Insurance Agents Requesting Wind Mitigation

That’s a good one. :smiley:
Thank God for online records.
Some county sites are good and some are not.
Collier County site is terrible, but it beats a public records request:mrgreen:

I have also found that some agents request them so that later the client can’t come back and say they were never told about them. Kinda a CYA thing…

The agent can also be doing a CYA thing so that the client can’t complain later about not knowing about the program

Just for the sake of saying, many structures built outside of what we consider the HVHZ were actually built to the 1994-96 SFBC. In some cases, roofing systems were submitted with an NOA and installed/designed with SSTD-10 application, including SSTD-12 for impact protection(openings). You can only verify this with a visit to the AHJ. That’s why structures outside of the HVHZ get credit under the 2001 FBC while not actually requiring RAS installation practices as detailed in the FBC, HVHZ. Take Palm Beach County for instance, they adopted the HVHZ section of the FBC in 2002, but most installation use common nails up until around 2008. I recently had a structure in Palm Beach that was 5,700sf of roofing system replaced in 2005 with all common nails, and they had a wind mitigation giving them credit for installation according to the FBC. Structures outside of the HVHZ do not require ring-shank nails for tile/shingle installations, but they receive equal or higher discount rate than the 1996 SFBC which did require ring-shank nails. Another thing to consider, the WM offers a discount for 8D nails only, but 6D ring-shank nails offer a higher uplift resistance to 8D common nails. The 1802 form isn’t worth the paper it’s written on.