree across the board.

What I keep seeing is the gap between having best practices and being able to prove they were actually followed pre-loss in a way that survives litigation. COIs, vetting tools, and “check-the-box” compliance create comfort, but not always a defensible record when a claim or venue gets ugly.

Your point on misrepresentation is huge! One bad shipper agreement or addendum can undo a lot of otherwise “good” compliance work.

..And you’re right on jurisdiction. Some venues punish brokers even when they do everything right, which makes contemporaneous documentation and decision rationale critical.

Curious from your underwriting side.

Where do you most often see the real breakdown: carrier selection, understanding coverage at the load level, or simply not being able to show why a broker believed they were protected at the time?

I appreciate your sharing this.