GapFollow-form drift at Layer 3L3 · L2
Arbor adds a PFAS exclusion the umbrella lacks, opening a $5M–$15M hole for PFAS claims. ARB 21 07 · p.2NSU 00 01 §IV · p.6
Errors hide where only your best people look.
Your seat on the account yearWinProtectServeDefendProve
Every placement is being remarketed, and the tower and wording review that used to absorb a specialist’s week — or an offshore team — is where the errors hide. Qumis reads the whole stack, on every placement.
Bring a layered program — concurrency, wording deltas, attachment points, cited live.
Tower review — four layers, reconciled against the lead form and the schedule
Representative screen · specimen programReportsTower reviewHartline — 2026 casualty program
Export
Draft memo
Hartline — 2026 casualty program
Hartline Manufacturing · $25M excess of primary · 4/1/2026 – 4/1/2027
4 layers7 policies5 carriers3 issues
Program towerLimits excess of primary
$25M
L4$10M xs $15MQuota shareFollow form
Ironbridge Excess50% · $5M p/o $10M4/15/26 – 4/15/27
Summit National50% · $5M p/o $10M4/15/26 – 4/15/27
$15M
L3$10M xs $5MFollow-form drift
Arbor CasualtyFollow form + 1 exclusion
ARB 21 07PFAS exclusionnot in NSU 00 01
$5M
L2$5M umbrellaxs primaryLead form
Northstar Specialty$25K SIR
$0
L1PrimaryKeystone Mutual4/1/26 – 4/1/27
CGL$2M / $4MCG 00 01
Auto$1M CSLCA 00 01
EL$1M / $1M / $1MWC 00 00 00
Concurrency findings5 checks across 4 layersAll layers
GapPolicy period misaligned at Layer 4L4 · L3
Ironbridge and Summit incept 4/15/26; $10M xs $15M is bare from 4/1 to 4/15. Ironbridge Dec · p.1Arbor Dec · p.1
UpdateSchedule of underlying: expired autoL2 · L1
Schedule A lists auto BA 25-10448, expired 4/1/26; the renewal is BA 26-11873. NSU Sched. A · p.4Keystone BA Dec · p.1
ConfirmSIR not carried into excess drop-downL3 · L2
Northstar retains $25K where no underlying applies; Arbor's drop‑down is silent on it. NSU Decl. Item 4 · p.1ARB XS §III.B · p.5
ConsistentQuota share: both follow formL4
Ironbridge 50% and Summit 50% follow the Northstar form; shares total 100%. IBX 00 01 §I · p.2SNX 10 §I · p.2
Placement quality is decided in the wording between markets.
Tower and wording integrity on shared-and-layered programs.
Follow-form drift, non-concurrency, and the wording deltas between markets that surface at claim time — read whole, cited layer by layer.
Bring outsourced review back, better.
Tower review is an offshore budget line at some of the largest firms. The same spend buys a specialist-grade read with citations, inside the firm.
Grow the specialty practice without normalizing away judgment.
Specialty is where margins live and where wording variance eats placement quality silently — normalize the read across markets, not the judgment.
The whole stack, read on every placement — not the triaged few.
The specialist’s read, at machine capacity, with every finding cited to the layer.
01
Program Structure & Design
Tower review, wording comparison, concurrency — cited layer by layer. The judgment no desk tool touches.
See the use case 02Policy Review & Checking
Manuscript and specimen comparison at the complex end of the book — checked whole before it binds.
See the use case 03Contract & Insurance Requirements Review
The requirements feeding your placements, read against the program — met, unmet, ambiguous.
See the use caseFor risk-managed placements, the market-facing half — Complex Submission Preparation, the submission that argues for terms — is in use with early design partners, including a top-10 brokerage. Ask about joining them.
“This particular wording comparison has come up two or three times — a game changer. It’s something I’m always asking for and we’ve never had.”
Placement specialist, recorded call
Underneath the six is Coverage Intelligence — the system of judgment Qumis is building for commercial insurance, where every reviewed decision makes the next one better.