In both of the cases that this has happened to me, they were brand new roofs. They were requesting slope images (I provided 7 images showing the roof geometry)… For roof slope images I also do something similar, use a 10ft selfie stick from the ground for single story homes (and a drone for 2 & 3 story homes). But roof slope images would take about 15 minutes on most of the homes I inspect and would require 15-30 images depending on the size and shape. Adding 15 minutes to every wind mitigation inspection I do would add 275 hours of labor per year (also add 10 minutes to download, resize/crop and add the images to the report x1,1100 reports=an additional 183 hours, so a total of 458 hours of additional labor/year). I’d have to drop at least one appointment slot per day to accommodate that, it would also screw up my scheduling, and I’d obviously need to adjust my rates. I’m not willing to do that over 2 rogue requests from someone who either does not know what they are doing or is trying to gain an additional Roof Inspection at my expense by illegally rejecting a legitimate report that includes all of the required images.
On the form itself, it states “At least one photograph must accompany this form to validate each attribute marked in questions 3 through 7”. Of those sections requiring images, there is only 1 one section pertaining to the exterior of the roof:
Section #5: "Roof Geometry”: “A minimum of 1 image is required”, I typically provide 4 , (1 image of each side of the home in high resolution that can be zoomed in to full screen, even the roof material type can clearly be seen) however in the latest instance I provided 7 images. The sole purpose of images for this section is to establish the “Roof Geometry”, nothing else. The roof in question was classified as “Other”. The images clearly established that, so the request was not to establish whether or not the home qualified for a hip roof credit…
That’s it for the roof photo requirements on the form. To verify this, all that needs to be done is to read what’s on the form.
As far as “Roof Slope” images (what was requested), they are only required for 4-Point Inspections and Roof Certification Inspections.
And as I mentioned in a post above, according to Citizens own website the only documentation required for a new roof is:
“If you have a ‘Finalized roof permit’ PolicyCenter will automatically Allow coverage to be bound by agent”.
End of story. That’s their own policy, in their own words.
If an employee at an insurance company wants photos outside the scope of what is required for that form, they should request the type of inspection they need in order to get those photos, not reject a Wind Mitigation report that complies with the photo requirements. Rejecting a form that complies with the photo requirements is a violation that can be reported to Florida Office of Insurance Regulation.
The problem is, no one in our state’s current insurance climate would be willing to report an insurance company, it’s a complete dumpster fire. I had one customer who was denied credit for his shutters. Even though I had images of the stamp on them saying “Miami-Dade Approved”, they wanted it to say “ASTM E 1886”. I pointed out that the home was built in 2005 and that the shutters were included in the county’s inspection as part of the permit and passed code, and also included InterNACHI training videos showing that if they say “Miami-Dade Approved” they are acceptable. They still denied giving him credit on his shutters, even though he legally qualified for credit. But he was afraid to report them to have the credit enforced because he had a previous claim and was having trouble finding insurance. He was worried they would just find a reason to deny him coverage, so he gave up and allowed them to take advantage of him even though they were violating state law.
It shouldn’t be this way, a report should simply document the facts and the insurance companies should comply with state law, it’s that simple. But I don’t blame him for feeling that way, many Floridians are desperate and feel like they are being held hostage. I can’t tell you how many customers I have had that the insurance company’s own initial adjuster had written up their damage for like $80,000 and they ended up with a check for $3,000 with the same adjusters name on the final breakdown. All of the laws passed last year were to protect and benefit the insurance companies to keep them from pulling out, but a ton pulled out or went bankrupt anyway, no laws were passed to protect the consumer. And insurance companies going bankrupt? I did not even know that was possible, shouldn’t an insurance company be required to have the funds to back up what they are covering? These issues have nothing to do with our inspections, but if you’re from Southwest Florida where Ian hit (or any other area that had hurricane damage in the past year and a half) I’m sure we’ve all heard the horror stories from our customers and it’s just a mess. With the current insurance company crisis going on, I myself would probably never file a report with the Florida Office of Insurance Regulation, simply out of paranoia that the insurance company being reported might flag my name and give my customers a hard time in the future.
I did however email Citizens about this particular issue yesterday (without mentioning my customer’s name) asking how to handle a situation like this when it arises, as it’s not a common issue with them. It might just simply be an honest mistake by one employee who is new and not properly trained. Apparently it can take up to 5 days for a response.
