Insurance companies denying coverage due to roof age...ending July 1st

[mikreb]

Beginning July 1st insurance companies in Florida can no longer deny coverage if the roof is under 15 years of age. If the roof is 15+ years old and insurance company requires roof replacement to continue coverage you can hire a licensed inspector to examine the roof. If the inspector determines there is a minimum of 5 years of life left on the roof the insurance company cannot deny new coverage or renewals.

[Rainger99]

New Florida Insurance Law’s Impact on the Roofing Industry | Roofing Contractor (https://www.roofingcontractor.com/articles/97099-new-florida-insurance-laws-impact-on-the-roofing-industry#:~:text=The%20law%20prohibits%20insurance %20companies,refuse%20to%20issue%20a%20policy).

[Stu from NYC]

Good news

[Michael G.]

I smell premium increases in the future

[EdFNJ]

Beginning July 1st insurance companies in Florida can no longer deny coverage if the roof is under 15 years of age. If the roof is 15+ years old and insurance company requires roof replacement to continue coverage you can hire a licensed inspector to examine the roof. If the inspector determines there is a minimum of 5 years of life left on the roof the insurance company cannot deny new coverage or renewals. Good newsBut does it prevent them from increasing your rate astronomically on that renewal or charging you much more for a new policy on an older roof? Not according to the quoted article. So I guess it will force them to insure you but not control how much of a premium they can or will charge. Then the Mr Homeowner might say "sorry, not going to deal with you Mr Insurance Company" and Mr Insurance Company will say "that's the idea." ;)

After a few years insurance prices may drop (yea, right, haha) because scammers will be shut out.

[tophcfa]

Cannot deny coverage, but can make coverage ridiculously unaffordable. How about making fraudulent roof claims a crime, and then correspondingly reducing insurance premiums for responsible homeowners?

[RVJim]

Cannot deny coverage, but can make coverage ridiculously unaffordable. How about making fraudulent roof claims a crime, and then correspondingly reducing insurance premiums for responsible homeowners?

Ridiculously unaffordable? More like priced appropriately for the risk. Free market at work and I wouldn’t have it any other way. Everybody loves a free market economy until the pricing isn’t to their liking.

[EdFNJ]

Ridiculously unaffordable? More like priced appropriately for the risk. Free market at work and I wouldn’t have it any other way. Everybody loves a free market economy until the pricing isn’t to their liking. Very true, but the point is to avoid the new coverage rules they could intentionally make the cost so painful you wouldn't buy it anyway, which would accomplish the same thing as saying "a new roof is required if it's older than 10 years, if you don't like it look elsewhere." There is a difference between "free market" and pricing to intentionally price one out if they don't want you and just want to get around the new regs.

[RVJim]

Very true, but the point is to avoid the new coverage rules they could intentionally make the cost so painful you wouldn't buy it anyway, which would accomplish the same thing as saying "a new roof is required if it's older than 10 years, if you don't like it look elsewhere." There is a difference between "free market" and pricing to intentionally price one out if they don't want you and just want to get around the new regs.

How does the carrier know beforehand if the price they are offering is so high the customer will say no? Writing quotes costs money. I think they will give a customer a price they are willing to do business at and not just waste everyone’s time writing go-away pricing.

When I sell something I price it at my thought on value. To someone else that may be a ridiculously high price but to me it is the price point I am willing to business at.

[Papa_lecki]

Cannot deny coverage, but can make coverage ridiculously unaffordable. How about making fraudulent roof claims a crime, and then correspondingly reducing insurance premiums for responsible homeowners?

It does - from the article…..

The law modifies this so that if a roof is more than 25% damaged but complies with the state’s 2007 building code, it only needs to be repaired.

It did ease that threshold requirement, which is going to make it more difficult to obtain a full roof replacement,” said Cotney.

Along with these changes, the law hopes to put a stop to roofing scams. For instance, in March, two Florida contractors were arrested for allegedly enticing homeowners with rebates to cover their insurance deductible if they submitted a full roof replacement claim to their property insurance company. To address potential roofing scams like these, contractors using printed or electronic advertisements to encourage consumers to contact them for the purpose of making an insurance claim for roof damage must include information stating:

Consumers are responsible for paying the insurance deductible.
It’s insurance fraud punishable as a felony for a contractor to knowingly pay, waive or rebate all or part of an insurance deductible.
It’s insurance fraud to intentionally file an insurance claim containing any false or misleading information.

Previously, contractors could recoup attorney fees from insurers if a lawsuit is successful. Under the new law, this is no longer the case when they’re assigned benefits. Homeowners, however, can still recover prevailing party fees if they file a lawsuit against insurers.

[bimmertl]

Here's how the state backed (financially backed by all the citizens of Florida) insurer of last resort is doing.

Citizen’s Property Insurance facing 900 new lawsuits a month (https://www.yahoo.com/news/citizen-property-insurance-facing-900-223830372.html)

[ThirdOfFive]

I smell premium increases in the future
Bingo. Someone is going to have to pay for replacing roofs on the verge of needing replacement. Might as well be the existing policy holders.

[missibu@gmail.com]

Beginning July 1st insurance companies in Florida can no longer deny coverage if the roof is under 15 years of age. If the roof is 15+ years old and insurance company requires roof replacement to continue coverage you can hire a licensed inspector to examine the roof. If the inspector determines there is a minimum of 5 years of life left on the roof the insurance company cannot deny new coverage or renewals.

Very useful information, thank you 😊

[Blueblaze]

Here's a crazy idea. Ever hear of DEPRECIATION? If you wreck your 15 year old Chevy, you don't expect State Farm to buy you a new one. So why do you expect State Farm to buy you a new roof if a tornado blows away your 15-year-old roof?

I'll tell you why. BECAUSE THAT'S THE ONLY KIND OF INSURANCE YOU CAN BUY IN FLORIDA -- full replacement cost coverage.

All of the fraud the insurance industry blames on our high rates is due to their own dumbass insistence on selling these stupid full-replacement-cost policies on a depreciating asset.

They have basically forced everyone to find some way to buy a new roof they don't need every 10 years, and sooprise, sooprise, the roofing scammers found a way. It's the dumbest part of living in Florida. And what did our brilliant legislature do? Did they mandate depreciating insurance to fix this absurd situation? Oh, hell no. They just made sure that your insurance company can screw you to the wall with rates beyond imagination, while continuing to sell you the same idiotic full-replacement coverage on your 15-year-old roof. At least before, you got a new roof periodically. Now, instead of spending your money to replace it, you'll spend the same money on insurance and live with your old roof. Or, you'll just give up and play the game -- let some roofing scammer make your insurance company buy you a new roof next time there's a big storm.

Dumb... dumber... dumbest.

[Papa_lecki]

Cannot deny coverage, but can make coverage ridiculously unaffordable. How about making fraudulent roof claims a crime, and then correspondingly reducing insurance premiums for responsible homeowners?

They are literally in the business of writing insurance policies. If they make the premiums ridiculously expensive and no one insured with them, they are out of business.

[RVJim]

Here's a crazy idea. Ever hear of DEPRECIATION? If you wreck your 15 year old Chevy, you don't expect State Farm to buy you a new one. So why do you expect State Farm to buy you a new roof if a tornado blows away your 15-year-old roof?

I'll tell you why. BECAUSE THAT'S THE ONLY KIND OF INSURANCE YOU CAN BUY IN FLORIDA -- full replacement cost coverage.

All of the fraud the insurance industry blames on our high rates is due to their own dumbass insistence on selling these stupid full-replacement-cost policies on a depreciating asset.

They have basically forced everyone to find some way to buy a new roof they don't need every 10 years, and sooprise, sooprise, the roofing scammers found a way. It's the dumbest part of living in Florida. And what did our brilliant legislature do? Did they mandate depreciating insurance to fix this absurd situation? Oh, hell no. They just made sure that your insurance company can screw you to the wall with rates beyond imagination, while continuing to sell you the same idiotic full-replacement coverage on your 15-year-old roof. At least before, you got a new roof periodically. Now, instead of spending your money to replace it, you'll spend the same money on insurance and live with your old roof. Or, you'll just give up and play the game -- let some roofing scammer make your insurance company buy you a new roof next time there's a big storm.

Dumb... dumber... dumbest.

I am not sure this “is the dumbest part of living in Florida”. There are so many other competitors for that prize.

[keepsake]

This should impact those of us with metal roofs. 50 year life that my agent wanted to force me to replace at 20.

[Topspinmo]

Beginning July 1st insurance companies in Florida can no longer deny coverage if the roof is under 15 years of age. If the roof is 15+ years old and insurance company requires roof replacement to continue coverage you can hire a licensed inspector to examine the roof. If the inspector determines there is a minimum of 5 years of life left on the roof the insurance company cannot deny new coverage or renewals.


No, but I bet they can Jack price up to get shop somewhere else? IMO insurance is Ponzi scheme on both sides.

[Topspinmo]

This should impact those of us with metal roofs. 50 year life that my agent wanted to force me to replace at 20.

I didn’t think residential housing in villages was allowed metal roofs? Only the developer and districts are allowed metal roofs? Got to keep brother in laws in business Replacing shingled roofs every 10 years or when little wind and pea size hail happens. :pepper2:

[Blueblaze]

I am not sure this “is the dumbest part of living in Florida”. There are so many other competitors for that prize.

Name one that exceeds this absurdity in cost and foolishness -- that we are all forced to live with,

[Luggage]

Usually one of the stupider ideas is to have government get involved with business. But since they did I'd like to suggest that the law written is terrible. So we're at least two different ways that it could have been written better one is allowing insurance companies to have an option not to cover the roof and reduce the premium accordingly but allow insurance coverage on the house, the second would be to cover the roof but to allow coverage to be based on usable life left in other words if your house is one or two years old there's no deductible on depreciation of the roof but for every year I'll have 5% deductible depreciation so that after 15 years they'll only pay 25% for replacement minus whatever your actual deductible is IE 4000 or $5,000 so that it doesn't pay to make a false claim. Insurance companies should be allowed to make money but that doesn't mean homeowners should be able to rip them off






Beginning July 1st insurance companies in Florida can no longer deny coverage if the roof is under 15 years of age. If the roof is 15+ years old and insurance company requires roof replacement to continue coverage you can hire a licensed inspector to examine the roof. If the inspector determines there is a minimum of 5 years of life left on the roof the insurance company cannot deny new coverage or renewals.

[mrlee]

Cannot deny coverage, but can make coverage ridiculously unaffordable. How about making fraudulent roof claims a crime, and then correspondingly reducing insurance premiums for responsible homeowners?

I don't understand these claims by insurance companies about fraud. I had my roof replaced by a contractor who could not do any work until the insurance inspector check the need for the work to be done. Then the insurance company had the say, yes the need is there or no, there is no need. I have work twice with my insurance company on claims and both times I needed an approval from them before they would pay. Maybe some of their inspectors get payoff.

[wamley]

If it's fraudulent it should already be in the law books as a crime. Insurance fraud has been going on since there was insurance. Issue is that insurance companies like Credit Cards don't investigate and prosicute small time stuff. Individuals are not targeted, but a large owner of numerous homes or multi apartments are looked into, but single homes rarely are inspected with storm damge claims when it's onesies. They pay the bill and spread it out with all the insured.

[Flyers999]

...... Replacing shingled roofs every 10 years or when little wind and pea size hail happens. :pepper2:

I used to do roofing up north for a few years in my younger days. I never replaced a roof that was not leaking, or it was not visually so far past its warranty that it was decaying before your eyes.
A little while ago I got a knock at my door. It was a roofer who claimed to be sent by my insurance company. He examined my roof, showed me pictures of it and claimed it was hail damage. I needed to replace my roof or my insurance would be dropped. I immediately called my insurance rep and she verified that the roofer was indeed from my ins company. So I checked my attic and crawl spaces to look for leaks. If your roof is leaking, you will find out quick. I could find nothing, bone dry. My roof was 17-years old ; it was a 30 or 35 year warrenty; I was going to replace it in three years anyway.

Again, why would anyone replace a roof that's not leaking?

[tophcfa]

They are literally in the business of writing insurance policies. If they make the premiums ridiculously expensive and no one insured with them, they are out of business.

They are in the business of accessing and pricing risk and making money. If they feel writing a policy on a home with an older roof, located in a market where roofing scams are hurting their bottom line and is not consistent with their desired risk pool, they will significantly jack up rates to recalibrate their risk pool.

[HJBeck]

I smell premium increases in the future

Thought I read that the Insurance companies will be able to prorate roof coverage based on its age. ??

[rsmurano]

Here's a crazy idea. Ever hear of DEPRECIATION? If you wreck your 15 year old Chevy, you don't expect State Farm to buy you a new one. So why do you expect State Farm to buy you a new roof if a tornado blows away your 15-year-old roof?

I'll tell you why. BECAUSE THAT'S THE ONLY KIND OF INSURANCE YOU CAN BUY IN FLORIDA -- full replacement cost coverage.

All of the fraud the insurance industry blames on our high rates is due to their own dumbass insistence on selling these stupid full-replacement-cost policies on a depreciating asset.

They have basically forced everyone to find some way to buy a new roof they don't need every 10 years, and sooprise, sooprise, the roofing scammers found a way. It's the dumbest part of living in Florida. And what did our brilliant legislature do? Did they mandate depreciating insurance to fix this absurd situation? Oh, hell no. They just made sure that your insurance company can screw you to the wall with rates beyond imagination, while continuing to sell you the same idiotic full-replacement coverage on your 15-year-old roof. At least before, you got a new roof periodically. Now, instead of spending your money to replace it, you'll spend the same money on insurance and live with your old roof. Or, you'll just give up and play the game -- let some roofing scammer make your insurance company buy you a new roof next time there's a big storm.

Dumb... dumber... dumbest.

None of this makes sense. I know many Chevy and fords that are 50 years old that are worth many times the original cost of the car, so if they are insured, they better pay up if an accident occurs.
As for insurance, why would insurance companies pay for a 15 year roof? Roofing wears out with age, not sure in 15 years but at some point they stop providing protection. I would think that if an inspector checks the roofing and it has much more life to it at 15 years, then the insurance company should insure it for the same price as the year before but with any normal increase for inflation. This is what the new law should state, not that everyone has to buy a new roof after 10-15 years. Just like a car, your insurance doesn’t cover wear items like tires, engine repairs, paint, etc..

[Pairadocs]

Beginning July 1st insurance companies in Florida can no longer deny coverage if the roof is under 15 years of age. If the roof is 15+ years old and insurance company requires roof replacement to continue coverage you can hire a licensed inspector to examine the roof. If the inspector determines there is a minimum of 5 years of life left on the roof the insurance company cannot deny new coverage or renewals.


Ah but they do anyway ! Hired two different ACTUAL roof inspectors who said roof had much more than 5 years left, and could be up to 10 based on the quality of the original roof and condition. However, not good enough for American "Integrity" (I question that part of the name !) insurance company, and.... we even included a wind mitigation inspection too. There is "something" very, very, VERY FISHY in this land of fish and water......concerning insurance and "roofs".

[Pairadocs]

This should impact those of us with metal roofs. 50 year life that my agent wanted to force me to replace at 20.

LOL, LOL, yep, there is something VERY wrong in Florida with this "roof thing". "WE, the people" need to get together before this next election, regardless of what "party" you prefer, we need to start paying more attention to "WE the people", than to "party" ! This roof, and now AC, "inspection" racket is just that... a racket ! :ohdear::ohdear:

[EdFNJ]

How does the carrier know beforehand if the price they are offering is so high the customer will say no? Writing quotes costs money. I think they will give a customer a price they are willing to do business at and not just waste everyone’s time writing go-away pricing.

When I sell something I price it at my thought on value. To someone else that may be a ridiculously high price but to me it is the price point I am willing to business at. Obviously not every company will do that, but those companies who don't want to do business with you can easily push you away without "breaking the law." Example: last year one's policy was $800 but this year $1900 because your roof is too old. Prove it they will say when the customer complains or look elsewhere (because that was the idea). That may be their "price to do business' as well as the way they can say goodbye to someone they don't want to cover.

[Blueblaze]

None of this makes sense. I know many Chevy and fords that are 50 years old that are worth many times the original cost of the car, so if they are insured, they better pay up if an accident occurs.
As for insurance, why would insurance companies pay for a 15 year roof? Roofing wears out with age, not sure in 15 years but at some point they stop providing protection. I would think that if an inspector checks the roofing and it has much more life to it at 15 years, then the insurance company should insure it for the same price as the year before but with any normal increase for inflation. This is what the new law should state, not that everyone has to buy a new roof after 10-15 years. Just like a car, your insurance doesn’t cover wear items like tires, engine repairs, paint, etc..

You don't cover a 50-year-old antique Ford or Chevy with an ordinary policy automobile policy from State Farm, and you know that. You insure it as an investment for what ever value your specialized insurer agrees to. And then you agree to not drive more than x times a year, and only for special events.

Pull your head out and think about it.

A roof is a deprecating asset, exactly like your every day driver in your garage. In a sane state, you insure it for the depreciating value, exactly like your car. You don't go begging your insurer for a new roof every 10 years any more than you beg for new tires on your car.

THAT'S the solution to this idiotic mess.

[Bay Kid]

Some insurance companies now want you to replace older hot water heaters.

[jrref]

Some insurance companies now want you to replace older hot water heaters.

And they should because you never know when they will leak and possibly cause a lot of water damage.

[Boffin]

94374here's a crazy idea. Ever hear of depreciation? If you wreck your 15 year old chevy, you don't expect state farm to buy you a new one. So why do you expect state farm to buy you a new roof if a tornado blows away your 15-year-old roof?

I'll tell you why. Because that's the only kind of insurance you can buy in florida -- full replacement cost coverage.

All of the fraud the insurance industry blames on our high rates is due to their own dumbass insistence on selling these stupid full-replacement-cost policies on a depreciating asset. 94374

they have basically forced everyone to find some way to buy a new roof they don't need every 10 years, and sooprise, sooprise, the roofing scammers found a way. It's the dumbest part of living in florida. And what did our brilliant legislature do? Did they mandate depreciating insurance to fix this absurd situation? Oh, hell no. They just made sure that your insurance company can screw you to the wall with rates beyond imagination, while continuing to sell you the same idiotic full-replacement coverage on your 15-year-old roof. At least before, you got a new roof periodically. Now, instead of spending your money to replace it, you'll spend the same money on insurance and live with your old roof. Or, you'll just give up and play the game -- let some roofing scammer make your insurance company buy you a new roof next time there's a big storm.

Dumb... Dumber... Dumbest.

[kkingston57]

Cannot deny coverage, but can make coverage ridiculously unaffordable. How about making fraudulent roof claims a crime, and then correspondingly reducing insurance premiums for responsible homeowners?

Fraudulent claims are already a crime. Many fraudulent roof claims occur when the homeowner signs an Assigment of Benefits Contract(AOB) and this enables the roofer to treat the claim as if he was the homeowner. I was in the insurance adjusting biz. If an insured and/or the roofer with an AOB contract makes a claim and the insurance company denies the claim, the insured or the rooger can file a suit. If insurance company loses, insurance company will have to pay the claim, their costs to defend the lawsuit and the attorney fees for the insured or roofer. If the insurance company wins the suit, they will have to pay their attorney fees and costs and can(in some circumstances) recover this money from the insured. This is rare. It is a losing propostion to fight these claims. I do not have the statistics, but do believe that the insurance company has to win a high % of the claims in order to come close to breaking even(they can never come close to breaking even)

[kkingston57]

Here's how the state backed (financially backed by all the citizens of Florida) insurer of last resort is doing.

Citizen’s Property Insurance facing 900 new lawsuits a month (https://www.yahoo.com/news/citizen-property-insurance-facing-900-223830372.html)

Thanks for sharing the article.

[kkingston57]

I used to do roofing up north for a few years in my younger days. I never replaced a roof that was not leaking, or it was not visually so far past its warranty that it was decaying before your eyes.
A little while ago I got a knock at my door. It was a roofer who claimed to be sent by my insurance company. He examined my roof, showed me pictures of it and claimed it was hail damage. I needed to replace my roof or my insurance would be dropped. I immediately called my insurance rep and she verified that the roofer was indeed from my ins company. So I checked my attic and crawl spaces to look for leaks. If your roof is leaking, you will find out quick. I could find nothing, bone dry. My roof was 17-years old ; it was a 30 or 35 year warrenty; I was going to replace it in three years anyway.

Again, why would anyone replace a roof that's not leaking?

To anwer your ?, because they can and the property owner gets a brand new roof for the deductible. I was in the insurance adjusting biz for 40 years. Roofers have learned to game the system. Agree with you 100% about the leaking. Most, if not all, of the claims are for worn out roofs which have minor cosmetic damages.

It is not a hard sell for the roofer, when they promise a brand new roof and the homeowner signs over their rights under an AOB(Assignment of Benefits) contract.

If you want to see more fraud, wait till the next big hurricane. Fortunately for TV this probably will not cause damage, but will cause huge increases in the premiums as we share the risk and will pay huge claims for damages to other places in Florida.

[kkingston57]

Thought I read that the Insurance companies will be able to prorate roof coverage based on its age. ??

Not in a regular homeowners policy, but your idea would work(hopefully)

[kkingston57]

None of this makes sense. I know many Chevy and fords that are 50 years old that are worth many times the original cost of the car, so if they are insured, they better pay up if an accident occurs.
As for insurance, why would insurance companies pay for a 15 year roof? Roofing wears out with age, not sure in 15 years but at some point they stop providing protection. I would think that if an inspector checks the roofing and it has much more life to it at 15 years, then the insurance company should insure it for the same price as the year before but with any normal increase for inflation. This is what the new law should state, not that everyone has to buy a new roof after 10-15 years. Just like a car, your insurance doesn’t cover wear items like tires, engine repairs, paint, etc..

Your idea does seem to be practicle and could help stop the "free roof" claims.I was in the insurance adjusting biz in Florida for 40 years. Replacement cost policies have been the norm since I started. Do not know why you can not buy an ACV(actual cash value) policy from a normal insurance company(I did work for Lloyds and they offered to sell an ACV policy) but do suspect that the lenders/mortgage company had a lot to do with this as they, also, want to be protected.

Even if an ACV policy was made available I ? if there is a market for this type of policy. Insureds want a policy which will pay for the damages less the deductible.

[Topspinmo]

Beginning July 1st insurance companies in Florida can no longer deny coverage if the roof is under 15 years of age. If the roof is 15+ years old and insurance company requires roof replacement to continue coverage you can hire a licensed inspector to examine the roof. If the inspector determines there is a minimum of 5 years of life left on the roof the insurance company cannot deny new coverage or renewals.

Wrong, they just cancel the policy it you roof over the limit so you you will have to get new roof or they will not insure home. Insurance can cancel policy when contract up, the don’t have to renew it. So, what this does make everyone have to have new roof.

[kkingston57]

Ridiculously unaffordable? More like priced appropriately for the risk. Free market at work and I wouldn’t have it any other way. Everybody loves a free market economy until the pricing isn’t to their liking.


Free market in Florida was destroyed after Hurricane Andrew hit S. Florida in 1992. Many good strong national insurance companies would not sell insurance in S. Florida after that storm and a lot of people could not buy homeowners insurance in S. Florida. If another big storm hits Florida, watch out.

[Topspinmo]

Free market in Florida was destroyed after Hurricane Andrew hit S. Florida in 1992. Many good strong national insurance companies would not sell insurance in S. Florida after that storm and a lot of people could not buy homeowners insurance in S. Florida. If another big storm hits Florida, watch out.


See, that should be against law if the are licensed to sell insurance then it all the states or none. Health and home insurance should be single payer let government make the billions and not privileged private insurance companies. But. When know how insurance is insured from lobbyist payoff.

[Flyers999]

Free market in Florida was destroyed after Hurricane Andrew hit S. Florida in 1992. Many good strong national insurance companies would not sell insurance in S. Florida after that storm and a lot of people could not buy homeowners insurance in S. Florida. If another big storm hits Florida, watch out.
(Thank you for you earlier, informative reply to me.)

In New Jersey, a similar thing happened. After a bad hurricane, insurance companies refused to insure homes on the coast. So, the state stepped up and underwrit the insurance for those homes. I'm not sure if NJ is still doing this, but I wanted to ask you,since you do have experience in the industry, if you see that ever happening in FL?