| Author |
 Topic  |
|
KileAnderson
USA
875 Posts |
 Posted - 03/02/2004 : 16:43:12
|
| The point of my previous post was not to say that the roof that had 9 year old hail damage but didn't leak wasn't damaged. The point was that if this roof with obvious hail damage has not failed (yes the only way for a roof to fail is for it to stop doing what it was put there to do, repel water)then a roof with damage so minor, if you can even call it damage, that it can't be seen is not going to be adversely affected. If you apply your logic of hail dislodging granules then there is no reason to even inspect the roof. Call the NOAA and ask them if hail fell in the area. If they say yes then just pay for the roof. That is the logical conclusion to the granular loss argument. |
 |
|
|
Johnd
USA
110 Posts |
Posted - 03/02/2004 : 18:12:31
|
Kile is right, ..... this granule loss thread has just about run its course. Maybe we should all switch gears and have a discussion on the effects of the sunshine on a home's paint job and how we should pay for the fade. Is chalking paint grounds to powerwash and repaint a home OR is all this just a "pigment" of our imagination?
|
John Durham
sui cuique fingunt fortunam |
|
|
|
KileAnderson
USA
875 Posts |
Posted - 03/02/2004 : 20:09:55
|
| A drought is not normal weather conditions. If that drought caused the paint to fade, chip and crack prematurely we may have a covered, weather related, loss. Don't you think? |
|
|
|
rbryanhines
22 Posts |
Posted - 03/02/2004 : 20:29:39
|
I have now took the time to read all the posts concerning this topic. It is eazy to see the IA , PA , and roofers. (JimF appears to be an old school multiline IA,Thats not a knock- I really enjoyed your posts)
There have been many posts stating hail is a normal weathering event. My earlier post and simple math proves this wrong. If you don't believe this call NOAA,Haag(not that they are unbiased)and do the math for yourself.
(I think the best way to see this ,is to put yourself in the shoes of 70 year old insured. Imagine that you have had your HO policy with the farm for 50 years. Now you file your first hail claim and some out of towner tells you hail is a normal weather event!)
There is also some posts stating there is not a difference between rain and hail. I think JimF said it best. To rephrase :
The shingle warranty covers rain events (any and for any duration )
The shingle warranty does not cover hail (any ,size and duration does not matter)
Rain alone does not cause the granules to fall off.(the formula is sun+rain+time=granule loss)
However hail alone can cause granules to fall off.
(Someone stated that granules were for cosmetic value only . This is absurd!)
There is a value of the roof that is lost even if the hail damage causes accelerated granule loss only.(I do believe that there has to be evidence to substantiate that hail was the cause of the granule loss!) Even Kile believes this as he stated to a homeowner on this site: "In actuality fresh hail damage is mostly cosmetic. But this damage can accelerate the deterioration of the material and early failure."
The bottom line is that roof damage from granule loss caused by hail is a grey area . If the adjuster approaches it any other way he is not serving the insured in a professional manner.
One must get past the personal feelings towards PA's and Roofers. As I stated earlier that all parties involved in the claims process have some bias.
|
|
|
|
KileAnderson
USA
875 Posts |
Posted - 03/02/2004 : 20:56:28
|
All you do by broaching this "gray area" is create more problems. Granular loss is not covered by any insurance company that I know of and if you go around telling insureds that their roof is damaged because you saw granules in the gutter but their insurance isn't going to pay for it, who are you helping. Your are creating a file that will never close and making insureds angry and probably shortening your career a great deal more than the hail shortened the life of the roof.
I believe it was said earlier that a line must be drawn and I think a very sensible line has been drawn by the carriers. Granular loss happens every day. And contrary to what you say, rain alone can and does cause granules to collect in the gutter. So does wind. The sun helps accelerate this and so does inadequate ventilation and a million other things.
Because granules are lost everyday then granular loss is an everyday event. Shingles are not bruised everyday. That's what makes REAL hail damage a covered loss.
Another point to ponder. If you want to go down the road of granular loss being damage, would walking the roof to inspect for hail damage be considered destructive testing. It does cause granular loss. Unless you can rig up some sort of pulley and trolley system so that your feet never actually touch the roof. |
Edited by - KileAnderson on 03/02/2004 20:59:18 |
|
|
|
rbryanhines
22 Posts |
Posted - 03/02/2004 : 21:22:11
|
Kile , based on your earlier post you work mainly for the farm. They have bought many roofs for granule loss alone.As I stated before the line has been drawn - the carriers keep moving it (including the farm!!)
I understand what you are saying and when it make sense I use your approach. However, I've done my research, watched how carriers handle reinspections, and always keep an open mind!!!
If you stay in the business long enough(which at this time I bet you will: You seem to know your stuff,your on someone's roster, and you believe everything the carriers tell you!)
You'll learn |
Edited by - rbryanhines on 03/02/2004 21:22:57 |
|
|
|
khromas
USA
103 Posts |
Posted - 03/02/2004 : 21:50:59
|
Mr. Hines, (I assume that it is your name)
You may be interested to know that a high percentage of property adjusters (male AND female, CAT or staff) actually have substantial backgrounds in the construction industry, many times as owners of companies. We have not been brain-washed by the 'evil-empire' and by the same token, do not park rational, common sense at the curb when we show up for work. Our skepticism with positions put forth by current members of the trades often is born out of experience and informed knowledge rather than what will sell a job to a homeowner. A case in point... while I was staff at a major carrier I inspected a roof with a salesman from one of the largest roofing companies here in the Houston market. I agreed there was hail damage and that we would be paying for replacement. As we were about to get on the ladder, I asked him to prepare an estimate for my consideration and that it should be based on what it would cost IF INSURANCE WAS NOT INVOLVED BUT THAT HE WAS BIDDING WITH OTHER ROOFERS TO GET THE JOB.
His response? (I quote!) BUT WE CHARGE MORE IF ITS INSURANCE!
( I would like for you to explain why that should be the case? The carrier did not contract with that company. It has nothing to do with the contract between the homeowner and the roofing company.)
As adjusters, we not only have the moral obligation to handle the claim properly, we have a substantial legal requirement with all of the penalties attached as well. Few states also impose those standards on members of the construction trades. It is left up to the personal honesty and integrity of those members of the trades, which, I'm saddened to say, is in short supply.
Sincerely, |
Kevin Hromas |
|
|
|
CCarr
Canada
1200 Posts |
Posted - 03/02/2004 : 21:54:49
|
Bryan, the concept of diminished value will evolve in time, to have applicability to property insurance claims. I've enjoyed your fresh appraoch to this thread, it has been civil and an easy read.
You might want to review the contents of the "Hail damage visibility" thread, found in the "Tips & How to" forum.
When there is a way ( i.e. an accepted technical standard) to measure granular loss after exposure to an insured peril, diminished value will then have its needed measuring cup with which to dispense additional indemnity dollars. |
|
|
|
Roof_Dr_Sr
USA
27 Posts |
Posted - 03/03/2004 : 06:28:57
|
quote:
Originally posted by rugg
Haag Eng books are an industry standard and they will tell you that the loss of granules is not considered hail damage. The shingle must show signs of puncture, or a bruise. The use of the tire explaination is a very good one, as it seems to go over fairly well with insureds.
AS well if you are talking about wood shakes and wood shingles need to have been split. A bruise to the wood will not affect the integrity or the life of the shingle. As you may have guessed this is not a direct quote.
Get yourself a copy of the Haag book on shingles.
|
Roof Dr.Sr. |
|
|
|
Cecil
USA
35 Posts |
Posted - 03/03/2004 : 06:55:05
|
As the thread indicates, there is a lot of subjectivity here regarding hail damage. Although we try, it is not black or white, we can adjust all hail claims the same. The "Haag" method is the standard but there are exceptions to every rule. Judgement, "Common Sense" has to came into play here.
Example, hail falls for 1/2 hour in an area, size of marbe, some bigger. Roof inspection reveals roofs 50% void of granules. No real bruises. How could someone say the roof hasn't been damaged if 50% of the granules were worn off is this 1/2 hour event. This actually happened in Houston, TX. After the big companies surveyed the damage they even agreed.
On the other hand, when you look at a roof hit by marble size hail and you see some granular loss, no collateral damage and the shingles look normal with no bruising etc., then you are not going to replace it.
Granules are there for color, protecting the matte from untraviolet rays etc. About 300% more granules than are needed are impregnated on the shingles at the factory. When bundles are delivered and opened on sit, usually anhand full or more of granules run out on the ground.
Clear hail damage is easy to adjust. Marginal hail damage is very difficult to adjust and always be right. All factors must be considered. |
|
|
|
Roof_Dr_Sr
USA
27 Posts |
Posted - 03/03/2004 : 09:29:18
|
In response to the granule loss. I have read most of the responses on this subject and failed to hear the answer to the real problem. I know one thing, it's not that PA's are always starting problems, I know it's not Ad's are avoiding work, and I don't think it because roofing contractors want to make money. The problem in my opinion is the inconsistency from the insurance industry. For example, at the beginning of a hail storm, most insurance companies will pay a claim for 5 hits per square. Later on after the storm has been going a while, they change their guidlines rules to 8-9 hits per square then to 10-15 hits per square after that. At this point, they add "per slope" to the deal. This shows what "no consistency" means. No wonder they can't get a grip on granule loss. Here is my opinion: if the granule loss is a direct result from a hail storm it should be replaced. If it is not replaced then, the adjuster should set the home up for a re-inspection in 6 months to see if hail damage is more visable. Repairing the granule loss is a tough nut to crack. Do you know anyone who does this? Do they do the whole roof or just sections? Who retains the warranty on their work? What about the color difference? Would the insurance companies waive the deductable? Any more questions just ask "The Roof Dr." or visit our web site at www.accutechroofing.com
2 story ladders available during storm work. Thanks for your time........... Jack Keeton |
Roof Dr.Sr. |
|
|
|
khromas
USA
103 Posts |
Posted - 03/03/2004 : 11:57:40
|
I am still waiting on someone from the roofing business to answer the question I posed in my post on 3/2 regarding pricing differences if insurance is involved.
Anyone willing to try? |
Kevin Hromas |
|
|
|
Tuckernotis
USA
19 Posts |
Posted - 03/03/2004 : 15:54:25
|
First: What exactly does a "bruise" look like?
I like the post about small prolonged hail removing 50% of the granules being hail damage. As a consumer, I don't see how granule loss would not be hail damage unless these granules have no value except for cosmetic. I have places on some of the hit marks that are bare to the matting where all the granules were knocked off. Is this normal wear? It wouldn't be this way except for the hail event. Is a bruise the indentation in the shingle that the impact left? I have lots of these. I also have some holes clean through the shingles. Don't know where these could have come fro except for the hail. Anyway, I have two roofers that are going to come out and look and I will ask specific questions about any damage that is alleged. I did my homework thanks to this forum. Someone on the board has generously offered to swing by and have a look and give his unbiased, unpaid opinion. And if it is decided that a new roof is needed, I will get bids from three reputable contractors.
Second: Kevin, you must have been kidding? This is America, capital of the free market enterprise sytem. Number one rule, if insurance is paying, you get a premium on the job. Same is true of automobile work or roofing. Not fair, doesn't make sense, drives up the cost of insurance, true as the day is long. Maybe they deserve the premium for having to deal with the insurance companies. I can certainly sympathize.
Third: Roof Dr., you mentioned "hits per square". Is that just hits alone or hits with bruising, etc.? And a square is 10 X 10 area, ne c'est pas?
Thanks |
|
|
|
khromas
USA
103 Posts |
Posted - 03/03/2004 : 17:20:39
|
Ms. Gray,
Your comment that 'if insurance is paying, you get a premium' underscores the major problem facing the marketplace today. I am a consumer as well and your blanket acceptance of "that's the way it is" costs ME (and your relatives, and your friends, and your neighbors, etc., etc.) in OUR personal pocketbooks. The insurance company is not a party to the contract for the repairs to your home. They are not responsible for overseeing your repairs, you are as the owner of that home. It is your duty to monitor the progress of the work and whether it is done to your satisfaction and per the contracted agreement. Offer and acceptance is the basis of a negotiated contract and the prime requirement. (Contracts I - UH Law - 1986) No where does the insurance company come into play in that scenerio. It is not bound to use the amounts you negotiated BUT MAY CHOOSE TO DO SO AT IT'S DISCRETION!
Please do not think I am trying to discourage what you have sought to learn by getting involved in this forum. I have admired your succinct questions and observations and for heavens sake, I wish more homeowners would take a little of the effort you have to become a better educated consumer. Continue to stay involved in this forum, it is important for us as adjusters to be constantly reminded of who it is we all really work for.
Sincerely, |
Kevin Hromas |
|
|
|
Tuckernotis
USA
19 Posts |
Posted - 03/03/2004 : 17:58:56
|
I was being facecious about "that's the way it is" in America. I don't like any better than you or anyone else for that matter. It's just a matter of fact not principle.
But your comments about quote:
It is not bound to use the amounts you negotiated BUT MAY CHOOSE TO DO SO AT IT'S DISCRETION!
Does this mean they just make up an amount and don't use estimates from the contractors? If so, how do they arrive at a proper amount for repair or replacement?
|
|
|
|
Topic |
|
|
|
Is granule loss considered hail damage?
Forum Locked
Topic Locked
