Wind mit question

What type of roof would this be?
Two different inspectors have two different answers.

Fierman2 (1) (Custom).JPG

gable carport is less than 10% so I would call it HIP

Is the carport the only shape that is not a hip?

If so I would call it a hip.

Yes, Greg.
The homeowner stated that a re-inspection was done, by State Farm, of the original inspection and changed to a gable roof.

what are the dimensions?

Is the gable portion structurally connected to the main roof system?

Hip roof with no other roof shapes greater than 10% of the total building perimeter.

Roof Geometry:
What is the roof shape(s)?
Carports that are attached only to the fascia or wall of the host structure & not structurally connected to the main roof system are not considered in the roof geometry determination.

If the gable at the porte cochere is less than 10% of the overall roof dimension then it would be a hip roof

What he said, agree 100% :cool:

If this is the only gable, it is a hip roof.

It looks like the roof of the gable is attached to the hip portion of the roof, am I correct?
If so, it’s a Gable roof & if not it’s Hip.

Yes, it is attached to the roof.
Here is a closer picture.
Also of the top portion of the roof.

It is attached, but the only portion of the carport that is gable is the small section facing outward. Not the entire structure back to the front door. It appears to be much less than 10%, so I would say it is Hip either way.

Carports that are attached only to the fascia or wall of the host structure & **not structurally connected to the main roof system *****(it is) ** *are not considered in the roof geometry determination.

Now the question is it greater than 10% of the total building perimeter?

It’s funny how why all have different view on this matter. :stuck_out_tongue:
Citizens should come out with a manual that has photos & illustrations in my opinion.
The under writer is going to probably flag that report if you put Hip & a re-inspection company will put it as gable,
in order to say they removed discounts to help Citizens (their client) gain more $ on the policy. :roll:

Send them a sketch with dimensions and the math to prove they are wrong. The agent should stand up to the underwriting Dept for their client…

I agree 100%! :twisted:

John, in theory you are quite correct. However, many agents have no problem with the client losing discounts because their commision is a percentage of the premium, so the larger the premium the larger the comission check and the the commission on the renewal each year.
Not all agents are greedy, but many are.

The issue the agent will have is: The customer will shop for a new insurance company and new agent. They will also tell ten people not to use that insurance company(which will include the agent tied to that company). The inspector will also be blamed for doing it incorrectly. I would be willing to bet it would all go away with a well sent/documented email, it looks obvious from where I sit.

Exactly. All it needs is a sketch and a bird’s eye view pic to support the sketch

Google Earth works great for the bird’s eye view. :cool:
I’ve recently used inspector pro Home inspection software for a sketch & worked out amazingly! :twisted:

I had an underwriter try to challenge me on the percentage of wood frame on a home.
It was close for the home to be considered a wood frame home, this would of increased the client’s policy/premium over $1,000! :shock:

At what point to we, as home inspectors, do we draw the line. This discussion board proves every day that there are flaws in the reporting system and the way these reports are interpreted. It takes time to go back and measure a house, and time to download and send out reports. Who pays for that. Some of you will say it comes in the form of more business. But every time one of us has to go back and ‘prove’ that we are right is costing us time and money, and yet no one is willing to charge for it.

There needs to be a review board set up, by the insurance companies, where these discrepancies can be reviewed. The homeowner should pay for ‘expert witness’ testimony, just like in court. If they prove, before this board, that they are correct, then the insurance company should pay ‘damages’ in the form of our fees (for work correctly done). This board should include members of the insurance company, inspectors, and civilians.

Maybe this would stop some of the crap that is going on out there and finally create a standard of practice for these reports. I have far better things to do than continually fight the system and prove a point for a $75.00 inspection. The ends do not justify the means with these inspections.