Filing Number: 788611
|
| Filing Accepted: 10/24/2024 |
| Last/Business Name
*
|
|
|
INHOUSE ADJUSTING
|
|
First Name |
|
|
|
| Street Address
*
|
|
4767 NEW BROAD STREET |
| City, State Zip
*
|
|
ORLANDO,
FL
32814
|
| Email Address
*
|
|
INFO@INHOUSEADJUSTING.COM |
| Complainant Type:
*
|
|
Third Party |
|
| Last/Business Name* |
|
BING |
|
First Name |
|
JON |
| Policy # * |
|
12-1013846-05 |
|
Claim #* |
|
12-3024219-24 |
|
Attorney is Applicable
|
|
|
|
| Insurer Type
*
|
|
 Authorized Insurer
 Unauthorized Insurer
|
|
|
| Insurer Name |
|
|
| Insurer Name* |
|
TYPTAP INSURANCE COMPANY
|
| Insurer Name* |
|
|
| Street Address* |
|
|
| City, State Zip* |
|
,
|
|
NAIC Company Code 15885 |
|
|
| Name of individual responsible for violation (if any):*
JACK DI GRADO AND ALL OTHER ADJUSTERS AND ASSOCIATES WHO HAVE HANDLED THIS CLAIM
|
| Type of Insurance
*
Residential Property & Casualty
|
|
|
| Reason for Notice
*
|
|
|
Unsatisfactory Settlement Offer
|
|
|
Unfair Trade Practice
|
|
|
*
Statutory provision(s) which the insurer allegedly violated.
|
|
|
|
| 624.155(1)(b)(1) |
|
Not attempting in good faith to settle claims when, under all the circumstances, it could and should have done so, had it acted fairly and honestly toward its insured and with due regard for her or his interests.
|
|
| 624.155(1)(b)(3) |
|
Except as to liability coverages, failing to promptly settle claims, when the obligation to settle a claim has become reasonably clear, under one portion of the insurance policy coverage in order to influence settlements under other portions of the insurance policy coverage.
|
|
| 626.9541(1)(i)(3)(a) |
|
Failing to adopt and implement standards for the proper investigation of claims.
|
|
| 626.9541(1)(i)(3)(b) |
|
Misrepresenting pertinent facts or insurance policy provisions relating to coverages at issue.
|
|
*
Specific policy language that is relevant to the violation.
Enter all words or phrases (one at a time) that should be used to filter.
SECTION I – PROPERTY COVERAGES
A. Coverage A – Dwelling.
1. We cover:
a. The dwelling on the "residence premises" shown in the Declarations, including structures attached to
the dwelling;
E. Additional Coverages
2. Reasonable Emergency Measures.
a. We will pay up to the greater of $3,000 or 1% of your Coverage A limit of liability for the reasonable
costs incurred by you for the necessary measures taken solely to protect covered property from
further damage, when the damage or loss is caused by a Peril Insured Against.
11. Ordinance or Law.
a. You may use up to 25% of the limit of liability that applies to Coverage A for the increased costs you
incur due to the enforcement of any ordinance or law which requires or regulates:
(1) The construction, demolition, remodeling, renovation or repair of that part of a covered building or
other structure damaged by a Peril Insured Against;
(2) The demolition and reconstruction of the undamaged part of a covered building or other structure,
when that building or other structure must be totally demolished because of damage by a Peril
Insured Against to another part of that covered building or other structure; or
(3) The remodeling, removal or replacement of the portion of the undamaged part of a covered
building or other structure necessary to complete the remodeling, repair or replacement of that
part of the covered building or other structure damaged by a Peril Insured Against.
b. You may use all or part of this ordinance or law coverage to pay for the increased costs you incur to
remove debris resulting from the construction, demolition, remodeling, renovation, repair or
replacement of property as stated in a. above.
SECTION I – CONDITIONS
Loss Settlement.
In this Condition D., the terms "cost to repair or replace" and "replacement cost" do not include the increased
costs incurred to comply with the enforcement of any ordinance or law, except to the extent that coverage for
these increased costs is provided in E.11.
2. Buildings covered under Coverage A or B at replacement cost without deduction for depreciation, subject
to the following:
TypTap Insurance Company Homeowners 3
TTIC HO3 05 23 Includes copyrighted material of Insurance Services Office, Inc., with its permission. Page 21 of 34
a. If, at the time of loss, the amount of insurance in this policy on the damaged building is 80% or more
of the full replacement cost of the building immediately before the loss, we will pay the cost to repair
or replace, without deduction for depreciation, but not more than the least of the following amounts:
(1) The limit of liability under this policy that applies to the building;
(2) The replacement cost of that part of the building damaged with material of like kind and quality
and for like use; or
(3) The necessary amount actually spent to repair or replace the damaged building.
|
| |
*
Facts and circumstances giving rise to the violation.
Enter all words or phrases (one at a time) that should be used to filter.
The carrier hired a biased adjuster who, within same day of inspecting the loss, approved only 6 shingles. Here is why this method of repair will not work and therefore leaves the claim severely underpaid:
Manufacturer Guidelines
Following DOL Storm, it is clear that the insured’s 17-year-old three-tab shingled roof is beyond repair, and the only reasonable course of action is a full roof replacement. Below, we have outlined the reasons for this request, citing manufacturer guidelines, industry standards, and practical realities based on the age, condition, and type of roofing material.
The insured’s roof consists of three-tab shingles, which typically have a lifespan of 15-20 years under ideal conditions. At 17 years old, this roof is nearing the end of its expected service life. Most manufacturers of three-tab shingles, such as GAF and CertainTeed, recommend that after approximately 15 years, shingles often experience material degradation, including granule loss, brittleness, and cracking. These issues significantly reduce the roof’s ability to withstand further repairs.
Moreover, the adhesive bond on shingles weakens significantly over time. After a decade or more, the bond holding the shingles in place deteriorates due to heat exposure, UV radiation, and general wear. Attempting to repair individual shingles on an older roof often causes surrounding shingles to crack or become dislodged, exacerbating damage rather than fixing it.
Additionally, for an older roof, manufacturers like Owens Corning or GAF often recommend full replacements after storm events due to the diminished structural integrity of the roof system. They explicitly caution against “patching” roofs that are near the end of their lifespan, as the roof system may fail to perform under future weather events.
Brittleness
Given the age of the roof, it is highly likely that the shingles have become brittle. Industry-standard testing, such as the ASTM D7158 or ASTM D3161 protocols, assesses shingle performance under wind stress. However, most shingles that are over 15 years old do not pass these tests due to the loss of flexibility and adhesion. Attempting to lift or remove damaged shingles for repair would likely result in further damage to the adjacent, previously undisturbed shingles, making a spot repair impractical.
Even if a repair is attempted, there is a high probability that the repaired areas will remain vulnerable to leaks and further wind damage, as the new shingles will not adhere to the surrounding aged and brittle material effectively. This non-uniform adhesion is inconsistent with the manufacturer’s installation guidelines, which specify that shingles must be fully sealed to each other to provide proper weather protection.
“Patchwork” Appearance
Most manufacturers discontinue specific lines and colors of three-tab shingles after a certain period. It is highly unlikely that identical replacement shingles can be sourced for repairs, given that this roof is 17 years old. Florida Building Code Section 611.1.1 clearly states that repaired roofing systems must match the existing undamaged roofing materials in color and general appearance. Installing mismatched shingles would not only violate building code standards but would also significantly affect the aesthetic and market value of the home.
Furthermore, even if visually similar shingles could be found, the performance of new shingles would far surpass that of the aged shingles, creating a patchwork of materials that will not age, expand, or weather consistently. This lack of uniformity could lead to premature failures around the repaired areas.
Florida’s Guidelines
Under Florida’s matching statute and the "Repairability Test" laid out in Florida Statute § 626.9744, repairs to a roof must be made to ensure that the roof is restored to its pre-loss condition both functionally and aesthetically. Given the age of the roof, it is improbable that repairs will restore the roof to a condition that meets these standards. A full roof replacement is the only solution that complies with both manufacturer specifications and the statutory requirements.
In light of the above factors—age, brittleness, manufacturer recommendations, and the inability to match materials—a full roof replacement is necessary. Attempting to repair isolated areas of this 17-year-old roof would likely result in further issues, including leaks and additional damage, as the roof has already exceeded its useful life.
The most appropriate solution to restore the insured’s property to its pre-loss condition and maintain compliance with Florida law and industry standards is a full roof replacement. We respectfully request that you approve the replacement cost value for the entire roof.
|
|
*
|
The submitter hereby states that this notice is given in order to perfect the rights of the
person(s) damaged to pursue civil remedies authorized by Section 624.155, Florida Statutes.
Before submitting a Notice using this system, please verify that all text has been entered
correctly and completely. Once the Notice has been submitted, the text cannot be changed
or deleted.
|
DFS-10-363
Rev. 10/14/2008
|