We are insurance adjusters that travel the world handling claims from natural and man-made catastrophes.
Let's talk about hail damage... I have been pondering recently whether or not it is actually true that the hail damage will be visible in 6 months if it is not visible during my current inspection.
I have seen these idea passed around recently and want to have further discussion and input.
Now, as a young adjuster, I went out on a re-i request 3-4 months after my initial denial of hail damage and did find hail damage to warrant repairs to the roof. Was this because I was not thorough enough at the initial inspection? Or was it simply that the damage could not be found?
I have even used this idea as a way to pacify homeowners if they weren't happy with my denial, actually believing what I was telling them (because of the above scenario).
I was particularly disturbed the other day when a roofer met me at a loss and after we scoured the roof the best we could, we found NO hail damage except to some box vents. He had called the claim in for the homeowner claiming hail damage to the roof. After I told him I wasn't buying it, he flippantly said, "wait 6 months, the next adjuster will." That upset me for so many reasons which I know you felt in a visceral way as you read his comment to me.
I guess what I really want to know is, if I look hard enough the first time, can I find that same damage that will possibly show up 6 months later? If I can, how much harder are we talking? An extra 5 minutes per test square? And extra 30 minutes?
I would really appreciate any comments or suggestions or thoughts anyone has on this, from any side of the proverbial fence.
Just do me one favor... let's not get all partisian or flaming here. I like my topics to stay friendly. :-)