by Guest » Sun Mar 22, 2009 08:19 am
We recently have had our roof damaged by wind. The independent adjuster told my husband to fix it himself. The Allstate adjuster said there were 31 shingles that needed to be replaced, and would not pay for such wind damage to roof at all. Why should we settle for a spotted roof,when my friend has State Farm and got a new roof on her house, garage and pool house. She said there were only 10-15 shingles damaged on her house and her garage and pool house was not damaged at all. The adjuster told her he wanted everything to match. Do I need to call the State Dept. of Insurance, get a public adjuster, send nasty letters to the home office or what. Because if I do not get a new roof i will get my satisfaction in another way by slamming Allstate on message boards, chat rooms and if i have to have a spotted roof i will get 31 blue shingles and put a huge sign in my front yard stating THIS HOME IS INSURED WITH ALLSTATE. Thanks for any response.
Posted: Mon Jun 20, 2011 06:23 pm Post Subject:
Posted: Mon Jun 20, 2011 06:23 pm Post Subject:
Posted: Fri Jul 01, 2011 06:50 pm Post Subject: insurance companies
We have been burned by several insurance co's,auto and homeowners. necause of this i have asked to see policies before we purchase them........have found out that insurance is the only thing you will ever purchase that you will not be allowed to see before you have to pay.
Posted: Fri Jul 01, 2011 06:51 pm Post Subject: insurance companies
We have been burned by several insurance co's,auto and homeowners. necause of this i have asked to see policies before we purchase them........have found out that insurance is the only thing you will ever purchase that you will not be allowed to see before you have to pay.
Posted: Sat Jul 02, 2011 12:27 am Post Subject:
insurance is the only thing you will ever purchase that you will not be allowed to see before you have to pay.
It might be that the company or agent you are using does not make "specimen" contracts available, however, every state requires a minimum of 10 days be given to you for the purpose of reading and questioning your coverage, and to return the contract within that time period for a full refund.
So while you might not have the chance to examine the policy first, you will not lose any money if, after reading your contract, you choose to cancel it during the FREE LOOK period.
Posted: Mon Jul 11, 2011 03:41 am Post Subject:
The policy promises new for old. It also promises like kind and quality. It isn't like kind if it doesn't match cosmetically. Also, how many roofs do you have on your home? Likely one unless you have some tile and some asphalt shingles, etc.. If that one roof is damaged you get new for old and that includes the warranty for new.
That is what you are paying for. If the policy was different i would expect different.
Posted: Mon Jul 11, 2011 06:39 pm Post Subject:
The policy promises new for old. It also promises like kind and quality.
"New for old" is not the promise of an insurance policy. Either "Actual Cash Value" or "Replacment Cost" is the promise, and replacement cost addresses "like kind and quality" but actual cash value does not. So these two sentences, in combination, are inaccurate.
If the same item is not replaceable (as in a lost part of a set), then there is a cash reimbursement for the value of the set (up to policy limits, of course, under the "pair and set" clause in a contract). A roof is a very different circumstance.
You have a shingle (wood, fiberglass, etc), tile, tar & rock, hot-mopped rolled, or metal roof. If a portion is damaged, the policy promises to repair the damage. You don't get a whole new roof just because one section is damaged.
Now, it could happen that the asphalt, wood, or fiberglas shingles on your roof are of a type and color that is no longer manufactured and no repair will blend cosmetically. In a case such as that, the insurer will replace an undamaged portion of the roof with all new material. A few Spanish clay tiles that are 75 years old will be replaced with like kind and quality (perhaps ever better quality). Those new tiles are almost never going to match, but can easily be painted to match the weathered tiles if necessary. But a few broken tiles like this is not going to be cause for replacing 100% of them, broken or not.
If the only difference is a slight shading of colors, you are highly unlikely to persuade an insurance company to replace an entire roof when only 1 or 2 squares need to be replaced. Given a year or two of exposure to the sun, it will probably be impossible to distinguish the two sections.
Posted: Sun Jul 17, 2011 06:10 pm Post Subject: Ins Comps are ripoffs
I was a property adjuster for 32+ years and dealt with many storm losses which included roof losses. One of the most crucial duties of the adjuster is to sit down with the insured and explain the policy to him/her. Many times I also took the insured right up on the roof with me, to hold the tape measure and write up the loss. When an insured is standing next to the adjuster and is asked if there is any damage to the shingle that they both are looking at, the insured knows that the adjuster is not pulling a fast one or Ripping them off. The policy states to repair or replace with like kind and quality. I would replace an entire side if there were more than 50% damaged shingles. I would replace the complete siding if replacement of any whole side was needed. I cannot recall at any time that I wasn't able to settle a loss with an insured as I made it a point to leave each loss with a satisfied client. I recall one time that I was inspecting and settling hail losses to roofs in a small town. When I arrived I found that State Farm (not my employer) had already been on the roof and been given by agreement a new complete roof. The trouble was State Farm was on the wrong roof. I inspected and found only 1/3 of one side was damaged and the insured agreed with me that repairs only were needed. In this case State Farm was stuck with paying the balance over my repair estimate. So there are some mistakes made out in the field by the pros as well as misunderstandings by the insureds.
Posted: Sun Jul 17, 2011 10:47 pm Post Subject: Wind Damage
A lot of wildly misleading and inaccurate ideas from the "Expert Agent in California"(you sell buddy,not handle claims)You are beginning to remind me of Chopper Ben.
I am a HAAG Certified Roofing Inspector and a Licensed Claims adjuster.
You are covered for Wind /Hail on your policy and should you file a claim for wind it will be determined by the adjuster .If you disagree with the assessment you may request a re inspection.Here's the criteria that is used .1.Has the shingle been separated from its seal and allow debris and water to come between the shingles and compromise the function of the shingles?(leaks)
2.Has the shingle been creased where it meets the adjoining shingle?
3.Will the repair cause the continuous damage to the other shingles such that they will need to be removed as well?
If this criteria is met usually the whole roof will need to be replaced.EVEN on a older roof!
You shouldn't bother with estimates BECAUSE it only is for the benefit of the insurer!
The adjusters estimate is usually sufficient and most roofing contractors will accept insurance company proceeds as payment.Also, they will state that if the insurance company will not pay , they will not ask you to pay! That's an unenforceable contract as per common law.
And lastly,deal with the contractors that have the experience to do a proper roof inspection and can represent you on the roof with the adjuster.You will usually find both the adjuster and roofing contractor ARE working for you !
Find a roofing company with experience in this situation and you can be treated just fine.KNOW what you do before filing a claim!
There are many ways to view this topic but remember your roof is the most important part of your house and you should treat it that way.
Posted: Tue Aug 09, 2011 10:54 am Post Subject:
There are times when there is minimal damage (Promotional link removed as per Forums TOU) due to wind in that case it is not uncommon for an insurance company to only pay for half the roof.
Add your comment