Morning All,
I may be going through the process with Allstate soon regarding overall weather-intimidated roof conditions on my home. I have had a couple of roofers come out and get on my roof, but the wife and I have never filed a claim with Allstate before–never filed a homeowners claim ever.
We’ve been in our home for about nine years now, and around mid-September some strong rainfalls resulted in water coming into the living space in several areas, and water staining resulting. While we didn’t suffer the flooding that some areas did, this episode repeated itself about a week and a half later.
That prompted us to go visit our current Allstate agent. I say current, because the original practice closed and clients bought/migrated. Our original dumb monkey training by our original agent was ‘maintain a high deductible and never file a claim’. The current agent said that was a terrible thing our original agent taught.
Our current agent suggested we may want to get our roof inspected for weather related damage. We let him mention the types of weather-related (or acts of god) situations for which the policy would and wouldn’t cover. The first two roofers that came over said while there is a problem in appearance there is also a mixture of weather-introduced damage.
For a lack of a better description, there are indentations from hail impact, as well as wind damage in the form of torn shingles, bent shingles, and shingles completely ripped from the roof. I’ve asked for clarification by my current agent on ‘the process’, but during the adjuster appointment, filing, and options of not filing.
Additional examples of weather-impacted roof damage from homes of same age, constructions, etc. are readily available, as well as several homes already with new, insurance-bought roofs within viewing distance of my home. So, I wonder what the experience is like for roofers and specifically my insurance company in Georgia.
Anyone?
Replies
Nuke,
I'm not sure if you are asking about the actual "process" of filing a claim or not.
If that's what you're asking about, it's pretty straightforward. Call the insurance company or your agent (which you have) and report that your roof has been damaged. (I can't tell from your posting whether your recent two rainstorms and resulting roof leaks were accompanied by damaging wind or hail or if your roof leaked by virtue of previous damage that was sustained).
The insurance company, Allstate in your case, will assign an adjuster to inspect your property. He/she may be an employee of Allstate or someone hired for the purpose. Regardless, they are "agents" of the insurance company and are not your advocate, per se.
If the roof is damaged, the adjuster should measure your roof, assess the extent and cause of the damage and decide whether the damage is the result of a "peril" that is insured against in your insurance policy. Property insurance policies (in your case a homeowners policy) differ from state to state and have clauses that require you to report damage within a certain period of time from the date of loss. If you didn't experience damaging winds or hail at the time of the rainstorm or you've passed the time requirement for reporting a loss that occurred historically, you may have a problem with the adjuster on this point.
If the adjuster decides that your roof is a "total loss", needs to be replaced and is an insured loss under terms of the policy, the proceeds you receive from your company will depend on whether you carry "actual cash value" coverage (cost to replace the roof, less depreciation, less your deductible) or "replacement cost coverage". In the latter case, you should receive a settlement amount equal to the cost to replace your roof with the same or equal quality roofing material, less your deductible (i.e. 30 year weight composition shingles to replace a damaged roof of like kind, etc.) The amount of the settlement attributable to the dollar amount of depreciation will be withheld until you actually replace your roof.
It's not a bad idea to have a roofing contractor, or several, inspect, your roof prior to the adjuster's inspection and, if you find one in whose work you have confidence, have the contractor present when the adjuster inspects your damaged roof. The contractor can function as your advocate, as their interests will coincide with yours in terms of the settlement.
Because insurance contracts vary from state to state, you should spend some time reading your policy carefully. Also, find out from others in your neighborhood the basis and details of how they came to have their roofs replaced, assuming that new roofs appearing in your neighborhood are the result of insurance settlements.
Insurance company loss adjustment practices also vary as to what constitutes a "total loss". Some require x amount of damage within a given area of square footage (hail stone pock marks, torn or missing shingles, etc). In your case without any quibbling, the damage sounds sufficient to warrant replacement, ideally with insurance settlement proceeds.
I hope you live in a state with insurance laws that are consumer friendly. That is not the case in Texas. In almost all matters of "commerce" including the insurance industry, statues favor the interests of business.
Yes, Joseph is absolutely accurate on every point. We've had many wind events in your part of Georgia, Nuke, what we call "Cat Claims", for CATASTROPHE, which is the term assigned when one localized event is anticipated to result in over $1,000,000 in paid losses.This is the threshold where the Cat Team is called out - these are the storm chasers, the adjusters that move from one loss to another and travel the entire country. They are specialists, and they can distinguish between hail damage, wind damage, and a worn out roof. Believe me, we get plenty of opportunities to replace roofs that are well past their useful life.Roofs are just about the most sensitive things we deal with when it comes to claims. It's a big ticket item, and even people with an undeniably worn-out 30 year old roof will give us a try. These are the ones that shout the loudest when we deny their claim.One thing; if they do see this as a covered loss, and if you do (and from the quality, recent construction, and location of your home, I'm quite sure you do) have the Replacement Safeguard, they WILL initially take a depreciation on the roof - AND when you have the roof replaced, you will fax in the receipt from the roofer, then we will pay what we call "Recovered Depreciation" In other words, we may pay the whole bill less the deductible, but you won't get ALL of your money until the work is done.Years ago, the trend was to collect from the insurance company, then hold off on replacing the roof for a few more years - then file another claim ! This way, we're sure the work will be done.Greg
Edited 11/7/2009 9:22 pm ET by GregGibson
Greg, once again thank you for replying. Joseph was good in his reply.
Personally, I'd like to stay completely out of this. I'd much rather my insurance company and roofer work together. I'm not a roofer, nor insurance person. Why involve me, other than the unfortunate victim? :)
And the last thing I want is someone handing me the proverbial check. I don't need money crossing my palm. Are there not preferred roofers on file that insurance companies, including Allstate, use to circumvent the homeowner in the money tranfer department?
Nuke,
I'm not entirely certain that the insurance proceeds check(s) need come to you directly. You may be able to "assign" the proceeds to the roofing contractor. However, most policyholders prefer to be involved in disbursing payment(s) to the roofer, pending satisfaction with the work. Keep in mind that once you get past the point of satisfactory settlement with the insurance company, you arrive at the "second stage" of reaching satisfaction with the work done to replace your roof.
Like you, I'm neither a roofer nor an insurance adjuster, but I like to become as educated as possible in both realms and to know that my insurance premiums allow for a maximum, legitimate claim payment for any insured loss sustained under my policy contract. I also want to know that any work that is proposed under a re-roofing contract is performed in accordance with the materials and work practices that are specified. No one is likely to take care of your business as well as you can. If you expect that of others, your interests may not be best served.
Also, as to whose hands the check crosses, if you have a mortgage on your house and the lender is shown by endorsement on your insurance policy as a loss payee, the lender will have to endorse the check that is payable to whomever.
By the way, your original Allstate agent wasn't entirely accurate in his advice to carry a large deductible and to avoid making claims against your policy. The deductible you carry is a function of your individual financial circumstances and to a lesser degree, your personal crystal ball. You should feel free to make claims for covered damage to your property whenever it occurs. In the event that turns out to be in numbers of claims that an insurance company considers "excessive", some states allow your company to deny renewal based on that assessment. However, I don't know of any state insurance laws that allow insurance companies to rate premiums specific to a policyholder's claims history. To my knowledge, rate promulgation for property insurance is "experience factored", specific only to geographic region.
The only rule I focus on is a self-remember that I'm the consumer and paying out hard earned bucks at every turn. I expect to receive maximum benefit for whatever I buy, discretionary or otherwise. And that requires a more or less degree of diligence on my part, depending on the purchase.
Greg,Are you in the insurance business?If so may I contact you with some questions?I am a project manager with a restoration company and I would like to pick some brains.Thanks.Russell
Sure, you certainly may . . . I'm an Exclusive Agent / Independent Contractor with the Big A that Nuke is insured with, and like Nuke, I'm in Georgia. Simplest email is my Breaktime name, no spaces, @Allstate.com By the way, the whole Exclusive Agent thing simply means i get to pay my own rent ! I've been doing this for 24 years.Nuke, in your area, we may indeed have a Preferred Vendor Program for roofs. Here in my relatively non-Metro, semi-rural area, we much prefer that the insured choose his own roofer. If there's a call-back, I don't want to be caught in the middle of it. We can't warranty every roofer's workmanship, but three years down the road, if there's a leak, the insured remembers that it was ME that paid for the roof, and they don't seem to remember which roofer did the work. Just like an automobile claim, we much prefer that you choose who does your work. After all, it is your home.I really, really try to avoid referring particular body shops, roofers, contractors. I never want to give the impression that I am driving business to anyone - there are so many suspicions in this industry of kick-backs and money for referrals. I try to run it clean.Greg
Edited 11/7/2009 9:24 pm ET by GregGibson
Joeseph has spelled it out pretty good.
I'll give you my perspective. We've been meeting adjusters on the roofs for the last four or five months.
Most adjusters do a pretty good job of finding and documenting damage. They will see and find "proof" even when it's not entirely obvious to the untrained eye. We have had several occasions where the adjuster denied the claim. On one, it was obvious that the adjuster was on a mission to deny the claim. She denied it. Not to be deterred, we applied for a re-adjustment. We were surprised that they sent the same adjuster out. More surprisingly, she approved it!
I would suggest interviewing at least one more contractor unless you've already found someone that you are willing to work with. I'd then expect the contractor to be there when the adjuster does his inspection. To accomplish that, you most likely will have to sign some form of contingency agreement with the roofer. I wouldn't meet an adjuster without if I was a contractor.
I was trolling the beighborhood yesterday. I knew a couple of more homes had their roof replaced recently, but not had managed to garner the roofer's name, homeowners satisfaction result, nor their insurer.
Last night I found these two homeowners went with a guy in the neighborhood, who himself isn't a roof (as it turned out), but just making referral money for a roofer. Turns out there were not entirely satisfied with the roofing process (left a lot of old roof debris (shingles, nails, etc.) everywhere, new shingles standing up as if wind already had gotten to them, etc.
I decided to just avoid that roofer, and that neighbor. I think from the two roofers that came out to my home, and a company I witness do another home a couple of doors down, those three seem sufficient thus far. The two roofers that've been on my roof both said they'd be here when the adjuster comes out to walk the roof with them.
To accomplish that, you most likely will have to sign some form of contingency agreement with the roofer. I wouldn't meet an adjuster without if I was a contractor.
Sorry Bro, but
Anyone that signs a contingency contract is Dumber than a box of rocks!
Why do you say that?
We got every storm chaser & his dog around here, bunch of hail 3-4 storms this summer. They drive the neighborhoods (more like trolling) had two of them on my roof this summer.Deal goes like this, sign a blank contract, then they will meet the insurance guy on the roof. Why would anyone in their right mind sign a contract for work that has an unknown scope. Both roofer that pulled that had out of state plates on the trucks they were driving & magnetic company signs.
Once I told them what I do for a living, the tune changed real quick. Told both of them to give a call back, but they never did.
They both wanted to base their work on what the insurance company was willing to pay.
"They both wanted to base their work on what the insurance company was willing to pay."I'm not quite sure why you would object to that. Nor am I sure why your occupation has anything to do with anything. I didn't suggest that anyone should sign a "blank" contract. I did suggest signing a contingency contract. I'd be careful about using an out of state firm but I wouldn't rule them out specifically because they do work in multi states. Concerning the "unknown" scope: it's very easy to include the scope on a hail damaged roof. It basically goes like this: "We will replace EVERYTHING on the roof." The scope of our insurance contract is the same as the regular contract so I don't understand what your concern would be. The only difference is the contingency clause...if your insurance company doesn't buy the roof, the contract is torn up. It doesn't sound like the sales reps did a very good job of explaining their contract, or, maybe their contract is a bad one and you were wise for not signing. Or, you might be one of those "types" of customer that doesn't understand and maybe doesn't want to understand and will not sign a contract under any circumstances until some other ducks are lined up. And I don't blame you or think anything less of you or others that are like you. It's just who you are. I've already met many that think like that.The reason I an curious about why you think it's a bad idea is because I want to learn about it so maybe I can come up with an answer to your objection and then have the answer when I again meet with this objection. Another question: if you had met a contractor that you felt comfortable with and you wanted them to do the roof, how would you propose to get them to work for you on your behalf if it became necessary? Would you ask them to do it for free? Would you expect them to do it without a signed agreement of some sort?We've
'maintain a high deductible and never file a claim'
Then why have insurance??????
I bet if we were to ask Allstate that question they'd say, because your "mortgage lender requires it."
Well, sure they do - but most folks want insurance to protect them from a large financial loss, even if the house is paid for. I had a freakish fire loss two years ago - my thermostat shorted out and caught fire when no one was home. Six feet from the smoke detector, which sounded off as designed, but no one was her to hear it.Splashed burning plastic onto the carpet, which smoldered, smoked, and basically put itself out. Didn't even burn through the drywall. My 17 year old son came home and the house was full of smoke. He stepped on the one last smoldering remnant on the carpet, and opened the doors and windows to air out the house.$13,000 later, we were aired out, painted, new carpet in the hallway, and the disaster mitigation company had all of our clothing, linens, etc. cleaned and returned, and they had sent in a crew to remove every article from the kitchen cabinets, china cabinet, and our closets to wash, dry, and return them to their places.In the world of fire losses, this was a miniscule claim, but I sure wouldn't have wanted to face it without insurance.Sure, we collect your premiums, but I think we do serve a purpose. I find this to be meaningful work.Greg
The question of high deductible vs low deductible is nothing more than a gamble. You get lower premiums if you have a high deductible. When I run into a homeowner that has a high deductible, I usually mention that they are suffering now but have reaped the rewards of lower premium for many years. I try to make them feel like they've made the better choice. For many of them, it is true.
Not saying I have a high deductible. Just passing on what the original agent said. Our deductible is based on his recommendation. And in terms of a roof's cost, I'll be happy to eat that deductible.
I understand. I'm just trying to explain why the agent might have suggested the high deductible. To him, it might have made the most sense and financially speaking, it might be the wisest choice...if you can afford to pay the piper when the damage occurs. Did your roofing estimators ask you to sign a conditional contract when they did their estimate/evaluation? Or, did they just verbally agree to meet the adjuster?The reason I ask this is because I'm curious about how/what other roofers approach these insurance jobs.Edited 11/8/2009 9:24 am ET by jimAKAblue <!-- JIMAKABLUE -->
Edited 11/8/2009 9:24 am ET by jimAKAblue
I never asked for estimates on the job. I only asked for the roof condition be evaluated. I didn't sign anything--and they bother offered on their own to come out and meet, and walk the roof, with the adjuster.
Blue,
i will tell you my view of the situation. Remember the 80/20 rule?- various versions- but basiclly- 80 % of your money is going to come from 20% of your customers-so those 20% are where you should concentrate your efforts. nuke's situation is- that as a roofing contractor he is going to take up a LOT of your time- for very little return. It's really not somethying I want to get involved in- it's just not worth the effort. Lets say we ordinarily recieve $400 plus /sq. for roofing sevices- but the insurance company only wants to pay out $260/sq. As a contractor- where is our incentive to meet with the homeowner-THEN meet with the claims adjuster- to try to convince HIM into paying for a $260/sq. roofing job?- for me- it's a money losing endeavor from the very beginning but everybody wants something for nothing. Early in Oct. I met with a prospective customer-sounded like a good lead since I had replaced his parents roof a few years earlier- the family is familiar with my work.All the houses surrounding the customers home- had new roofs---storm damage- but State Farm had rejected my prospects claim of storm damage-and so the prospect was understandably p.o.ed. I explained to the homeowner that he had a fairly bad roof- but it was bad because of sub standard installation( short nailing,high nailing ,improperly nailed roof decking etc.) and really their wasn't any storm damage- I gave him prices on some repairs-and also a price to replace the roof. Propsect goes ahead- and resubmitts a claim-and then HE and his insurance agent ask me to meet the second adjustor to "advocate" on the prospects behalf- for an undamaged roof to be declared storm damagedTHERE is a couple hours of my life wasted that I will never get back. so-the question is- how hard to you want to work-to "advocate"--FOR FREE---on the outside chance you are going to get low margin or money losing projects? I can tell you- I spent good parts of 2007 and 2008 doing roofs at MY price- not the insurance company- for customers who had checks from the insurance company BEFORE they ever called me. EVERY instance I recall- of me having to meet with an adjustor- every single one- resulted in NO SALE- becaue if the roofer has to be there an "advocate"- it ain't clear cut storm damage. Personally?- it's more profitable for me to stay at home and lift weights- than it is for me to waste time "advocating" on behalf of dubious insurance claimsStephen
"As a contractor- where is our incentive to meet with the homeowner-THEN meet with the claims adjuster- to try to convince HIM into paying for a $260/sq. roofing job?- for me- it's a money losing endeavor from the very beginning"As a "contractor", I'd have to agree with your assessment...it's a money losing endeavor. As the "contractor", I don't go out there and meet adjusters. I send the sales rep, who has went on the first appointment and signed a contingency contract with the homeowner. It's obvious that our business models are significantly different. We are closing sales in the +90% range after we've walked the roof with the adjuster. Normally, we are not "convincing" the adjuster of anything....we are just there. A case in point would be the last roof I walked with an adjuster. When I got there, the adjuster was already on the roof. He had been there for ten minutes already. He had one spot circled. I immediately thought "oh, oh....he ain't going to buy this roof". I engaged him in small talk and began walking the roof looking for anything that I could find. I wasn't having much luck. Since I'm not a pushy guy, I just figured that he wouldn't find anything. I never once pointed at anything and I didn't try to convince him of anything. In fact, I never discussed the roof's condition with him at all. After circling the roof about five times, I went down to my truck and waited. After about ten minutes, I went back up because I was bored. Low and behold, there were the required spots circled in the required 10 x 10 area. He bought the roof! The only thing i did was be polite and amicable. I just let him do his job and never tried to influence him one way or the other. I really didn't care either way...we are busy enough.
blue- in this last instance- i met with the adjuster- because i had previously done the prospects parents roof- knew the family from church-and I felt there was a quasi-societal obligation on my part. here is something to consider- as a roofer- I am really in the business of solving problems-and now so are you. but what problems are we to solve?- I am in the business of solving ROOF problems-in exchange for money I am not in the business of solving insurance problems, or solving the customers financial problems etc.-FOR FREE Meeting with the adjustor- puts me in the business of attempting to solve other peoples problems-for free AND- further more- I think it's un-ethical. I don't think the roofer-should EVER meet the adjustor-and then the 2 somehow collude and magically arrive at the SAME scope of work and price?
NAW- don't want to get involved in that.
stephen
"I am not in the business of solving insurance problems, or solving the customers financial problems etc.-FOR FREE
Meeting with the adjustor- puts me in the business of attempting to solve other peoples problems-for free"At this point in time, we ARE in the business of solving insurance problems and that is a major point in our sales process. However, we don't do that for free either! I've already mentioned that the only way we are going on a roof to meet an adjuster is if we have a signed agreement providing for us to be the roofing contractor, IF, the insurance company approves the claim. "AND- further more- I think it's un-ethical. I don't think the roofer-should EVER meet the adjustor-and then the 2 somehow collude and magically arrive at the SAME scope of work and price?"I don't agree at all that it's unethical. We ALWAYS magically arrive at the same scope of work because it's always the same: we replace the entire roof, felt, vents, drip edge etc. In the cases of most newer roofs, we verify that the flashings are intact and correct and we also make sure that there is valley metal in every valley. We don't do the ice and water thing here but we would if it made sense. The other element of our duties is to make sure the roof measurements are correct. It's not unusual to find that the insurance company has shorted the job two, three or more squares. This happens because of bad math or improper allowances. Don't lose any sleep worrying about the insurance company. They can, and do, send out for re-measurements if we can't agree on the scope. They hold all the power and we are just there making sure we get paid fairly for our services. By being there, we make sure the claimants don't have to "settle" as you, and others have made note of.
Now, lets talk about the numbers of these roofs. We don't need anywhere near $400 to operate profitably. I would certainly take it if we could get it but we are generally happy with the insurance numbers as they pay. We did one last week that returned 11k over our hard costs. It took our crew a day and a half. The crew originally intended to do it in one day but got a late start and had dump-trailer problems. I would love, Love, LOVE to do one of these every day of the year, including New Years and Christmas. I fully appreciate that your business model does not work with the insurance payouts and I'm glad that others with similar business models like yours do not chase the same work that we do. I'm not afraid of the competition but I'm realistic too...if you were chasing work in our market, we'd certainly lose some work to you....not all...but some.
""We did one last week that returned 11k over our hard costs. It took our crew a day and a half. The crew originally intended to do it in one day but got a late start and had dump-trailer problems. 11k over hard costs (net profit?) on one roof in one day at insurance companies allowance? Must have been either some roof or some fancy selling .
Life is Good
There certainly wasn't any fancy selling.
blue, Grant has summed things up very nicely-no need for further comment from mewith the exception of pointing out that there is CONSIDERABLE difference in walking a 10/12 in cougar paws on an intact roof for the purposes of measurement-vs. working on it all day during a tear- off of 2-3 layers,with wood repairs, and roof replacements.also note- insurance "allowances" do pay a VERY slight increase for the difference between tearing off 2-3 layers -as opposed to 0ne layer-and they do pay VERY slight extra for steeper pitch work-put the additional "allowance doesn't come anywhere near covering the actual cost-let alone allowing for any profit to make it worth whileso-we are left arguing with eh insurance company in the vain hope of having the chance to break even.-
no thanksStephen
Fair enough. You guys obviously have a much different experience than I have here and the rates that you are getting paid might be so skewed that it's soured you. I don't have the exact breakdown but my recent experience with a 10/12 hip paid 400.79 per square if you were to apply the entire amount toward the roofing. The actual dollar per square would be less because all the accessories are lumped into the $400.79 per sq. That number doesn't include any guttering.I've attached a sketch of the roof which was generated by Eagleview.
Sorry for the large size. I don't have any pictures programs on this computer to downsize it. It's a new vista and I can't find paint. I'll download irfanview later.
Heres that resized picture of the roof. It paid a tad over $400 per sq.
It was all 10/10. What do you and Grant think the insurance company should have paid for it? It was 30yr GAF.
can't open it.
stephen
Here's the roof in question:View Image
Jon Blakemore RappahannockINC.com Fredericksburg, VA
Good pricing as far as I'm concerned. I'll do roofs like that all year long at that price.John Svenson, builder, remodeler, NE Ohio
So would I. I'd love to do two, three, or four every day LOL!I'm thinking that Grant and Stephen ran into a tough insurance settlement many moons ago and decided then that insurance jobs are all losers....then never looked again to see if the first one was an aberration. It reminds me of a line of questions which answers an objection "Did you ever eat a bad sandwich?" ..."Yes."....Did you stop eating ALL sandwiches after that?" On this particular roof, we never walked the roof (we ordered an Eagleview), never met the adjuster and got paid the full amount the day we finished. Everyones happy.
I'm thinking that Grant and Stephen ran into a tough insurance settlement many moons ago and decided then that insurance jobs are all losers....then never looked again to see if the first one was an aberration.
It's more along the lines of "I got butt raped" the 1st time and figured that was an aberration and tried it again. When I got butt raped the second time, I figured I'd quit before I got AIDS. Plus my butt hurt.
The last insurance job I got involved in, the homeowner sent me an unsolicited check for $600 for all the hours I'd put into fighting the insurance company (and that about broke me even) on their behalf. Their house had Grand Manors on it and the insurance co. was gonna pay $120 L&M to replace them with 30 yr dimensionals. No allowance for copper valleys/flashings etc. They were not paying like for like. They ended up using someone else who would drop their prices to meet what the insurance co finally agreed to pay after battlling me.
The other two or three similar situations wasted lots of my time (not as much as above), but resulted in no payoff. In hindsight, I should have gotten some sort of contract signed before proceeding, but I'm a man of my word and I assume everyone else is as well. Maybe one day I'll learn.
Then there were the storm chasers using illegals and paying them by cashing checks for jobs less than $5000 and taking those jobs off the books and paying their illegals cash and doing substandard work to boot. Meanwhile, the adjusters were handing these guy's cards out while condemning undamaged roofs and pocketing a cash kickback from the storm chasers. I need to go take a shower after thinking about these sleezeballs.
As I said, I won't fight anybody over this type of work. More power to you if you can make a living at it. I've just chosen to take a different route and I'm glad I did. I had a hard time keeping my guys busy when everyone was trying to get the same jobs. We threw it in 4 wheel drive and went off the road after the jobs nobody else wanted or could do and have been almost as busy as ever with profitable jobs.
I just got a nice apartment building fire job yesterday. But, I'm subbed, so I don't have to deal with the insurance co directly. And got I got the alum gutter contract on the complex as well because it was "too high" to reach off of ladders, but there's pavement all the way around it. Can you say "boom lift"?copper p0rn
I don't think you can say "butt raped" here, but I'm not sure. And I'm supposed to know !
;>)
Greg
Well, we both just said it. So I guess we can.copper p0rn
With those stories, I can see why you are sour on insurance jobs. I just haven't run into anything like that at all. Maybe it's the difference in state laws. We haven't run into any insurance company trying to install anything less than like kind. I haven't heard anything about shady adjusters and I haven't met any that made any shady offer but that doesn't mean that they aren't around.
I'm glad for every roofer that ignores storm work. Less competitors that way. I've had more trouble with deceitful homeowners than adjusters, but the good FAR outweighs the bad.And I've had insurance jobs that paid for Camelots, Grand Manors, even had one that paid for Lamarites(The homeowner was entitled to slate, used the savings for some other improvements)John Svenson, builder, remodeler, NE Ohio
blue, my ordinary retail price on a roof that cut up and that pitch would be considerably over the price your insurance company allowed.
I spent over 20 years getting to the point where I could collect those rates in the open market HOWEVER- my experiences with a hailstorm on june 8,2007-adjusters from state Farm,allstate ,nationwide etc.-all of them-would only "allow" prices in the $260-$280/sq. for this zip code It's not a matter of an isolated boning turning me sour on it( insurance work)-in 2007 I stopped counting after I had climbed on over 250 roofs within a 12 block radius of my home.
I know what the insurance companies were prepared to pay-and I know what my ACTUAL customers actually paid I don't feel it is my responsibility WHERE a prospect gets the money to pay for a roof-but in 2007-2008 most of my customers here-recieved insurance settlements-and then added money out of their own pocket in order for me to do their roofs the way I do roofs also-keep in mind that in 2007- I could buy a sq. of 30 year dimensionals for about $46-by 2008 they were close to $80- all the other materials upped the same way-but the insurance comapnies "data" indicated our costs were still $46, LOL keep in mind- my experience is confined to THIS zip code-insurance company payouts might well be different in a different(more affluent) zip code but I am not in the business of doing as many roofs as possible. I am in the business of doing the roofs I WANT to do at the price I WANT to get.
i can tell you for a fact- insurance companies were not paying $400/sq. here in this zip code in 2007.
I can also walk you around the neigthbgorhood- and point out to you the folks who took the insurance checks-and went on a cruise instead of replacing the roof-or the folks who took the insurance check and installed new vinyl windows instead of replacing the roof, and the folks who 2 years ago had nicely painted clapboard siding-but took the insurance check and vinyl sided the house- instead of replacing the roof so, my distaste for insurance work-isn't from an isolated one or two time experience. frost off the roof now- off to do a spanish tile roof repair.
stephen
"also-keep in mind that in 2007- I could buy a sq. of 30 year dimensionals for about $46-by 2008 they were close to $80- all the other materials upped the same way-but the insurance comapnies "data" indicated our costs were still $46, LOL"We've run into that situation here too. It's a very simple procedure to apply for a supplement to get the updated cost differential. We've already done this several times for clients who pocketed money from a storm that hit two years ago here."my ordinary retail price on a roof that cut up and that pitch would be considerably over the price your insurance company allowed.
I spent over 20 years getting to the point where I could collect those rates in the open marke" I'll let you know in 20 years if I can get more for a roof like that. Until then I'll just have to suffer through them although if I charged more I'm sure someone in here would start calling me greedy and shady.
Now, lets talk about that situation you tossed out. You already knew that it wasn't an insurance claim type job. You also knew that they were going to pay $260 a sq for work you charge $400 per sq. Why wouldn't you immediately reject the request to meet with the adjuster on the basis that the spread was too wide and you wouldn't be the contractor even if the adjuster bought the roof?!!! The secondary issue would have been that you agreed with the first assessment!!!!!Also, why wouldn't you charge them an hourly service fee for meeting the adjuster if they insisted on you being there? If the homeowner was agreeing to pay you the $400 per square "if" the adjuster bought the roof, then I would probably meet with the adjuster as long as I had the proper written agreement with the homeowner. I would not expect any different results on the re-evaluation but with the signed contract in hand, it would be worth my time, given the results we've had here meeting with adjusters. I know I'm not going to win them all but the percentages are in our favor at this time.
I guess if a guy can't make money @ $260 a sq. for asphalt, they should stop using Platinum nails. $400 a sq. better be over an 8/12 & all cut up.
On a side note, there is a bike shop around here that converted a Prision Bus for food vending, they call it the Prision Bus Bistro! Always a waiting line when the Bus is open!
G80104,almost every roof I do-is over 8/12 and all cut up--- and 2-3 layer tearoffs I think we did TWO walkers all yearAs insurance adjusters have explained to me- they only pay the AVERAGE per sq. price of roofs installed within that zip code I specialize in roofs that are HARDER than average.
you do the math- if you are getting paid AVERAGE per sq. prices for easier than average roofs- it's an ok deal- however if you are doing HARDER than average roofs- for average costs-it's a bad deal.
Stephen
Jim -
I think you told the "real" difference between your business model and Stephen's (and mine as well) when you described your meeting with the adjuster as "walking" the roof. I don't think Stephen can "walk" many of his roofs. It takes a lot more time and effort to roof a square of 2 story, hipped, dormered, valleyed, cut up, 12/12 roof than it does to roof a 5/12 ranch with a front porch gable and attached garage where you can back the trailer up to the eave.
Yet the insurance companies pay $260/sq for both.copper p0rn
Precisely additionally- the material costs for 30 year dimensional shingles, full drip edge, all the flashing, all the vents, using the spec. hip and ridge caps- not cut up 3 tabs as caps, 6 ft. of Grace along the bottom edge of all roofs and in the valleys-and w valley flashing- will take the material costs up to around $150/sq.-or better factor in dumping 2-3 layers of shingles-and at $260 sq.- you are left with less than $100/sq. to some how actually do the work AND make a profit not a good deal for me however- the homeowner doesn't care about that-nor does the insurance company.-lets say the existing roof was a 20 year 3 tab roof over 15# felt- that's what the insurance company wants to pay for. for instance- they won't pay for ice gaurd if it wasn't there originally- but I am requirede by code to install it- thye insurance company and the homeowner apparently think I should pay for that out of my own pocket, LOL the homeowner just finds someone who will put on another 3 tab,20 year shingle roof over 15# felt- forget about the icegaurd- they got a "roof" at the insurance companies price. gotta run,
stephen.
I wonder how this applies with respect to my policy with my current insurance company. According to my agent, my policy isn't capped in terms of replacement. Unlike current policy design, which caps at 20% what homeowner paid for it, my policy is replacement cost at any cost.
Of course this may be limited to catastrophic conditions where the home (structure) is deemed a total loss.
Stephen,
One minor point to your comment
for instance- they won't pay for ice gaurd if it wasn't there originally- but I am requirede by code to install it- thye insurance company and the homeowner apparently think I should pay for that out of my own pocket, LOL
Actually, most insurance policies have a clause that allows for upgrading if it is a code requirement. Most adjusters do not go out of their way to figure it out, but it is a permissible modification to the adjustment. It does, however, require a bit of a fight or discussion depending on the adjuster.
We just finished a repair of a flat roof that was basically concave. IRC requires that roofs have some slope for drainage or drains built into the roof system. In addition, our local AHJ require r-30 minimum on roofs.
I was able to "upgrade" the roof with sloped poly iso to address both matters and the adjuster worked with me. Corporate office did not want to do it, but I offered to bring out the building inspector and they agreed.
These negotiations took some effort (about 10 hours), but the owner paid for my time to work with the insurance company. We were able to increase the final adjustment by 12K on on original 12k adjustment and complete the work at our rates and not the "average". I would not do this if I was not being paid.
Bruce
That is an interesting small point.
Just got a reply from my insurance agent regarding filing a claim. He certainly is trying to talk me out of it. Nice, expected, and immediately identified the roofer as being the proverbial enemy.
Backstory. During my visit to this agent's office last month, he provided a contractor to get an evaluation from. The person came out not prepared to get on a roof (no ladder), and from a street observation stated no hail damage. Instead, he claimed acid rain and poor construction. Mind you this was while it was raining out.
Ok, acid rain. Not on the home across the street, beside my home, nor the one behind me, all of which are built during the same phase. Also, how well can you spot hail damage from the street when it is raining out?
And let's ignore the new roofs around me for said reaons (wind & hail) but several other insrance company claims. We should ignore this, trust ground-based observations only, and allow rain-on-roof as not obscuring the evaluation.
This is enough for me to find another insurer. As expected, and as a non-roofer, Allstate could care less about me, my home, or my safety, and as proven from the auto accident last year. Time to move on.
I actually think it is more about the individual adjuster than the company. I had a project where a kitchen fire went from a 30K sheetrock and paint job to virtually a new house build-using the bring up to code criteria and the adjuster was very amenable to the discussion.
Same insurance company, different adjuster, on water leak in a kitchen would not allow removal of base cabinets to replace damaged subfloor.
I would also disagree with Stephen on meeting the adjuster. There is nothing unethical about presenting how you would solve the problem. The adjusters are not necessarily trained to dig deep when finding a remedy. Most do have some common sense and are amenable to a valid approach to fixing a problem and it is alot easier for them to present a bigger first adjustment than to revise a low adjustment.
Best of luck
Bruce
"Actually, most insurance policies have a clause that allows for upgrading if it is a code requirement. Most adjusters do not go out of their way to figure it out, but it is a permissible modification to the adjustment"
My farmer's policy has an "addendum" that I must pay an extra fee on my premium if I want them to bring the home repairs up to current codes when a claim is filed
Interesting.
I am by no means an expert on insurance work and frankly do not want to be. I have found that the key to any significant change in the scope or nature of an adjustment is to meet and dicuss these ideas with the adjuster before they generate their first adjustment.
I am sure there are many levels of policies and I believe the projects I have worked on have been on full replacement.
Blue brought up a good point with me in a phone conversation in that if a repair is not done in an appropriate way, it may devalue the home. Apparently insurers do not want to be the entity doing that so that helps with adjustments.
Bruce
I meant in no way to question you, I did make this statement that, had our agent not discussed every item of our policy, would could have been really screwed.
Our old home was build in 1930. Solid brick in Earth quake Calif. It has not a sigle seismic retro fit now required by bulding and local codes. We's be screwed if something, even a fire, had happened.
NO questioning or offense inferred. I had not run into that type of addendum before and just wanted to clarify that insurance work is no way my expertise. My apologies for not making that clear.
Out of curiousity, have you asked your agent about what would happen if you had a total loss. Are you insured for replacement value or a set value for the home?
complete replacement. including teardown and haul away. It ain't cheap
Our old home's replacement cost was 50% higher than the value of the home, including the property.
That is what happens whenit's the only brick home in the neighborhood . The first home built and then the reamining land was subdevided in later years with Ramblers build on residential size lots.
We are all attempting to further our knowldege here. Your question and information is welcome.
We've had several jobs that paid us to put additional materials on to "meet code". Things are different here in TX. I have yet to do a roof that has two layers. The insurance company will pay extra for each layer to be torn off though. They won't pay for the matching hip and ridge caps if there were cut up 3 tabs. Since most of the housing stock here in TX was put up by big national companies, there isn't anything but cut up 3 tabs that I've seen. I might start applying for supplements for them though. You've given me a good idea. I wouldn't mind putting them on...even though they would be "special orders" because the suppliers don't stock them.
I don't agree about your assessment of the "real" difference in our business models. I walk 10/12's with my Cougar Paws all the time. I'm okay on 11/12's too but we just don't see many of them. I've walked 12/12's but I tend to stick to the valleys and ridges even though the Cougar Paws allow me to stick. I do agree that it takes more time for hips, valleys, dormers and steep. All of those factors are provided for in the insurance payout though...so it's not a true statement to say that they are paying the same rate for simple 5/12 gables and complicated 10/12 hip/valley cutup combos. Your comments, along with Stephen's comments, pretty much prove that Nuke is best off finding a roofing contractor that is experienced in dealing with insurance claims. A roofing contractor that doesn't routinely deal with claims might be induced into accepting a $260 per square payout on a complicated cut up roof whereas another contractor, who has focused their business in the insurance arena might be much better at spotting irregularities in the adjuster's report. For instance, today, we are sending in supplemental requests for 100' of 6" gutter. Additionally, on that same job, they only paid for 5" gutters whereas the actual gutter is 6". 300 feet of 6" gutter is significantly more expensive than 300' of 5". I don't need to tell you that. On another job, they didn't allow for replacing all the flashings and vents. We'll be getting another $500 or so for that. Would a roofing contractor that "doesn't have the time for all this nonsense" be the best choice for these clients, or would someone who is willing to do the insurance dance be better? Before you answer that...please apply this caveat: both contractors do the same quality work. So, summed up, today, we are earning our money by "arguing" with the insurance company. It will probably put an extra 2k in our account. We don't really "argue", we just send in fax requests explaining the situation. It does take time to write up the reports/requests but thats the service we extend for our clients. Our other alternative would be to reduce the scope and only build what the insurance company provides for. We don't think that's the right way to do things.
All of those factors are provided for in the insurance payout though...so it's not a true statement to say that they are paying the same rate for simple 5/12 gables and complicated 10/12 hip/valley cutup combos.
I know that and I typed it the way I did for brevity's sake. But, their upcharge allowances are negliegable and don't reflect reality.
Nuke is best off finding a roofing contractor that is experienced in dealing with insurance claims.
Agreed.
Would a roofing contractor that "doesn't have the time for all this nonsense" be the best choice for these clients, or would someone who is willing to do the insurance dance be better?
The answer to that question is obvious.
we are earning our money by "arguing" with the insurance company. It will probably put an extra 2k in our account.
I understand. I've chosen to put an extra 2k in my account, by avoiding these situations. The job usually goes to someone else unless the client insists I get the job. In the cases that has happened, I've refused to take short cuts and do it like the insurance company wants and instead stood my ground for the client and insisted in putting it back like it was. And that has cost me lots of time per job. You can have all the insurance work you want. I sure won't fight you for it.
It does take time to write up the reports/requests but thats the service we extend for our clients. Our other alternative would be to reduce the scope and only build what the insurance company provides for. We don't think that's the right way to do things.
I can't find the profit in that. I get paid $X to install a square of shingles on a non-insurance job. On insurance jobs, I get paid $X to install a square of shingles, argue with the adjuster, document and fax, argue some more, meet with the adjuster, meet with the client extra times to explain what the insurance company is trying to pull, document and fax, etc.
That $2000 your talking about that got into your account from a day of arguing, would have already been in mine from the gitgo. Carry on.copper p0rn
I put the word "arguing" in paranthesis as a way of dramatizing the irony of that statement. The fax that I sent out today requesting the supplemental for 100' of gutter and upgrade 300+ gutter from 5" to 6" went out on my automatically generated fax to the insurer. I did have to type the specific request in the message portion of the fax. It took me all of one minute....less time than I will spend writing this response LOL. I've already been paid in full for this job and if the supplemental is allowed, I will take in an extra 2k. Half of that will be costs. If the supplemental is denied, we will install the gutters as paid for or the homeowner will have to pony up the difference. Its just business. I know they won't deny the 6" gutters because that is what is there. You also mischaracterized the time spent discussing this event with the client. It didn't consist of meeting with them "extra times" to explain this. I had a three or four minute phone conversation with her, from my office, before I wrote the fax. The burden that you are attempting to portray simply doesn't exist. Yes, we (the salesman/estimator) do have one added meeting with the adjuster on some of the insurance work. I'm going to guess that it happens on about 50% of the claims we have worked on. The reason is simple: half of our customers contract with us after they have their first check from the insurance company. So, while we might not be meeting with the adjuster, we find that there is often some items left out....shingles, gutters, etc. That's what triggers the supplemental requests. I'll gladly do them on every job....especially if it puts another $300 to $3000 in our account. It also is a service to the client because they get the full roof and all it's components properly paid for and installed. I will be glad to carry on and I'm truly thankful that there is so much anti-insurance job sentiments in the trades. I hear it all the time from competing contractors that refuse to deal with insurance jobs and every time I hear it I thank the heavens. I will valiantly labor on and suffer each time I cash those paltry inadequate checks LOL.
Jim,
I know the frustration I have when dealing with the insurance companies is two fold. First they the insurance companies try to make the contractor look like some sort of bandit daring to charge significantly more that what the average cost in the area is.
Second is that most trades people do not estimate to the tenth of the foot. I have never figured out what
5.25 feet of trim costs for me to remove
5.25 feet of trim to replace
5.25 feet of trim to prime
5.25 feet of trim to paint
and to prep 3.6 sf of closet and to move and replace content of one small closet.
Most of us figure this would take us x hours and charge x per hour and $50 bucks for materials.
Those little details on the xactimate estimating add up to significant amounts. Granted I never come in under the insurance estimate, I can get within 10 to 20 percent and the owner ends up paying the rest.
I find it hard to go from my traditional approach to estimating and working to beating the spreadsheet for all potential unit costs and tallying them up.
Regards
Bruce
I haven't really read too many insurance reports regarding interior work. I would agree that it's probably harder to value the work. They do include base service charges for mobilization and setup and that would take the edge off some of the items you are talking about. The insurance companies will pay the 10 to 20% more that you normally bill but it comes with some risk because they would typically want to see other local estimates on the work before they would approve the added amount. Your client would be caught in the middle of something that they, and you, are trying to avoid: contractor price wars.
What ever. I can only speak from my experiences with insurance companies. They have been unpleasant and I haven't made my margin. So I avoid those type jobs.
I also have avoided driving a honey wagon for a living. But, if that was the only job I could get to feed my family, I'd take it. And I'd get used to the smell, eventually. You've apparently gotten used to the smell pretty quickly.copper p0rn
"I will be glad to carry on and I'm truly thankful that there is so much anti-insurance job sentiments in the trades. I hear it all the time from competing contractors that refuse to deal with insurance jobs and every time I hear it I thank the heavens. I will valiantly labor on and suffer each time I cash those paltry inadequate checks LOL."You and me both!John Svenson, builder, remodeler, NE Ohio
I agree, and that is as I said. The deductible that a homeowner carries is a function of their financial circumstances and their personal crystal ball.
The point that hasn't been discussed is whether people are in general sufficiently disciplined to "save" (an antiquated term) the premium differential when they carry a 1% or greater deductible on their homeowners policy. I venture that most people are better off served paying a higher premium for a lower deductible - than relying on fiscal self discipline.
Regardless of what deductible anyone carries, I am a believer in "replacement cost coverage" vs. "actual cash value", especially when the economic cycle is "normal" and long term inflationary.
You need to be involved in the choice of contractor, and your chosen contractor needs to advocate for you. Otherwise, the adjuster will fix the claim allowance based on insurance industry 'blue books' and the rates in those books are calculated to favour the underwriter, not the insured.
As a contractor, I have done several large flood-damage jobs for clients, and in all cases the adjustor's first tactic was to look at our estimate and offer the client a flat amount ranging from one-half to two-thirds of what we estimated. The negotiating started from there.
The one I remember best was a basement apartment that was totalled by a leaking hot water heater. Adjuster offered the HO 16k; we had estimated 24,400. After three of four rounds of arguing, we got 21,500 for her.
The important thing is for the contractor's estimates to be as specific as possible. The scope of work and list of required materials have to be laid out in detail so the adjuster can't find fault with it.
Obviously, the contractor must be paid for this; most experienced outfits won't go near an insurance job without some kind of guarantee they won't be left holding an empty bag once the HO gets his dough.
Dinosaur
How now, Mighty Sauron, that thou art not brought
low by this? For thine evil pales before that which
foolish men call Justice....
re:
"You need to be involved in the choice of contractor, and your chosen contractor needs to advocate for you."
Well put. I had significant raccoon damage, for which State Farm wanted to give me a couple of thousand dollars. The actual payout, after my roofer finished argueing with them, was all most $10k. Find a roofer experienced in dealing with insurance companies.
norman- your suggestion to find a roofer experienced in dealing with insurance companies----- is a good one- up to a point. speaking for myself- i spent good portions of 2007 and 2008 involved with insurance companies-RE: a hail storm june 8,2007.
In my case- I have all the experience I need with insurance companies- to know I don't want any MORE experience in dealing with insurance companies, LOL Frankly- there isn't anything in it for me. someone else, however- might well be better tempermentally suited to arguing with insurance companies- as for me- I put it on the list of projects I am not interested in-along with projects involving homeowners who are lawyers, homeowners who are retired or active engineers, projects involving bankers, ANY call from a real estate agent,people who want to negotiate,barter,dicker and so forth. Life is too short- and there is always someone willing to do it for less. some folks,however- THRIVE on that sort of thing. not me.stephen
In my case- I have all the experience I need with insurance companies- to know I don't want any MORE experience in dealing with insurance companies, LOL
Frankly- there isn't anything in it for me.
That's because you aren't charging for it.
When I spend an hour on the phone arguing with an ajustor, or writing up a 'rebuttal' to an his latest pile of BS, I charge the HO for an hour. If I spend 15 minutes printing out and sending a fax, I bill that 15 minutes. If I spend two hours making up a bill of materials and scope of work, that two hours is billable.
It's all billable work, whether the insurance co. pays out in the end, and now matter how much they pay, and even if I never do the actual roof work. I make that clear to the HO at the first meeting. If they don't agree to that, I just go away calmly, and don't come back.
Sure, dealing with adjustors can be a frustrating PITA, but I charge the same hourly rate for doing that as I do for climbing up on a 6/12 steel roof with 8" of warm, slippery snow on it.
Dinosaur
How now, Mighty Sauron, that thou art not broughtlow by this? For thine evil pales before that whichfoolish men call Justice....
Skimmed over the replies. Here's my experience.
Back in '99 our area had a severe hailstorm. We were out of town at the time so the severity of the storm we didn't really appreciate. And we lived in a very rural area (closest house was a half mile away) with no two roofs alike.
Anyway, I called up State Farm and they sent somebody out. He looked over the roof and offered up $1500. Word begin to filter down about whole roofs needing replacing. We had a cedar shake roof. Others who had one said insurance companies where replacing their roofs.
Called State Farm back. The guy came out again. This time he decided the western side needed replacing but the eastern side didn't (the hail came in from the west and this is a 12/12 pitched roof with one side facing west and the other facing east. Of course the western side was more damaged then the eastern side).
Really didn't like that mainly because I would now have a roof that would not only be two colors for a year (cedar takes a while to age) I would have a roof with two different lifespans, the existing roof being 15 years old.
Got a contractor on board.
Met up again with the adjuster and contractor. Turns out the criteria as to whether to replace a cedar roof or not is measured by "splits/square". The break point was like 300/square. The west side had like 450 but the east side had like 200.
Anyway to make a long story short, they paid for replacing the whole roof. The contractors presence here was critical.
Runnerguy
I will preface my remarks by stressing that moy comments are aimed specifically at Allstate, and not the insurance industry in general.
Allstate has a long history - documented at least to the appellate court level - of encouraging their employees to use every means, fair or foul, to keep from paying a claim. Deliberate misinformation and specious reasons for rejecting claims are the norm. When caught, it has been the practice to reward the dishonorable employee with raises and promotions - also documented in the court records.
Because of this record of malfeasance, I strongly reccomend that you engage an attorney immediately, and follow his advice. I also reccomend that you take out a second policy with another firm, one with a better history. Whether this is the time to cancel with Allstate is something you need to discuss with your attorney first.
Be aware that Allstate may fall back on the practice of simply denying the claim, refunding your premium, and cancelling you. Again, your attorney will know how to handle, or prevent such from happening.
Our experience here is that you are "NOT in good hands" with a certain unmentioned insurance company. They are the worst.
I can understand your desire to be circumspect.
Yes, against defamation, truth is an absolute defense. Since the practices of Allstate are a matter of public record, and the opinions are those of the courts, I have no hesitation in voicing my disdain for Allstate.
It is interesting you say this. When I got t-boned by another Allstate customer my experience with the 'Allstate process' was as if I were criminal.
The ther party pulled out a Mrs. Winters parking lot at full speed, t-boned my truck on the road. He claimed I was speeding. Kind of hard with speed bumps 300' doesn the road immediately following a mandatory stop intersection.
Anyway, because he went to Allstate first, and filed a claim, accusing me, Allstate took his side, refused a rental, etc., etc., etc. until I provided a Police report. Seriously, even if I had been liable, which I wasn't, why was he exempt for providing the report? This alone made my wife and I think twice about staying with Allstate.
Once the Police repoirt was provided, it took a couple of days to get a rental, which was the super-sub-compact bare minimum to replace my full-sized truck for a month. At that point the wife and I decided that the next time we have interaction would be the deciding condition.
BTW, I was not aware that you can carry multiple policies concurrently. If this is the case, then I may do just that! I have been canvassing the neighborhood talking with folks with recent roof replacements and not one is using Allstate. Two on State Farm, one on Nationwide, Travelers, AARP, etc.
Not to get all anti-Allstate, but our experiences thus far are not positive, and this from never filing a single claim on any policy. So, we'll see how it goes. Expecting the low-ball to not-sufficient damage, to the excuse of the day, yadda, yadda, yadda. All is expected under my belief system in how fellow man will fail me. :)
While there is no rule against carrying multiple policies, it is important that you declare this fact when you apply. To be fair, insurance companies are not in the business of having each loss become a profit center for you, and they are ever wary of fraud.
What will typically happen is that the plder policy will cover the bulk of the claim, while the second covers what remains.
How old is the roof?
I would say nine years old at most. We're the original owners and we've not been in it nine years. But these problems, and subsequent previous repairs have been going on for a while. This is just the latest round.
We are going through a similar process at the moment in Fayetteville, GA. Allstate is the insurer. We had softball szd hail . Most every house in the neighborhood received new roofs. For what it's worth, our roofer says it is damaged but also said Allstate has been denying most every claim he has run across. We've never filed a claim w/ Allstate so this will be our litmus paper test. Our agent was very helpful and someone is coming out to the house on Nov 27 to inspect. I'll let you know the result.
My agent was out yesterday and advised me to file a claim. Of course, filing a claim means nothing. They can taking the filing, deny it, give minimal, etc.
With a known date for the adjuster coming to your place make sure to have a roofer there to walk it with them.
Do you know if this adjuster is an Allstate employee, or 3rd part adjuster?
Sorry but do not know. I'll ask when he arrives.
For What it is Worth from Forsyth County, GA.
As an engineer contracted to CAT insurors on occasion I delayed my roofing claim for some months after the hailstorm that occured in this area of GA back in April.
I even had an individual (21 YOA and probably started yesterday) back in June climb the roof and state that there was no hail damage. Recently, I did some further investigation of the roof on my own and determined that, due to a leak that was not there prior to April, I would contact my agent. It is the same insuror that you mentioned.
Making a somewhat long story short, I came home early today to observe the progress on my roof replacement.
I believe that where you may come into some discussion is when was the system compromised and by which event. I understand from past experience that the insurance companies place a time limit on claims for a specific event.
Not much help, sorry.
Best Regards