AIC Adjuster Level 3 Licensing and Claims Cheat Sheet
Cheat sheet: Level 3 reference for AIC licence facts, DR distinctions, senior file review, complex claims, settlement, recovery, supervision, and escalation.
Use the tables for a quick pre-exam check. Expand a topic’s notes for explanations, examples, and additional distinctions.
Official route at a glance
Verify all current details with AIC before applying.
| Route fact | Quick reference |
|---|---|
| Official status | Adjuster Level 3 is an AIC licence class, not a separately published Level 3 exam. |
| Licence foundation | Confirm the Alberta or equivalent adjuster-licence status AIC requires for your resident or non-resident route. |
| Level 2 foundation | Meet the applicable Adjuster Level 2 educational and experience requirements. |
| Designation | AIC lists Associate/Fellow status or the CIP/FCIP designation. |
| Required education | AIC lists C-32 plus one of C-46, C-41, or C-111, or an accepted equivalent. |
| Experience | AIC lists at least 60 months of adjuster experience within the 10 years immediately before application. |
| Application | Confirm recommendation, current criminal check, supporting records, E&O context, fees, and the applicable portal process. |
| Level 3 DR | Education and experience requirements match Level 3, but the DR role adds responsibility for management and supervision of the business. |
Level 3 role check
Before acting, identify which authority is actually involved.
| Authority | Ask |
|---|---|
| Licence authority | Does the person hold the required current class, and is the question one only AIC can decide? |
| Assigned claim authority | What may the adjuster investigate, recommend, approve, communicate, pay, settle, deny, or release on this file? |
| Supervisory authority | What work must be reviewed, corrected, countersigned, escalated, or returned with instructions? |
| Insurer authority | Which coverage, reserve, litigation, payment, settlement, or reporting decisions remain with the insurer? |
| DR responsibility | Is this a firm-management, licensing, staff-supervision, application, E&O, complaint, or continuity issue? |
| Specialist authority | Does the issue require legal, engineering, medical, accounting, privacy, fraud, recovery, or regulatory input? |
Senior file-review dashboard
| Control | Minimum question |
|---|---|
| Identity and role | Are all parties, insured capacities, adjusters, experts, representatives, and decision owners clear? |
| Policy | Is the complete policy identified, and are limits, deductibles, conditions, exclusions, and endorsements applied to verified facts? |
| Evidence | Does each material conclusion cite a reliable source, and are conflicts or missing items visible? |
| Exposure | Are coverage, liability, damages, valuation, reserve, legal cost, business interruption, and recovery considered separately? |
| Authority | Does the file show who instructed and approved each consequential action? |
| Communication | Are positions accurate, timely, fair, understandable, and within authority? |
| Financial control | Are payee, banking change, invoice, duplicate-payment, lien, release, salvage, and recovery checks complete? |
| Diary and limitation | Is every material deadline assigned, visible, and escalated before rights are endangered? |
| Correction | Are errors corrected transparently without overwriting chronology or concealing the cause? |
| Follow-up | Does the next action have an owner, due date, and review point? |
Notes and examples
Senior file-review sequence
Use the same sequence whether the scenario concerns property, automobile, bodily injury, liability, settlement, or recovery.
- Role: Who is acting, who owns the next decision, and who has assigned authority?
- Coverage: Which policy, insured, loss, condition, exclusion, endorsement, limit, or reservation issue is material?
- Liability and cause: What is established, disputed, alleged, or still dependent on evidence?
- Quantum: What scope, valuation, damages, reserve, or business-interruption assumptions require support?
- Evidence: Which source supports each material conclusion, and what conflict or gap remains?
- Control: Are privacy, payment, diary, expert, legal, recovery, complaint, and communication controls working?
- Authority: Is the proposed action within authority, or does it require insurer, legal, DR, executive, or specialist review?
- Record: Does the file show the reasoning, instruction, approval, communication, owner, and follow-up date?
Complex property and recovery checks
- Separate safety, emergency mitigation, cause, coverage, scope, valuation, business interruption, and permanent repair.
- Define each expert’s assignment and reconcile conflicting technical opinions rather than selecting the convenient one.
- Distinguish building, contents, stock, equipment, tenant improvements, extra expense, and income-loss evidence.
- Preserve damaged property, scene evidence, contracts, notices, and limitation dates before repair, disposal, demolition, settlement, or release.
- Track salvage and subrogation separately: one concerns residual property value, the other recovery rights against a responsible party.
- Record authority for advance payments, major scope changes, reserve movements, experts, settlement, disposal, and recovery action.
Automobile, bodily injury, and liability checks
- Confirm vehicle, driver, permission, use, policy, endorsement, other insurance, and loss circumstances.
- Separate policy response from negligence, causation, damages, and settlement value.
- Obtain medical and employment information only for a defined purpose and with proper authority.
- Distinguish treatment from causation, pre-existing conditions, prognosis, income loss, future loss, and mitigation.
- Preserve witness, scene, police, contract, product, premises, and expert evidence.
- Identify represented parties, litigation, limitation, privilege, liens, contribution, release, and recovery before recommending settlement.
- Avoid admissions, promises, or final positions that exceed evidence or authority.
Supervision note
Use this order when reviewing or correcting another adjuster’s work:
- Issue: What technical or control problem was identified?
- Risk: What could happen if it remains uncorrected?
- Evidence: Which file material supports the concern?
- Instruction: What action is required, by whom, and within what authority?
- Escalation: Who else must be informed or approve?
- Correction: How will the file and any affected communication be corrected transparently?
- Follow-up: When will completion and learning be verified?
Immediate escalation cues
Escalate while taking permitted preservation or safety action when a scenario involves:
- fatality, severe injury, catastrophe, major commercial loss, vulnerable party, or media sensitivity;
- uncertain coverage that may produce reservation, denial, litigation, or material E&O exposure;
- represented parties, active litigation, limitation risk, privilege, or legal interpretation;
- fraud indicators, payment diversion, duplicate payment, bribery, document manipulation, or unexplained financial control failure;
- privacy breach, conflict, misleading communication, complaint escalation, discrimination, or unfair treatment;
- concealed error, repeated staff failure, competence or workload problem, or missing supervision record;
- action beyond delegated authority or an unresolved distinction between personal Level 3 and DR responsibility; or
- firm licence, DR replacement, E&O, application approval, or regulatory-reporting questions that require AIC or specialist direction.
One-line decision test
Before choosing an answer, complete this sentence:
Because [decisive fact] creates [technical or control issue], the Level 3 reviewer should [authorized next action], preserve or obtain [evidence or right], document [reasoning and instruction], and escalate to [decision owner] if [trigger] applies.
If the sentence cannot be completed from the facts, the answer probably assumes authority, evidence, or finality that the scenario has not established.
Route facts to keep separate
Confirm current requirements directly with AIC.
| Fact | Level 3 readiness point | Common mistake |
|---|---|---|
| Qualification route | AIC describes licence standing, Level 2 foundations, prescribed education, professional designation, experience, and application requirements. | Treating a high practice score as evidence of licence eligibility. |
| Experience | AIC currently lists at least 60 months of adjuster experience within the 10 years immediately before application. | Counting any insurance employment without confirming that AIC accepts it as adjuster experience. |
| Education | The route includes C-32 plus one listed advanced claims course or an accepted equivalent, alongside the required designation and Level 2 foundation. | Assuming a similar course will automatically be accepted. |
| Level 3 licence | This is the senior adjuster licence class described by AIC. | Assuming every Level 3 licensee is automatically the firm’s Designated Representative. |
| Level 3 DR | AIC uses the same education and experience requirements but associates the DR role with management and supervision of the licensed business. | Treating DR as merely another title on the personal licence. |
| Firm and application controls | Recommendation, current documentation, and qualifying business E&O context remain part of the official process. | Focusing only on technical claims knowledge. |
High-yield practice map
| Practice area | Review before mixed questions | Weak answer pattern |
|---|---|---|
| Licensing, supervision, and DR duties | Personal Level 3 status, DR responsibility, firm recommendation, supervision, report review, E&O context, application integrity | Combining licence eligibility, claim authority, and DR business responsibility into one concept |
| Claim governance and file quality | Authority record, evidence map, coverage direction, reserve rationale, chronology, diary, complaint and correction controls | Approving an outcome because the file is old, urgent, or commercially inconvenient |
| Complex property and recovery | Cause, scope, mitigation, valuation, business interruption, expert coordination, salvage, subrogation, limitation awareness | Letting repair, disposal, release, or settlement destroy evidence or recovery rights |
| Automobile and bodily injury | Policy response, use and permission, liability evidence, treatment and causation, privacy, damages, liens, release, authority | Treating medical attendance or a police report as conclusive proof of every disputed issue |
| Liability, litigation, and settlement | Allegation, duty, breach, causation, damages, defence, limitation, legal instruction, contribution, release | Making an admission, promise, or settlement commitment before authority and evidence are established |
| Leadership, ethics, and mentoring | Competence, workload, complaint handling, conflicts, correction, escalation, staff instruction, audit trail | Quietly repairing a subordinate’s file without documenting the issue or addressing the control failure |
Distinctions that prevent senior-level errors
| Keep separate | Why |
|---|---|
| Coverage position and claim valuation | A well-supported estimate does not decide whether the policy responds. |
| Liability analysis and settlement authority | A reasoned view of fault does not itself authorize an offer or release. |
| Reserve review and payment approval | Exposure may justify reserve action before coverage, liability, or payment is final. |
| File correction and concealment | A correction must preserve chronology and explain what changed and why. |
| Supervision and takeover | Effective supervision sets controls and review points; it does not require the Level 3 adjuster to perform every task personally. |
| Technical disagreement and conduct issue | A defensible difference of judgment is not automatically misconduct, but unsupported, misleading, or concealed work requires control. |
| Level 3 licence and DR appointment | The qualifications overlap, while the DR role adds firm-level management and supervision responsibility. |
Explanation review test
For every missed question, record four items:
- the decisive fact you overlooked;
- the authority or control boundary involved;
- the evidence needed before the action becomes supportable; and
- the file note, approval, communication, or escalation that should follow.
The goal is not to memorize answer wording. It is to make the next real or practice decision traceable, authorized, and defensible.