In the maintenance log gap
Slip-and-fall, dram shop, security and product-liability claims live or die on what was on the floor and how long it had been there. Owl reads the incident report, CCTV, maintenance logs, vendor contracts and the demand on intake, and matches them to OSHA history, plaintiff posts and venue verdicts.
14 min
Notice window, spill to fall
Bot idle
Bot idle, contradicting written log
$640K
Counsel’s 4th $500K+ at this venue
Three AI agents on a GL loss. Reading. Cross-referencing. Answering.
One loss: a 14-minute spill, a cleaning-bot lying, a $640K demand.
Anonymized composite: slip-and-fall in big-box retail, claimant alleging spinal injury, demand received 6 weeks post-DOL with surveillance footage attached.
External data only. None of this lives in your CMS. Owl gathered it from public records, professional networks, registries and the open web, then resolved it to this claimant.
CCTV cam #A12-NE confirms spill at 13:54 (cart bump, liquid product). Fall at 14:08. 14-minute window, no warning placed, no staff in aisle. Mode-of-operation doctrine applies in this venue (self-service retail). Notice-and-time-of-discovery argument is severely impaired. Constructive notice established.
Manager handwritten log claims aisle inspection 13:55. Cleaning-bot Tennant T7 telemetry (vendor cloud) shows bot idle in dock 13:54-14:08 with zero motion, directly contradicting the “bot cleaning Aisle 14” notation. Spoliation risk on handwritten log is real if it was completed after the fact. Preserve under formal hold today.
This store location has 4 prior premises liability claims in last 36 months: 2 slip-and-fall (Aisle 12 and Aisle 8), 1 falling-object, 1 tripping-hazard. Two settled at $80K-$140K. Pattern of repeat aisle-12 spill incidents weakens the “isolated event” defense. Reptile-theory exposure on safety culture.
Open-web search returns claimant posts week 4 post-DOL: 5K race finish (12-minute mile pace), gym-class video weeks 6 and 8. Demand letter alleges “unable to walk without assistance, lost recreational activity.” Surveillance opportunity is high; demand specials should compress 35-50% under contradiction.
Floor-care vendor contract (master service agreement 2023-04) contains additional-insured endorsement and broad indemnity for premises-cleanliness claims arising from vendor performance. Vendor’s telemetry placing bot idle during the notice window establishes vendor breach. Tender to vendor carrier under additional-insured grant is supportable.
Material exposure on liability; damages compressible. Constructive notice is established by 14-minute CCTV window, mode-of-operation doctrine and contradicted maintenance log, so defending on notice fails. Damages are the lever: claimant’s post-DOL race participation and gym video contradict “unable to walk” allegations and compress specials 35-50%. With $640K demand, recommended initial reserve $148K. Floor $90K (specials only on apportioned MRI), ceiling $260K (full PT + ER + comparative-fault rejection). Tender to floor-care vendor carrier under MSA 2023-04 additional-insured grant in parallel. File spoliation hold on the bot telemetry, the handwritten log and the CCTV today.
Constructive notice established under venue’s 3-prong test. (1) Hazardous condition: liquid spill on tile flooring, present from 13:54-14:08 per CCTV. Element met. (2) Notice (actual or constructive): mode-of-operation doctrine applies because this is a self-service retail context with foreseeable spills (venue case law applied this doctrine to liquid-product aisles since 2018). 14-minute duration also satisfies traditional constructive-notice timing. Element met. (3) Failure to remedy: no warning cone, no staff in aisle 13:48-14:08, cleaning-bot idle contradicting log entry. Element met. Recommend conceding constructive notice in the answer to focus discovery and motion practice on damages and vendor indemnity instead. Open-and-obvious is unavailable; the spill was on a tile aisle without visible color contrast.
What the world says about your General Liability claimants, none of which lives in your CMS.
Internal claim data is half the picture: it tells you what the claimant told you. OwlSignal continuously gathers external data (public records, professional and corporate registries, court dockets, social and open web) and matches it back to the claimant. These are the families that move the needle on General Liability.
CCTV partner integrations, floor-care vendor telemetry, POS time-sync, IoT sensor feeds. Reconstructs the loss to the second so notice and remediation stop being opinions.
Cross-carrier premises claim history by location, public dockets matched by defendant entity, insurance-industry premises pattern data. Surfaces the repeat-incident pattern the FNOL doesn’t name.
OSHA inspection records, state-OSHA citations, BLS injury rates by NAICS, public health-department inspection feeds. Establishes the safety-record picture that anchors reptile-theory defenses.
Public open-web search across social platforms, race results, gym memberships, public posts. Surfaces the claimant activity that contradicts demand-letter allegations of disability.
Vendor master-service-agreement language, additional-insured endorsements, certificate-of-insurance status, vendor liability history. Surfaces the indemnity and tender pathways your file doesn’t flag.
External EHR pulls and HL7 exchanges that surface diagnoses, prior imaging and pharmacy fill history. Drives apportionment on the medical specials.
Numbers from P&C carriers running Owl on General Liability in production.
Built for the regulatory shape of General Liability.
Lives where your General Liability files live.
Claim systems
Guidewire ClaimCenter, Duck Creek, Origami, Ventiv, in-house
CCTV / telemetry
Verkada, Avigilon, Tennant, Nilfisk, Kärcher, in-store IoT
Records exchanges
Datavant, MRO, Verisma, Ciox, HL7 partners
Industry data
OSHA, BLS, ISO ClaimSearch, LexisNexis, TransUnion TLOxp
Document intake
Box, OnBase, Documentum, ImageRight, Kofax
Identity & SSO
Okta, Azure AD, PingFederate, SAML, SCIM provisioning
Bring us a closed GL file. We’ll show you the CCTV, the vendor tender and the venue verdict pattern you missed.
Two-week pilot. Your records, your tenant, your CCTV partners. We measure cycle time, notice-window analysis, vendor-tender catch and indemnity leakage against your own ground truth.