by Guest » Thu Jan 15, 2009 11:33 am
Hi! I've a question for you all :)
We recently have a hail storm in our area which has caused huge damages to many of the houses in the locality including mine. We have both damaged siding and roof. Though the claim with the roof went well, the problem occurs with the siding. The insurance company is replacing it with a color that is not matching with the remaining part of the home. We have complained it to the adjuster but he isn't ready to budge since the insurance company is only responsible to replace it with a same quality material. What can we do in this situation? Can we ask the insurance company to replace the entire siding to match it with the rest?
We recently have a hail storm in our area which has caused huge damages to many of the houses in the locality including mine. We have both damaged siding and roof. Though the claim with the roof went well, the problem occurs with the siding. The insurance company is replacing it with a color that is not matching with the remaining part of the home. We have complained it to the adjuster but he isn't ready to budge since the insurance company is only responsible to replace it with a same quality material. What can we do in this situation? Can we ask the insurance company to replace the entire siding to match it with the rest?
Posted: Wed Jan 21, 2009 09:59 pm Post Subject:
Something you can look into is line of sight. Would you be able to stand at the corner of your house near the street and see the different colors of siding. I have seen some carriers bend to the line of sight rule in some states and pay for total replacement.
Posted: Thu Jan 22, 2009 09:27 am Post Subject:
I have seen some carriers bend to the line of sight rule in some states and pay for total replacement.
You have added a whole new angle to the discussion :) I've never heard of this theory before, so am curious to know more about it. What kind of policy would actually allow this? Is it a provision under the standard replacement plans?
Posted: Fri Jan 23, 2009 06:59 am Post Subject:
Its not in any policy. I've worked for carriers that follow this rule. Its not that I agree with the line of sight rule as it goes against how the policy is written, but then again I didn't make those calls. I've been involved when it has been to both shingles and siding.
Posted: Fri Jan 23, 2009 11:34 am Post Subject:
The carrier I have all my insurance with does this...if you can stand on one side of the house (or corner) and see the difference they make that uniform...again this isn't in the policy and an adminstrative claims decision.
Posted: Fri Jan 23, 2009 11:47 am Post Subject:
The carrier I have all my insurance with does this...if you can stand on one side of the house (or corner) and see the difference they make that uniform...again this isn't in the policy and an adminstrative claims decision.
Will they do it only for a small portion of the home or they will look at the house from every corner and fix it eventually? Who would bear the additional expense? Is the insured liable to share the additional cost with the insurer?
Posted: Fri Jan 23, 2009 11:59 am Post Subject:
Will they do it only for a small portion of the home or they will look at the house from every corner and fix it eventually? Who would bear the additional expense? Is the insured liable to share the additional cost with the insurer?
Simon in the case with my carrier, let's say the south side and the east side had 'some' (not entire side) siding damage, they would (if they could not match the siding) replace the siding on both the east and south to be the same...if just the front (east) side of the house, or just the (west) back side of the house had lets say six siding panels that couldn't be matched they would reside that entire 'side'...so that entire side of the house matched..they would pay all of it...and no they don't look at every corner...from the front corners...Posted: Sat Jan 24, 2009 12:29 am Post Subject:
Wouldn't it be hard to even try to match siding after it has been on as little as a couple years. I have a newer double wide and I can see the difference already in the color of the siding. I had to take off a couple shutters so I could kill some bees and was amazed at how much different the siding color was already.
Posted: Sat Jan 24, 2009 07:50 am Post Subject:
Fireyone, That's why the whole matching argument shouldn't matter. My house is 8 years old and has never had any siding damage. The siding on the south and east sides of my house are a different color then the west which is protected by my neighbors and the north does not get as much sun.
Lori, line of sight really goes against everything that an adjuster knows about a policy. The first time I was told to apply it, I questioned the examiner immediately. The house had west and south damage. I told her when I stand at the southeast corner I could see siding on both sides that if not all was replaced could be noticed. She said that I should write for the east as well as the south and west. I said fine, but what about when I stand at the northeast or northwest corner……I can see siding on both that won't match. Where do you draw the line? She had me write for all 4 sides. I didn't agree, but followed directions and immediately changed my homeowners to them.
Posted: Sat Jan 24, 2009 11:52 am Post Subject:
Course you know a policy contract can be 'added' to with the consent of both partys but NEVER taken away from...some companys, no all companys i know of have 'little' bonus type things they do for their insureds...this same company (which i was an adjuster for, for ten years) on their auto policys if you get into an accident with another ''blah blah'' insurance company insured...everybodys deductibles are waived..The carrier I work for now has made 'administrative claims decisions' about four or five times, in the nine years i've been here!....so most likely that carrier for whatever reason make huge concessions...or maybe they just wanted the estimate for all but wouldn't necessarily issue payment for all of it?
Posted: Sun Jan 25, 2009 03:37 pm Post Subject:
This happened to me several years ago, with roofing/siding companies and the insurance company going back and forth. They finally agreed to reroof for the amount that the insurer initially gave for both roofing and siding, but only because I refused to accept the terms of replacement siding: current siding is over 20 years old and the company doesn't do roofing, but wanted entire amount to re-side all eaves and overhangs. They wouldn't budge. Roofer does siding, would re-roof but would replace individual pieces of siding with another type and color.
The insurance company said every roofer offered this deal and I should take it and re-side late since it was just edges and a few small holes on the back of the house, none of which affects the integrity of the house.
Eventually, when we decide to sell, it's one of many things I will let the new owner deal with at their discretion.
Add your comment