On a wind mit, the front door had an upper glazing and the door was NOT impact rated, they had all the windows with proper shutters, but on the front door only 3 panels to cover the upper section for the glazing, is this correct?
Good question and I see it all the time. I know that Citizens has taken the position to not count partial protection on a glazed door, even if installed on the wall. Some installs are just attached to the door and of course that would not count as a protected opening. Summary - the entire opening needs to be protected to count.
If I understand you correctly it would be glazing covered only.
I filled out the form and gave them credit for all glazing was covered, but the garage door and side garage door where solid doors but not impact so I put down that the non glazed items where not protected.
So I marked box A, and A3
Should have been marked X. the front door should not count for protection. The entire door needs to be shuttered.
I would mark X as well.
The door itself wasn’t impact rated, so even if you covered the glass, it still isn’t rated. If there was no window, then A 3 would be marked.
Agree with above comments. The entire assembly needs protecting.
I know its been touched on before here but I cant remember the outcome. Where you have the single door which is unrated and then the sidelite has been shuttered from the mullion over towards the wall.
Would that be accepted as properly protected and marked as A. A3 ?
Thanks.
Bert
X should have emailed me 
You can always call.
Thanks Mike.
Bert
Citizens allows this condition as A3, just so you know.
Actually Brad, I have marked it that way myself and never had it kicked back or questioned. But wanted to see how others felt. If in fact I was wrong I wanted to correct myself. Thank you for your reply Brad.
Bert
It is an unprotected glazed opening. That is not debatable. It even calls it glazed on most doors. I believe marking it anything less than what it is is wrong. When you do it with the intent to gain clients discounts they do not deserve then the law calls it fraud. No offense to those who do it differently just something I advice you think about. Not something I am willing to put my a s s on the line about. if window fails home is breached. It is that simple.
I agree with what you’re saying Mike but reread what Brad wrote…Citizens accepts it and therefore highly unlikely it would trigger a customer losing their credits.
Bert
It might if the client went to another insurance company. 
Citizens isn’t god…or are they? :shock:
Lol They might think they are Eric!
So, are you saying there might be differing views amd thereby different outcomes of the same scenario and circumstances given depending on various factors not limited to company, underwriter, and picture angles and lighting? Lol
Bert
I don’t think I did…but I agree with you! :mrgreen:
That’s what I meant to say…lol
Bert
That is what I have been saying forever. They ain’t nothing more than an insurance company. Everyone kisses their a s s . The OIR for example should clean house and fire all who work their and start ***Regulating the Insurance Industry ***INSTEAD of doing what citizens says. It is wrong and disgusting. I personally do not give a crap what anyone “accepts” I mark it how it is if they accept it then the have the right to give any discounts they want. I will not like because they say they accept lies from those willing to do it. if they accept it then it should NOT MATTER what I write. I tell clients I do not decide I just fill out the form as IT IS WRITTEN. No more.
Most combination door units with sidelights are built with a fairly strong jamb in between the door and sidelight. This is what was considered when deciding to separate the non-glazed door and the side window (two different units in their minds). This was discussed and declared when I was doing reinspections for Citizens. I can’t speak for other carriers, but most take their cue from CIT.