Total Loss Vehicle Valuation Documentation Form

This form records the inputs behind a total loss valuation, including vehicle identification, valuation source, comparable vehicles, condition adjustments, and the final settlement offer. It is meant to support an actual cash value determination, not to replace the claim file or repair estimate. Use it when you need a clear audit trail for how the payout was calculated.

Use it after a vehicle is declared a total loss and before the settlement offer is finalized. It is especially useful when the claim involves multiple comparables, disputed condition adjustments, or a need to explain the valuation to the vehicle owner or a reviewer. If the vehicle is repairable, this template is usually not the right fit.

It is typically completed by a claims adjuster, total loss specialist, or valuation reviewer. A supervisor or second reviewer can add comments in the review section when the file needs escalation or approval. If your process separates data entry from approval, this template supports that handoff.

Include the comparable vehicle's year, make, model, trim, mileage, market region, and any condition differences that affect the comparison. The goal is to show why each comparable was selected and how it influenced the base value. Avoid vague notes like "similar vehicle" without enough detail to defend the choice.

It is usually completed once per total loss claim, then updated only if the valuation changes during review or negotiation. Some teams also reuse the same structure for internal rechecks when a claimant submits new evidence. If your workflow has multiple review stages, keep each version dated so the audit trail stays clear.

Yes. You can add state-specific disclosures, carrier approval fields, or extra condition adjustment categories without changing the core structure. Keep the required fields limited to what you actually use, and use conditional logic for any jurisdiction-specific steps so the form does not become cluttered.

Common mistakes include entering the wrong trim, using incomplete comparable data, and applying condition adjustments without explaining them. Another frequent issue is skipping the reviewer comments field, which makes later questions harder to answer. The form works best when every adjustment can be traced back to a source or observation.

Email and spreadsheets can work for a small volume of claims, but they make it harder to keep a consistent audit trail and review history. This template gives you a repeatable structure for the same valuation inputs every time, which reduces missing fields and makes settlement decisions easier to explain. It also helps standardize how different adjusters document the same type of claim.