Rhode Island wants to put auto insurers on a four-day clock - miss it, and they lose the right to inspect the damaged car.
That's the centerpiece of S 3560, a bill introduced on June 06, 2026 by State Senator Hanna M. Gallo and referred to the Senate Judiciary Committee. It rewrites the state's Motor Vehicle Appraisal Provision, the law that governs what happens when an insurer and a policyholder can't agree on how much a damaged vehicle's loss is worth.
For carriers writing auto in Rhode Island, the mechanics matter. When the two sides disagree on the loss amount, the insured or claimant gains the right to trigger an independent appraisal. Each side then selects its own "disinterested Rhode Island licensed appraiser at their own expense." From there, the bill puts the pressure on the insurer's side first.
The insurer's appraiser "shall inspect the damaged motor vehicle within four (4) business days after the written demand is received," provided the vehicle is on the premises of the repair shop when the request is made. Blow that window, and the consequence is steep. Under the bill, if the appraiser fails to inspect in time, "the insurer shall forfeit its right to inspect the damaged vehicle prior to repairs," and negotiations are limited to labor and the price of parts. The insurer also loses the ability to dispute whether damage exists or how the car should be fixed, unless it provides "objective evidence to the contrary."
The bill then sets clear math for resolving the gap. If the two appraisers' proposals "differ by fifteen percent (15%) or less, the amount of the loss shall be the midpoint between them." Wider gaps go to an umpire, chosen from a short list of licensed appraisers, who "shall render a decision within five (5) days of appointment." That decision is binding, except for supplemental allowances for hidden damage, parts price increases, or other reasonable charges not already paid.
There's a direct financial penalty for lowball offers, too. If the insured or claimant starts the appraisal and the final award beats the insurer's original offer "by more than twenty-five percent (25%), the insurer must reimburse all of the insured or claimant's appraisal costs." If the difference comes in under 25%, the two sides split the cost of the umpire.
Two further provisions speak to claims conduct. The bill states the insurer "shall not refuse to honor a 'direction to pay'" - the document that lets a policyholder route payment directly to their chosen appraiser and the umpire. It also bars insurers from "any act or practice of intimidation, coercion, threat, or misrepresentation of consumer rights" toward anyone involved in the process.
The Legislative Council's explanation sums up the core change: the act "would require an insurance company to directly pay the insured's chosen appraiser and the umpire appraiser" once a direction to pay is received. The measure would take effect upon passage.
For now, S 3560 has only been introduced and referred to committee. It has not passed, and it is not yet law.
