Storm Chaser Roofing Companies

[Overachiever]

I had one of those roofing companies come by and say I had hail damage on my roof. The roof is sheet metal. Are they really going to be able to replace it with an insurance claim? Most of the houses in my area are getting new roofs but I always assumed I'd be exempt given the material my roof was made out of. I don't really want to make a claim if there's a high likelihood of the claim getting denied.

 

[MEP001]

Your insurance company would be best suited to answer that for you. I know of wash owners who have had their roof replaced after hail damage and were covered by their insurance, but they had coverage for that.

 

[OurTown]

I had one of those roofing companies come by and say I had hail damage on my roof.

Does it look damaged to you?

 

[Overachiever]

It's leaking in places. I see a few dings here and there, but I doubt theirs much correlation on where the leaks are and where the dings are. If it was purely cosmetic, I wouldn't even care, since no one except me would know about it.

 

[soapy]

Our area had a severe hail storm back in April. About golf ball size hail or less. Many roofing companies have moved in and new roofs are being installed all over our valley. On a fiberglass roof the shingles get damaged easier than a metal or shake roof. I have not seen any metal roofs being replaced but have seen a few shake roofs. Your insurance company will send out a claims adjuster to inspect your roof for nothing. If they find anything they will either give you a check or tell you no damage was done. If they do find damage they will probably give you a low estimate. If they find anything then you should check with a roofer and get a bid. Then you can negotiate a compromised settlement on the true cost to fix the damage. All my metal roofs checked out fine but they did find $3500 to my shake roof on my house.

 

[mjwalsh]

One of the "out of state" storm chaser companies approached me about 2 years ago on a large residential roof. He was extra friendly & explained what I already knew that if I wanted to switch companies ... most of them will not insure as long as the "interlocking" style is on the roof.

I coordinated a meeting with my insurance adjuster & the contractor. It was clear verbally between us that I was not locked into the amount on the adjuster's worksheet & especially not just on the basis of him having been there with the insurance adjuster or a followup with the adjuster. I was foolish enough to sign a document that allowed him to follow up & negotiate with the adjuster. The very fine print on the bottom portion the document said if he talked to the adjuster that meant I authorized them to proceed with ... me now "out of the loop".

Long story short ... the friendly contractor representative became completely different once he had that signature & whatever verbal reassurances earlier of not being locked in until an actual contract did not happen with his new version. I called the state AG consumer affairs office & they talked like I was in the wrong & they never heard of such a problem. I called the state Insurance office & they said that it was a big problem & very much sided with me based on the exact details. Go figure.

Insurance company representative gave the contractor a tongue lashing & was extremely firm ... while I was in his office & put a stop to the misleading tricky maneuver on the part of the contractor. The problem I see if this type of communication between contractor & owner became the commonplace norm & the insurance companies & the owners would all be forced to go along with the trickery. The trickery came in with the lying verbally & pretending that the fine print on the preliminary document did not really mean that the owner would be forced go with any contractor just on the basis he signed a paper allowing the contractor to talk to the insurance adjuster.

Since the topic was what to watch out for: I thought this might apply in other states .... or maybe even worse ...