I am in the same boat. OC claims that the labor portion of the Warranty expired. My two neighbors on either side of me had their roofs replaced but I was only offered new shingles...no labor. This was after they stalled me for 9 months while the labor portion was still in effect, claiming they did not receive the samples from Sack Roofing and later saying that now they did not need the samples because they are admitting certain shingles were defective. I received a written estimate for labor for $4,750.00 from Sack Roofing. I was planning to take them to Small Claims Court for the $4,750.00 since they were aware of these defective shingles and failed to notify me. A Class Action seems like a good idea and will be successful. OC should have recalled these defective shingles when they found out that they were defective and replaced them. I am still pondering Small Claims Court since it may be a quicker way to proceed. This is akin to an auto company who had a defective engine sending the engine to your home telling you to install it.

Approximately, what are the years these houses were built with the defective shingles? Our house was built in 2011.

Do we have to be pro-active in determining if we have defective shingles, or would TV or OC contact us?

Was there a certain type of home or location or time frame where these shingles were used?

I am surprised that home warranty does not send out a notice to every affected home owner.

My home was built in 2007 and has defective shingles. I believe OC was replaced by The Villages but not sure when. Call the Warranty Dept. They will give you the info. you need.

Consumer Reports Roofing buying guide
 

It appears that they rate roofing.

Top Roofing Ratings | Roofing Buying Guide

If you search around on the internet, you will find various review and complaint forums on roofing shingles.

Check local section, page C4, of today's (Friday) Daily Sun....a letter from the VHA on the OC shingle issue and an update on the process.

It did state that the problematic period was homes constructed between 1/1/07-12/31/10.

Villages07, the article states OC will supply the shingles but they still refuse to pay for the labor to install. It also alludes to the fact they will now supply individual shingles as opposed to the entire roof, something they have agreed to in the past. The date they stated is the period they will cover, the defective shingles were installed on many homes prior to 2007 and after 2010.

Duffy's Mom you are spot on and Owens Corning is trying to duck their responsibility. I had a defective roof when I lived in Minneapolis and the roofing company tried to duck their responsibility and for two years I chased them. finally after discovering some really unethical practices by them I sued in small claims court. They called me and offered replacement of the defective shingles. I told them guy that inspected my roof stopped counting bad shingles after 300. They then said they would replace my roof wherein I explained that I had no confidence in their product . I told them I had an estimate to replace the roof and that since I had used the shingles for 8 years I would deduct eight years of useful utility. I settled for the maximum in small claims court and hired a contractor to replace it. I later found out that this roof mfg was facing a class action suit and the reason they were in a settling mood.

I see Owens corning doing the same thing here. OC claimed my roof did not contain the offending shingles. After reading this thread I will further investigate perhaps getting an independent opinion

We had Saks take a sample in July. I called them in September and they told me they had lost the sample before it was sent to OC. Then OC told me they no longer will let anyone else inspect the roofs and they will do it. I'm still waiting.......

Courts
 

It's time for a Class Action Suit against Owen's Corning and if appropriate others who may have been in bed with them. Lets the courts decide what the abuse is and who are participants.:cus:

VHA and Owens Corning published something in the paper the other day about the future roof replacements. It did state that they would be doing the roof inspections and they might not have to replace whole roofs. I think the whole idea behind the declaration in the paper was to cover themselves legally. I would let the POA know because they have been gathering information for just these types of problems. My house falls in the time frame for the inspections but nothing to date from Owens Corning. It may take awhile since we were in the early 2010 time frame.

We are the 3rd owners of a small ranch here. Our house was built back in 2006. In October, a neighbor 3 houses down was having his roof replaced. So I talked to the roofing contractor, Saks and asked them what's up? He told me about the defective shingles. I asked him if he could inspect mine. He gave me the process which was to call OC and get a claim number. I did that and called Saks and gave it to them. They took 2 shingle pieces off and sent them to OC. In November, I get an email and letter saying the roof is defective and will be replaced including labor. I have the check for $4k in hand that I am to provide to Saks upon completion. Roof will probably be replaced in early Feb due to their backlog. I did examine my roof prior to purchase and found nothing that serious. I have about 10 spots which are the size of quarters which are missing the granules. If this would have been my roof up north, I would have gone to the hardware store and got some roof cement and applied to that small section and be done with it. With the roof being almost 8 years old now, I was shocked to learn that they were going to replace the whole thing. What shocked me more was that I get a new 30 year roof and Saks provides a 5 year workmanship warranty so if there are issues with the installation, you are covered for 5 years! I called OC and asked them why they were doing this and how they were handling the thousands of roofs around the nation. The service rep clearly stated that they were only doing this in the Villages and no where else. She also stated that the Villages has been using OC roofing materials on all their roofs and they did not want to jeopardize their future business. So that's my story. I am saddened to hear the change in OC policy for those that are now expected to pay for labor.

Villagefrog, I'm a gardener and for the last several years I've mentioned to my husband my surprise at the huge amount of granuals I would find at the end of the down spouts after a heavy rain. It wasn't until I read in the POA about roofing problems that I realized what the problem was. It is interesting that you had labor and shingles paid for since we contacted OC about the same time you did but received a different answer; we now know that the labor cost is $5,500 while they supply the shingles. The POA is in the process of looking into the issue so if people have this problem, please contact the POA.

What is Legal
 

In reviewing Villagerfrog's note it would appear that allegedly there may be some legal questions involved? I wonder if Antitrust laws require consistencies when applying "freebe's to some and not others when the circumstances are the same?" Can you allegedly give something "free" to one customer because of their value for future business and not the next customer who has the same set of circumstances? It would appear that in the Villages there are a number of same circumstances with different policies being applied allegedly based on what OC wants to do not what may be required by law? I continue to believe the qustions should be taken to Court and let the courts decide what is fair and equitable.:police:

For 6 months we've been on a "waiting list" to have our roof inspected. 8 of our surrounding neighbors have had repairs completed. Guess we were too slow contacting the OC warranty department. I think something is amiss and still question why TV warranty department offers no help.