[DALEPQ]

We are snobirds that had significant roof damage from hurricane Milton Oct. '24.
We had not, one but two independent adjusters certify the significant damage occurred.
Our home ins. was thru State Farm, we are continuing to have filled a lawsuit against S.F.
as they are refusing the damage claim for our roof. (Lawsuit most likely will carry into '27)
We are in Fernandina, and 8 homes next to ours have all had to have new roofs since Milton.
Two of the homes are on each side of ours, 6 directly across the street. None had S.F. ins., and all have had new roofs installed, after settling with their insurance carriers.
Now, on 08/24/26 a judge in Oklahoma required the release of internal S.F. documents that disclose they have been deliberately refusing to settle roofing claims to the tune of $1.4 Billion
so far. For the full story Google "State Farm Oklahoma Lawsuit" quite astonishing.
Now, I know why, after talking to many roofing contractors they call them 'SNAKE FARM'.
If anyone now has S.F. for home ins. you should definitely consider looking elsewhere, unless
you want to get into a protracted lawsuit, such as we are still going thru.
Good Luck.

[JohnN]

Wow. I'm sorry to hear of your State Farm issues. Good luck.

[It's Hot There]

Google is your friend.

SF has a long history of not paying in Florida.

There are law firms with examples of SF in Florida.

Read & Learn.

[Topspinmo]

IMO typical in insurance business. Denial first few time see if it sticks? Dental insurance IMO even worse. Funny thing about vehicle insurance you HAVE to have it but there NO control over it other than you got have it. IMO anything you have to have by government should be controlled by government. IMO Insurance ripoff in most cases, unless you accident prone unintentionally or intentionally….

[ThirdOfFive]

Originally Posted by DALEPQ

We are snobirds that had significant roof damage from hurricane Milton Oct. '24.
We had not, one but two independent adjusters certify the significant damage occurred.
Our home ins. was thru State Farm, we are continuing to have filled a lawsuit against S.F.
as they are refusing the damage claim for our roof. (Lawsuit most likely will carry into '27)
We are in Fernandina, and 8 homes next to ours have all had to have new roofs since Milton.
Two of the homes are on each side of ours, 6 directly across the street. None had S.F. ins., and all have had new roofs installed, after settling with their insurance carriers.
Now, on 08/24/26 a judge in Oklahoma required the release of internal S.F. documents that disclose they have been deliberately refusing to settle roofing claims to the tune of $1.4 Billion
so far. For the full story Google "State Farm Oklahoma Lawsuit" quite astonishing.
Now, I know why, after talking to many roofing contractors they call them 'SNAKE FARM'.
If anyone now has S.F. for home ins. you should definitely consider looking elsewhere, unless
you want to get into a protracted lawsuit, such as we are still going thru.
Good Luck.

I'm not surprised by that, considering the deluge of fake and inflated roofing claims that have plagued the insurance industry of late. Maybe they're just money ahead denying any claim that they think might have even an iota of fraud involved, and letting the chips fall where they may. Probably costs less in the long run than if they just continued to rubber-stamp everything that crosses their desk.

Check out the following (only one of very many) articles online that address this: "Roof claims hitting a new high – and crisis – for insurance industry, experts say", (403 Forbidden), which does a pretty good job of addressing the issue. State Farm in particular has apparently been hard hit by the fake and fraudulent claims.

I'm not surprised by this happening. But there are legal avenues to take if a valid claim is denied (and which you are apparently taking). There are also offices at the state level where these kinds of things can be reported, and the feds, while not having any specific role in insurance oversight, does influence it because of specific specific mortgage and disaster insurance required on home loans. You'll win in the end assuming that the law is on your side, and (in some cases) the insurance company MAY have to cover your court costs if the judge finds they acted in an illegal manner in denying your claim.

It is most likely highly frustrating to you, but if it discourages the roof-repair fraudsters and the folks who will try anything to game the system into getting them a new roof--well, then it does have a positive side.

[CarlR33]

I assume since you did not say if you have replaced your roof yet or not. Is the damaged roof doing other damage to your home? I might have just went ahead and replaced it by now and argue later they would not fix it? I would probably look at the cost of a new metal roof and get rid of the hassle you and others have mentioned on this site related to roof repairs and damage. Metal roof might be more but why not?

[Aces4]

IMHO, you'll be losing even more as this takes place..:. Per AI, "State Farm is not firing all of its agents, but it has overhauled its contracts for roughly 19,000 independent contractor agents. The massive restructuring cuts base commissions by 30% to 40%, eliminates health and retirement benefits, and mandates the adoption of new artificial intelligence tools." You will soon have no agent to assist you or help you with you insurance questions or problems. We had a loss two years ago where a SF insured teenage driver was at fault. Fortunately, a witness stopped and the police department was about a half mile away as she fled the scene. Long story short, SF insisted the driver in our household was at fault too and they would only pay a percentage. Cop advised us to fight it and our insurance company agreed to take it to arbitration. If anything, our driver saved that girl, her two young brothers and oncoming traffic from serious injury or death. SF settled and paid but we, personally, will not carry their insurance for anything.

[Chellybean]

Originally Posted by ThirdOfFive

I'm not surprised by that, considering the deluge of fake and inflated roofing claims that have plagued the insurance industry of late. Maybe they're just money ahead denying any claim that they think might have even an iota of fraud involved, and letting the chips fall where they may. Probably costs less in the long run than if they just continued to rubber-stamp everything that crosses their desk.

Check out the following (only one of very many) articles online that address this: "Roof claims hitting a new high – and crisis – for insurance industry, experts say", (403 Forbidden), which does a pretty good job of addressing the issue. State Farm in particular has apparently been hard hit by the fake and fraudulent claims.

I'm not surprised by this happening. But there are legal avenues to take if a valid claim is denied (and which you are apparently taking). There are also offices at the state level where these kinds of things can be reported, and the feds, while not having any specific role in insurance oversight, does influence it because of specific specific mortgage and disaster insurance required on home loans. You'll win in the end assuming that the law is on your side, and (in some cases) the insurance company MAY have to cover your court costs if the judge finds they acted in an illegal manner in denying your claim.

It is most likely highly frustrating to you, but if it discourages the roof-repair fraudsters and the folks who will try anything to game the system into getting them a new roof--well, then it does have a positive side.

although i agree with a lot of what you are saying the state will not push on these insurance companies for denying claims. If the insurance companies leave Florida as they did around 2006 the Citizens insurance company offered by State of Florida can not handle the exposeure. JMHO

[Moderator]

Political references and arguments about elected officials, immigration, and presidential administrations have been removed. Please keep the discussion focused on State Farm, insurance claims, and the original poster’s experience.