Strangely quite on this topic - Anyone have any insights as to how it went?
Wow, 61 views and not a peep - I guess either the meeting didn’t happen - or the Rick Scott Administration is keeping the mussle on as per usual?
No one??? No one has any comment on this subject??
An agent sent this information to me, it was posted on a blog following the meeting:
**[The Uniform Wind Mitigation Verification Inspection Form is on the Move Again](http://community.faia.com/profile.htm?mode=pvb&pid=16168&op=ViewArticle&articleId=893&blogId=3)**
Posted by Dave Newell on Jun 21st, 2011 9:03am
The Office of Insurance Regulation recently conducted a rulemaking hearing for the purpose of updating the 1802 form to reflect the 2010/11 legislative changes along with other suggestions that will improve the form.
Many of the items I will outline in this blog are categories on the 1802 form that are creating conflict between the carrier, inspection and the inspector.
Before I get started on the list of suggested changes to the 1802 form let me begin by saying that FAIA has been advocating for quite some time the need for the OIR to come up with and distribute guidelines for inspectors to follow as they complete the 1802 form. OIR continues their stance they are not in a position to develop a set of guidelines and prefer that the industry get a working group together to establish those guidelines. The industry feels the OIR is in a much better position to set this group up, establish the guidelines and publish for inspectors to follow.
Will keep you up to date as this discussion continues for guidelines in completing the form, but in the meantime we have an 1802 form that is being revised again to address the concerns of the industry.
Opening protections was a major discussion as it relates to garage doors, nail pattern for single and double wraps, Roof geometry (hip and flat roof), tile roof coverings, secondary water resistance and the validity of the form for five years.
Garage doors appear to be an issue as they relate to exterior openings for all exterior openings glazed or unglazed. There is some proposed language that will help better define applicable categories just for garage doors, so they meet the criteria allowing a credit.
I know from hearing from many agents that the nail pattern on straps for inspections and resinspections has been an issue for quite some time. The suggested changes will require a minimum of four nails, three on one side of the strap and one on the other. This suggestion is made by Bill York and others to help inspectors be consistent when completing the form.
Another hot topic is roof geometry. Eliminate the current hip roof definition and replace it with; a hip roof has no gable end that exceeds 50% of a major wall length. This recommendation is a major change that will no doubt help in better defining the roof geometry of a home. In addition the flat roof definition will be replaced with the following language; flat roof shape in which 90% of the total roof area has a slope of less than 2:12. These recommendations were made by the OIR and the industry found these recommendations to be helpful to defining a roof shape for mitigation credits.
Next item or items deal with tile or other types of roof coverings along with secondary water resistance (SWR).
The current 1802 form does not take into consideration other types of roof coverings including tile, clay or concrete tile roof coverings,wood shake roofs,rolled roofing, membrane roofs or built up roofing and metal roofs. Many homes have these types of roof coverings, so the recommendation to add other types of roof coverings for inspectors to select and allow for credits is needed. Another recommendation by Bill York and his group to make these additions to the new form.
SWR has created quite a stir in the industry for homeowners and inspectors to verify the roof has some type of SWR and provide photos or other documentation to validate it. There is a recommendation to change the term from SWR to sealed roof deck, but still require pictures or other forms of documentation to verify it. Testimony from the industry indicated that less than 10% of new roofs have an approved SWR installed when a new roof is installed. Does the cost of the SWR product justify a minimal credit on the 1802 form? The bigger issue is not the credit, but mitigating your home from further water intrusion when an event blows off the roof covering.
The last item that has kept all of us wondering, is the length of validation of the form itself. The current form has language making the form valid for up to five years. The suggested change would be from up to for five years provided no material changes have been made to the structure. This recommendation if adopted will create certainty for how long the form can be used in the marketplace for that risk.
The goal is to have additional comments from the industry on the recommendated changes to the OIR over the next two weeks and then publish the revised 1802 for approval from the financial services commission. No time frame for adoption was set forth, but hope to have something in place over the next few months.
If you have any questions on the recommendations or anything else related to the 1802 please let me know.
Thank you Mr. McCord!!
thats the same info posted before the meeting
Somebody has to write an illustrated manual and make it available to all licensed inspectors online if they expect uniformity. I am a first time poster and have a question, but am unsure where to post it, can you help me out? It’s a huge hassle to scan the 4 page written 1802 document, make a four page file, develop a word document with the photo proof, so I can email it to the client/agent. Is there a version of the current 1802 that I can type the info into the form, check boxes, add photos, etc? One that I could download into my laptop? That would save me a ton of time.