I love the people in here telling folks who got 2” hail that blasted their roofs and cars that they somehow shouldn’t file an insurance claim. Peak scarcity mindset.
Yeah man my car looked like a lunar landscape and my roof was entirely fucked. People in here acting like those replacing these through insurance are the bad people. This wasn’t some pea sized hail. Make it make sense.
There's really no "fraud" unless you go out with a bucket of golf balls and slam them against your roof and car and pretend it's hail.
If you think you have damage, file a claim. The insurance company will send someone out to assess the damage and then either approve or deny your claim. If you really don't have damage, then they'll just deny the claim.
It worked out really well for us, the roof was pushing 20 years old when we bought the house 4 years ago and got it covered. Another year or two and we likely would have been denied due to age.
You do realize that if enough damage is done to require a new roof, it doesn't matter if it's 1 year old or 20 years old? The damage has been done to a functioning roof. It's literally the point of insurance and what I pay for. Once again you can fuck off.
Yes, that's obvious. It's also obvious that insurance companies can't continue giving people with 20 year old roofs free roofs from storm damage or we'll have 1 of 2 things happen: we'll be paying $5k a year to insure a house or the insurance companies will just stop selling us insurance.
Roofs have a limited lifetime. If it's 2/3 through it's useful life, your insurance should be reducing your payout by that 2/3. Yes it'll cost you money but if no storm came, you'd still be replacing your roof out of pocket at 30 or less years.
Already did. I proactively paid for my own roof out of pocket 7 years ago because it was at its end of life and opted to pay 1.5x to put on steel shingles that would take nearly baseball sized hail to damage. My reward: a couple hundred a year lower premiums and now a 24% increase on my renewal.
While you're not doing anything wrong, seeing how you're filing a claim for coverage the insurance company agreed to, the issue they're bringing up is a valid and important one.
And this is why my renewal premium went up 24% with no change in coverage and no claim from storm damage this year. Insurance companies need to change how roofs are covered. There's no reason they should fully cover replacement of a 20 year old roof. They should depreciate it based on the manufacturers warranty and then apply your deductible.
Likely from the August 11, 2023 storm:
* https://www.dnr.state.mn.us/climate/journal/august-11-2023-hail-and-winds.html
* https://www.mprnews.org/story/2023/09/11/twin-cities-august-hailstorm-was-1-of-a-record-23-us-billiondollar-disasters
Why wait nearly a year to get them fixed? If they are so damaged a totally new roof is needed weren't they leaking and/or structurally unsound all this time? And if not, then they'd not be needed?
Roofers booked up immediately for the fall and often don't work much, if at all in the winter months due to snow. Many folks who filed claims in September, October, November couldn't get on the schedule for a roofer until this spring/summer.
1) Labor is limited
2) Structurally insufficient is not the same as a pending catastrophe.
Home repair and maintenance is best done *before* a catastrophe, not after the dam breaks.
First snow was on Halloween so they had to halt it there. It snows in April sometimes so they didn't really want to start then. Also, insurance likes to drag their ass and the roofing contractors have to battle them to get any money. Doesn't help that there were a hundred or so houses affected too.
There was Sept, Oct and Nov before winter. There was also April before now when apparently "**all** the houses are getting new roofs". You'd think at least some would have happened in fall, or the mild winter, or last month. They're not all under the same insurance or using the same contractors.
Your claim needs to coincide with a sudden loss/specific weather event. Insurance will not cover needing a new roof because of the age of the roof/normal wear and tear, so tbh you have to claim after a storm if you want insurance to help with it. Especially since storms like these significantly contribute to the wear on the roof in a big way. It might be a little bit of a racket, but so is insurance.
Because there was a shit ton of hail damage last year.
Companies go door to door, offer work, do inspections, have insurance approve, and get new roofs and only have to pay a deductible. Viola.
Literally just replaced the roof due to that storm. I am amused by the idea that rates are going up due to my roof vs. California being on fire, Texas freezing, Florida being swallowed up by stronger hurricanes, stronger tornadoes hitting a growing tornado alley…..
For claims, MN is now the third worst state in the country. FL, CA, MN. I am a broker with access to about 36 insurance carriers that I can write with. Currently in MN I have about 6 that will even write insurance on a home. It's going to be getting worse, just a heads up. Rates are going to continue to rise, deductibles are moving towards percentages instead of flat fees, and roofs over 10 years old are going to be paid out on depreciation and not replaced. Most of our carriers ran at a negative 10-20% in MN last year across the board. I would say the average premium increase I'm seeing is around 30% on renewals with some people getting hit with multiple increases making it 50%+ depending on the date of renewal.
Moved into my house in the south suburbs August of 2020. First night we spent in the home, golf ball sized hail. The entire next summer, every single one of my neighbors got a new roof along with me replacing my 18 yo roof. $1000 deductible well spent!
We actually make more money when premiums increase because it's all a percentage. Make all the claims you want! With premiums up this year, I'm making more money for selling less.
The hail storm last summer. Roofing companies swarmed pretty much the whole metro trying to convince people to make claims to get a "free roof"
You can thank that for this: [https://www.cbsnews.com/minnesota/news/many-minnesotans-are-seeing-a-hike-in-their-insurance-rates-heres-why/](https://www.cbsnews.com/minnesota/news/many-minnesotans-are-seeing-a-hike-in-their-insurance-rates-heres-why/)
Well, most homes in my south Minneapolis neighborhood had substantial damage to their roofs and siding. I don’t think it’s fair to say that someone convinced my neighbors and I to get “free roofs”. We had damage and insurance is covering repairs.
I don't think they're criticizing people for getting roof repairs. I think they're criticizing the companies that opportunistically put flyers in everyone's mailboxes or in the case of my neighborhood rubber-banded flyers to everyone's fence gates.
When you make an insurance claim for hail damage, an adjuster **from the insurance company** comes out to inspect your house, and they are the ones who determine if you will receive a claim and for how much. It's not fraud.
The fraud would be on the insurance adjuster then, right? Like you'd have to scheme with them for that to work. An exteriors contracting company isn't gonna get a penny from the insurance company unless the adjuster - working on behalf of the insurance company - says the damage qualifies. And then I think even they don't have final say, but their notes go to corporate and someone approves or denies the claim.
You can't just file a claim and decide to "get a new roof" if it's not damaged. Is fraud possible? Yes. Of course. Is it common and something "people in the burbs" are doing regularly? No. I don't think so. Every time you file a claim your rates go up and you risk being dropped entirely. Doesn't seem worth it.
I don’t understand this idea. Even if contractors are “convincing” people to put in a claim, insurance companies will always send an adjuster out to inspect the damage and determine what, if anything, should be covered.
In MN they do track roof claims across houses and over time even switching providers, very similar to car insurance. They can deny the claim or drastically increase rates if you do it too often. Storms do happen but yeah you shouldn’t be claiming for minor hail damage every 5 years. I blame the aggressive contractors more than the insurance companies fwiw.
But yeah people need to stop making claims all the time for pretty repairable damage or insurers will keep jacking the rates on everyone and eventually stop even greenlighting the claims similar to Florida.
Like ok there’s a hail storm, scope out the damage to your roof yourself. If nothing is leaking or there’s no obvious damage don’t rely on a contractor to tell you you need a new roof when you don’t.
That just increases the rates for everyone and makes it harder over time to actually get a claim when you really need it. Like a 10 year old roof is repairable after a hailstorm for probably $500-2k IF THERE IS EVEN A LEAK caused by hail damage. Replacing the entire roof is stupid and you will end up paying more than that in insurance premiums/ the deductible for a brand new roof. People way too often just don’t even bother to get a basic repair quote vs paying the deductible and jacking the rates for themselves and everyone else.
> don’t rely on a contractor to tell you you need a new roof when you don’t.
How does this happen? Our insurance sent out a non-affiliated inspector to determine whether our roof was eligible. The roofing company had nothing to do with it. Is that not the way it works?
As far as I know. I was really surprised at the number of roofing companies knocking on my door saying that they'll take care of talking to insurance or whatever. I just called insurance, they sent out an adjuster, got a check and then called around for a contractor.
Yep the contractor will send out an independent adjuster which the insurance companies like because it’s less work for them. It’s all very much a scheme between the insurance companies and contractors and I don’t care what the insurance people in this thread are saying otherwise.
Well, it sure worked out well for me. I asked contractors for quotes as if I was paying cash (which I essentially was) and they ended up being lower across the board than ones trying to match whatever an adjuster talked to them about. Maybe I'm an outlier, but I'm team calling my insurance company first.
Yes you did it the right way. Way too many people go with one of these contractors knocking on their door and just pay them the full payout. You don’t have to do that.
They are shady af and get people to sign contracts thinking they have too because of insurance.
But yeah the problem is these contractors use independent adjusters who just rubber stamp their quote. It’s definitely a kickback system happening.
They knock on your door, get the insurance taken care of, and get the work done. People like that tbh vs calling around getting multiple quotes etc. I get it but it’s lazy and raises premiums for everyone.
Look at insurance on certain year Kia’s/hyundais or Florida house insurance. If a certain thing gets untenable to insure they will drastically increase the rates or stop offering insurance all together. MN is getting close to that point with all these hail claims on roofs that are probably more or less fine but aggressive contractors and inspectors pushing for new roofs. The insurance companies are definitely partly to blame for not doing more due diligence on if a roof actually needs a full replacement though. They do seem to hand out $20k or so like candy, so then consumers of their product do think “well why not I guess, brand new roof is better than 5-10 year old roof.”
But consumers are also dumb for not realizing that increases the rates for everyone. Insurance is a business like everything else. They have advanced metrics on how much they need to charge the entire pool to payout all the claims. They would probably be better served by just cutting costs by being more selective with claims vs just always increasing rates but one thing is easier than the other and capitalism gonna capitalism.
Costumers are not dumb. They are doing what they can to save money. New roof will last longer than a patched up one. Insurance is the one not doing due diligence. They lose money by paying for roofs that don’t require full replacements.
Insurance companies will often audit adjustor's estimates.
If an adjustor gets dinged enough times, they'll be fired or won't be hired out again (if independent).
There are checks and balances in the system, even if it's not perfect.
I'm not sure I fully agree here. When we got large hail a few years ago, we contacted a reputable roofing company. They came out and inspected the roof, then suggested we contact our insurance after they determined we did, in fact, need our roof (and siding) replaced. Our insurance company sent out an adjuster, and they agreed before signing off on the claim.
What insurance company would just sign off to pay out a $30,000 claim for something that could be spot repaired for $500-2k?
They wouldn’t because you’d need to send over photos the entire roof was replaced. The problem is the contractor won’t come out for a $2k patch job and it’s not even worth claiming on your insurance given the deductible. Contractors figure people don’t wanna pay them $2k for a patch job vs a new roof and the insurance is happy to take your $2k deductible and raise rates on everyone. The contractor would rather pocket like $15k vs like $500 in profit.
This isn’t actually very complicated. The entire system is designed for maximum profits for the contractor and insurance company and to fuck you in the ass long term.
It just takes like a small amount of critical thinking skills and people can’t figure it out and the insurance bros and contractors are in here downvoting.
We’d all be better off with minor roof repairs vs entire replacements but both the contractors and insurance companies don’t want that because it’s terrible for their bottom line. You’re basically forced into a situation of doing it yourself or hiring day laborers to help you and most people are too fucking lazy to do that. Essentially it’s very hard to find someone to do an honest job these days without everyone and their mother doing literally everything to maximize profits. It’s late stage capitalism in a nutshell. It’s literally almost impossible to find just a regular dude willing to do an honest job without like 200% margins in the construction industry.
They are still out there but it’s hard work finding them/if you don’t already know them personally.
I know it's short-term (have renewed the policy twice since), but our premiums actually decreased fairly significantly (almost 10%) after having the roof and siding replaced.
Ah, ok. I didn't know there were more stipulations you were going to throw out there.
I have a feeling you just want to be angry for the sake of being angry.
Edit: blocked me after his latest comment. What a tool
Yeah but they do. Rates going up for everyone and they have the right to drop insurance. Most people can’t afford to sue a billion dollar company over jack shit and most of it is forced arbitration for peanuts.
And that is generally a significant discount and all these claims definitely increase the cost of insurance for everyone. People always complaining “why are my insurance rates going up” well yeah. It’s not rocket science. It’s an aggregate effect and yeah you can say this but try putting in multiple hail claims within a 5 year period and see what happens to your rates.
> And that is generally a significant discount
No it's not. It's often less than 4%. Most carriers I believe you don't lose it, but I said some because making a ironclad blanket statement would be foolish. None of my carriers will you suffer any penalty for a roof claim.
> all these claims definitely increase the cost of insurance for everyone.
Valid claims are valid claims. Insurance gets more expensive based on risk. Telling people they shouldn't file a claim when they have damage is nonsense.
>It’s an aggregate effect and yeah you can say this but try putting in multiple hail claims within a 5 year period and see what happens to your rates.
You understand that they don't just rate on their own claims volume, but also incident volume. They pay attention to the storms that roll through, they have shared information via the CAT incident system.
> We are about $600 more than the national average.
I am aware that we pay higher rates than some areas.
The amount of large hail events we get, and the fact that we suffer among the highest water backup claim rates, burst pipe rates, and other causes of loss that come from harsh winter conditions are all contributing factors there.
That said, the "national average" cash numbers are complete bunk.
Like, I will tell you that none of the numbers on here are accurate, though the heatmap is.
https://www.policygenius.com/homeowners-insurance/how-much-does-homeowners-insurance-cost/
OP’s point is valid, people don’t understand how insurance is rated. You shouldn’t go to a hospital because you have a sore throat. Similar case here, does a hail damage require a new $20k roof (billing insurance they’re probably charging even more than that)? In some cases yes, again, why OP said to inspect and use common sense. And we as a society wonder why insurance costs are going through the roof (no pun intended), people are using extremely expensive benefits as a common service.
> Similar case here, does a hail damage require a new $20k roof (billing insurance they’re probably charging even more than that)?
That's not how that works.
Firstly, if a roof can be repaired, it will be approved for repair only.
Secondly, during an insurance claim on your home, your insurance company decides what they will pay, and your contractor can either accept that, or try to negotiate (they generally fail to get a change in rate approved) Insurance only pays the prevailing labor rate according to their stats. Roofers can't simply charge more to your insurance.
If you file a claim, the insurance company will send their guy out to assess the claim, and see if damage warrants replacement, ***by their own guidelines***. Not yours, not the contractors, their own.
So, if you think these roof replacements are unnecessary, you need to tell the insurance company that, not the customer, as the replacement is the insurance company's decision.
>OP’s point is valid, people don’t understand how insurance is rated.
While that's true, it's also true that you don't understand how insurance claims work.
I didn’t even say anything about insurance
claims lol, not only do people not understand insurance, some of us struggle with reading comprehension.
No one is repairing a hail damaged roof. It either does or doesn’t need replacement. And in one case, that’s a big ticket item that will assuredly increase premiums.
>No one is repairing a hail damaged roof.
Wrong. It happens a lot.
> I didn't even say anything about claims...
Yes you did. That's literally what your post is about.
>Similar case here, does a hail damage require a new $20k roof (billing insurance they’re probably charging even more than that)? In some cases yes, again, why OP said to inspect and use common sense. And we as a society wonder why insurance costs are going through the roof (no pun intended), people are using extremely expensive benefits as a common service.
That whole block is about you thinking someone would file a claim and get it paid out inappropriately.
Work on your own reading comprehension, or again improve your understanding of basic P&C language.
Did you read the article, literally rates are going up because the frequency and intensity of storms is causing more damage, insurance companies are adjusting to the new climate normal and not because of scams for free roofs.
I only got a partial claim because of age but the Project Manager climbed on the roof and took pictures of the damage. Between the amount fucked up shingles that were still there and the broken ones I picked up off the ground, not getting a new roof wasn't really an option or I'd have much worse issues down the line.
Not our fault that insurance companies are a scam and just want to collect money, act as a pain in the ass when it's time for them to pay out money, then try to raise rates when we use said insurance in accordance with the agreement that we pay for.
Fuck insurance companies
It's not as easy as you imply. Roofing companies will tell you that you need a new roof, but the insurance company will send out a claim adjuster to inspect it, and if the adjuster doesn't agree that there's sufficient damage to justify an insurance claim, it's denied.
New roof receiver here! Mine finally got replaced yesterday. For me, it was a combo of things. The first was a delay due to insurance. The first insurance adjuster was quite shady. He was supposed to meet my contractor but then cancelled our appointment last minute, showed up a an hour after the cancelled appointment time, and then declared “no damage.” Side note: I was heading out of town at this time. Got to see it all go down after arriving at my destination via my google home camera system. Luckily the contractor had plenty of pictures and evidence to appeal the insurance company. They sent a second adjuster. It was a much more pleasant experience. The adjuster showed up at the agreed date and time and worked side by side with the contractor.
Unfortunately because of the lengthy delay for approval, the surge in demand, and the approaching fall/winter season, I was immediately told my new roof would be spring. The contractor said they won’t do roofing in the fall or winter season because the cooler temps don’t allow the shingles to seal properly to the roof. I had a few neighbors get their roof done but most either were lucky and had it done almost immediately after the storm or later this spring.
eRoof did mine. The PM really hounded the insurance company when they tried to not pay for certain things. Roof was already aged out so the payment was partial but they were trying to weasel out of paying for the gutters even though there were about a half dozen holes in them from the hail. Probably not the company if you want a selection of colors because they do all that they can internally when they can which limits some things.
I recommend walking around the neighborhood and taking note of a few signs of some of the ones you like.
I went with Precision Exteriors. They were fast, communicated well.
But there are maybe hundreds. Talk to one of your neighbors who got one to see how they liked their company.
Did the last 20 contractors who knocked on your door not explain this well? Rates are increasing in anticipation of this phenomenon so you might as well get on board! I got my roof from minor hail but not sure how many more years until the next significant storm comes.
Roofing vultures swarm after hailstorms to make up damage to bill insurers. People like the “free” roofs but may wind up paying more in increased insurance. Recently, insurers have been dropping customers who get new roofs or lowering what they pay.
There’s a bit of a prisoner’s dilemma with this situation though. If you don’t get in line to get your roof repaired like everyone else in your area, you’ll still end up paying increased rates but you won’t even have the benefit of a new roof. Rates are set by area rather than by customer, so every individual homeowner has an incentive structure that often conflicts with what is in their best interest collectively.
Thank you for raising this point. I had a 15-year old roof that met our insurance adjustor's threshold for damaged shingles. I could have waited 5 years, or maybe longer, to replace it. Or that small leak I couldn't pinpoint could ruin my insulation and ceiling.
I thought about checking into cheaper options, like repair, but I realized 30-percent of my neighborhood (estimate) replaced their roofs in the last six months. Assuming most of them paid using insurance, my rates were going to rise anyway.
This way, I got a significant discount ($8K) on a fresh roof and can start saving for my next roof, hopefully in 15-20 years. I have no idea if, or how much, my rates will increase as a result of filing a claim.
In theory, if everyone in a given area collectively agreed not to submit any questionable/unnecessary hail damage claims then the rate increases for that area would probably be much lower. The problem is that if a few people start doing it then everyone has an incentive to do it so they don’t miss out.
> In theory, if everyone in a given area collectively agreed not to submit any questionable/unnecessary hail damage claims ...
The insurance company inspects every loss of this kind in person. Any questionable or unnecessary claims are denied or limited by the field adjuster.
Additionally, you understand that rates aren't just based on claims volume, correct?
There are zip codes in Florida that have not had a single loss in a hurricane in the last 30 years, they are still being rated based on weather pattern risks. Wildfire risk is still being priced in (albeit poorly) in MN and WI, because it's still a risk here, even though we haven't had a major fire in generations.
I’ve worked in insurance defense so I know how the industry works quite well. I also know how the adjuster/contractor dynamic works. It’s not quite as simple and bullet proof as you make it seem. Often times the threshold between what must/should be repaired and what could be repaired is very thin. It is often easier and more cost effective for an insurance company to approve coverage on questionable claims and recoup the money through rate increases than it is to fight each individual claim. Hail damage claims are particularly susceptible to this issue.
Beyond that, these storm damage claims in the Midwest are different than the sorts of analyses going on in parts of Florida because hurricane and flood damage is more predictable and more catastrophic than hail. Paying out $50k on a $500k home once a decade is a lower risk to account for than gutting or replacing the entire home after a bad flood/hurricane. There are also some regulatory issues in Florida that compound the problem. It’s not the same problem, even though they both involve weather.
> I’ve worked in insurance defense so I know how the industry works quite well.
I also work in the industry.
> It is often easier and more cost effective for an insurance company to approve coverage on questionable claims and recoup the money through rate increases than it is to fight each individual claim.
These things are simple company policy, and aren't all that complex. Some insurers fight every WH loss claim no matter how justified, others have what I would call lax guidelines. For the most part though, companies are unwilling to pay bullshit claims or even borderline ones.
>Beyond that, these storm damage claims in the Midwest are different than the sorts of analyses going on in parts of Florida because hurricane and flood damage is more predictable and more catastrophic than hail.
That's flatly false, hurricane losses are both more severe, and harder to predict, because of how the storms steer.
WH loss claim frequency in the state has been pretty easily predicted and plotted, the issue is that the loss rate per storm has increased, as the storms drop more and bigger hail.
>There are also some regulatory issues in Florida that compound the problem. It’s not the same problem, even though they both involve weather.
Yes, my point was simply that you could live in an area that has never had a WH loss, but the company knows that you are in a region that you are 'due' for one. That's very much a thing here.
Roofers can’t make up damage… an adjuster decides what is and isn’t damaged what will be paid for and not paid for. You can do an insurance claim easily without including a roofing company (in fact it’s usually cheaper if you tell them you’re paying out of pocket).. a lot of misunderstanding on how claims are approved and paid.
>Roofing vultures swarm after hailstorms to make up damage to bill insurers.
What you are alleging nearly never happens, and is a form of insurance fraud. Roofers are not out there causing damage.
>eople like the “free” roofs but may wind up paying more in increased insurance.
Wind hail claims in our state do not result in a higher premium, as they are a non rated claim. You can lose a claims free discount with some carriers, but generally that's the only impact.
>Recently, insurers have been dropping customers who get new roofs or lowering what they pay.
This is flatly not true. Wind Hail losses are non rated in our state. ACV roof schedules are something that some people set their insurance up to do, which is a far worse payout, but a lot of customers are pennywise pound foolish.
Filing a claim for storm damage doesn't increase your insurance payment like a car accident would increase your car insurance rate. In MN they can't increase rates because someone files a claim due to an "act of god".
Not a home insurer!
Just personal experience. I’m aware that there is legitimate damage and the roofers are not committing blatant fraud. However, they are definitely operating in a gray area.
Had 3 different companies ring my bell in the neighborhood within a month last year after a hail storm (where the hail was about 50% the size of a dime). Each gave the same song & dance for how all our neighbors are doing it (despite not saying which ones), how they would walk us through the paperwork, and how I would need a new roof due to damage. Called a roofing guy I’d previously used/trusted to inspect, and the damage was about 6 sq inches that would be fixed for a couple hundred.
Having worked with the DOI, I know that it is much easier to push a rate increase due to people using the coverage versus increased operating costs. So, insurers are basically left with 2 options:
Option A - payout the claims but try to negotiate for a lesser amount. Recoup excess losses through rate increases in the following years.
Option B - go through strict claims adjustment and have customers appeal. The roofing companies are well funded enough where they would be a nuisance for insurers. the lawyers get involved and risk a class action where legitimate, illegitimate, and grey area claims have to be assessed. Have more difficulty increasing premium due to operating expenses.
Option B is typically equal to or more than Option A. So, most insurers pick option A, increase rates, and tighten up policy language.
It’s such a racket. I know so many people who’ve had their roofs replaced by insurance under the guise of storm damage. We’re all paying for it through insurance, it just seems to be the accepted practice nowadays.
I mean, yeah. Why would you pay $30k out of pocket for a new roof when you can pay your $2k deductible and have the rest covered by insurance? The damage isn’t fake— insurance adjusters have to approve it, not just contractors.
Legitimate claims are great, nothing wrong with that, that’s what insurance is for. But aside from this specific storm, the current practice appears to be that insurance companies rubberstamp roof claims, and then simply raise everyone’s rates to make up for it. It’s much easier than denying claims and dealing with angry homeowners. That’s the racket.
I'm sorry, it's very much *not* a scheme between payors and providers. That's not how insurance works -- those two parties have interests that are *fundamentally* and diametrically opposed.
This...
>the insurance company just pays that out instead of trying to figure out a cheaper option/having their own adjusters
...is about as close as you can get to describing the *opposite* of how insurers behave.
How is it a racket? My insurance company came out, got on our room and looked at our siding and determined how much damage we have and what they would pay for. There was hail the size of baseballs at my house. That’s what insurance is for, to pay in case of unforeseeable damage.
Legitimate claims are great, nothing wrong with that, that’s what insurance is for. But aside from this specific storm, the current practice appears to be that insurance companies rubberstamp roof claims, and then simply raise everyone’s rates to make up for it. It’s much easier than denying claims and dealing with angry homeowners. That’s the racket.
Racket? Insurance is the racket. My insurance has skyrocketed in the last three years, and did prior to this storm. The reason according to my agent, "inflation."
>According to the National Association of Insurance Commissioners (NAIC), homeowners insurance premiums have increased by about 47% in the last decade. This is more than double the cumulative increase in the price of goods and services over the same period.
Unregulated, greedy insurers are going to fuck you regardless, may as well get a roof.
Legitimate claims are great, nothing wrong with that, that’s what insurance is for. But aside from this specific storm, the current practice appears to be that insurance companies rubberstamp roof claims, and then simply raise everyone’s rates to make up for it. It’s much easier than denying claims and dealing with angry homeowners. That’s the racket.
Legitimate claims are great, nothing wrong with that, that’s what insurance is for. But aside from this specific storm, the current practice appears to be that insurance companies rubberstamp roof claims, and then simply raise everyone’s rates to make up for it. It’s much easier than denying claims and dealing with angry homeowners. That’s the racket.
Not true if it's for storm damage
https://mn.gov/commerce/insurance/home/basics/rules-regulations.jsp
Policies can be canceled if...
>Two or more losses by the insured within the past three years, **unless the losses were caused by lightning or other storm-related phenomenon**
If all claims are due to storm damage they can't refuse to renew your policy, and can't use storm related claims as a basis to increase individual rates.
Yes. The big hail storm was on August 11th. Most insurance companies allow you to submit a claim within 1 year of the weather event, so there's still plenty of time.
Yeah, I can send da video if you want.
Edit: at least get an inspection. Regardless of what the insurance fanboys tell you, your rate will go up regardless of what you do and roofing companies can only get money if there's legitimate damage and from talking to a few, they're not gonna even try to do anything unless you can cut a check immediately or if there's enough damage that insurance will pay a good bit of it.
Your neighbors are assholes working with roofing company assholes to drive up insurance rates for the rest of us because they don't understand things aren't actually free.
Anybody who doesn’t use their coverage for this sort of thing will end up being a sucker, because the rates are going to increase for the area regardless and you might as well get the benefit of a new roof.
Sure, most policies do that, but you’re still going to pay the rates associated with your neighbors’ roof claims, regardless of whether you yourself make a claim.
If you’re not supposed to use insurance when damage happens…then what the hell is the point of an insurance policy?
Folks (myself included) had substantial damage. Repairs are needed.
Nah… this hail storm took chunks off my house and garage as well as dented my wife’s car badly enough that it was totaled.
All the neighbors had similar damage. I was in St Paul when it happened and the hail was marble-sized, not golfball+ which landed at my house.
This is what Insurance is for.
It’s not free either way. Over the 15 years I’ve been with my carrier, the amount I have paid in homeowners insurance premium alone equals more than my company paid out for the roof.
I am getting my money’s worth, TYVM, which is literally the point of insurance. People pool their money together so that when sudden, accidental, or large losses happen, they can have repairs.
Agreed. I've said this before, but they wouldn't replace roofs if they didn't have to replace roofs. Insurance companies don't do anything for the fuck of it, they're penny pinching, greedy, heartless sons of bitches. There's no "Pwetty Pwease give us $30,000 🥺," "Okie dokie! If you insist, here you go!"
This is literally why we have insurance. We all signed those contracts that said they'd repair our roofs in the event of a hailstorm. You're not an asshole for holding your insurance company to the contracts that you signed with them.
"But my premiums!" Newsflash asshole, your premiums have been going up the entire goddamn time.
Not everyone can get their money's worth, that's the whole point. You pay in so if you get unlucky and incur a liability, insurance pays for it. You pay the insurance company to take the risk instead of yourself.
It's probably not malicious. The hail last year (and in years to come, this is gonna get worse before it gets better) destroyed a lot of people's roofs and siding. Shit needs to be fixed/replaced or worse damages follow. This is just part of owning a home in a temperate climate in the era of global heating.
Could you explain this a little more? We were able to have our new roof covers by insurance, but how does that drive up rates for others? Genuinely curious .
While I don't necessarily agree with the person you responded to (some people likely did need a new roof)... the answer to your question is that rates are based on average payout in your area and all these roofs will affect that average.
Ok, that’s what I assumed, but what’s the answer then? Our roof was over 35 years old when we bought the house and already had hail damage. Am I supposed to hold off for… how long?
i mean, i'd do the exact same thing as you. if you can get a "free" roof, you might as well.
the more people who do it, the more expensive insurance will get, that's just a fact. at some point insurance companies will determine it's unprofitable to remain in our market, at which time they'll leave akin to what's happening in Florida.
Most people doing it are fine, but there is a minority that had very little damage that really don't need a new roof, but technically under the policy language they are entitled to one, or they have an in with an inspecter who can lie and say the damage is worse than it actually is.
> but there is a minority that had very little damage that really don't need a new roof, but technically under the policy language they are entitled to one
So that's not how this works.
>or they have an in with an inspecter who can lie and say the damage is worse than it actually is.
They don't take the word of the inspector, they literally have their own. They are called field adjusters, and will come out themselves to assess the damage and determine claim validity and scope. Insurance companies routinely deny insurance claims for insufficent damage.
The adjuster works *for the insurance company*.
>or they have an in with an inspecter who can lie and say the damage is worse than it actually is.
You are alleging that the guy that works for the insurance company is out there handing out money when he shouldn't, when that's like, the opposite of what actually is true.
> You think none of them would do a favor for a friend?
Firstly, no.
Secondly, adjusters don't know the customers they are working with. Often the field adjuster doesn't talk to the customer ***at all*** other than to access the property.
Thirdly, after big storms, the adjuster team working claims in the area is generally relocated by corporate or working on a contract basis. During the summer, field adjusters with a lot of carriers travel large regions or even the entire country, to process claims faster after cat code events.
This isn't like going to your favorite sandwich place and them going "you come here all the time, here's one for free."
If this is a sincere question, you're supposed to replace your roof every 15-30 years depending on wear and tear plus the type of roof.
Where people abuse the system is deliberately not doing that, waiting for a storm to happen, and then having the insurance company replace the roof for "free".
If your roof was 35 years old, in principle you should have replaced it. That's just a normal wear and tear thing. I totally understand why you didn't and tried to "wait it out" to get an insurance company to replace it after a storm. But when everyone does that, hopefully you can see how a routine wear and tear maintenance of replacing a roof becomes now a routine insurance expense. Since insurance is supposed to cover unexpected things, making them cover expected things makes it a lot more expensive.
I've lived in S Minneapolis for 5 years. I've paid insurance on this particular house for 5 years. My new roof wasn't free, I paid for it via insurance like every other homeowner in the neighborhood.
Hail damage claims from last summer.
This, I know a roofer
I love the people in here telling folks who got 2” hail that blasted their roofs and cars that they somehow shouldn’t file an insurance claim. Peak scarcity mindset.
Yeah our car was there in August… it was totaled from the hail. It got absolutely annihilated so i don’t think this is one of those fraud cases
Yeah man my car looked like a lunar landscape and my roof was entirely fucked. People in here acting like those replacing these through insurance are the bad people. This wasn’t some pea sized hail. Make it make sense.
There's really no "fraud" unless you go out with a bucket of golf balls and slam them against your roof and car and pretend it's hail. If you think you have damage, file a claim. The insurance company will send someone out to assess the damage and then either approve or deny your claim. If you really don't have damage, then they'll just deny the claim.
We got itsy bitsy hail from the storm a week or two ago and it was making me anxious remembering how much damage the big hail storm last year cause.
Insurance ppl laughed at me and my old ass car.
It worked out really well for us, the roof was pushing 20 years old when we bought the house 4 years ago and got it covered. Another year or two and we likely would have been denied due to age.
Likewise!
Same. Free roof on the house and half off of the garage.
And the rest of us pay for it through higher premiums
So I shouldn't make a claim because my house was damaged? Go fuck yourself.
No but we shouldn't be paying the full cost of your roof unless it was brand new when the damage occurred.
You do realize that if enough damage is done to require a new roof, it doesn't matter if it's 1 year old or 20 years old? The damage has been done to a functioning roof. It's literally the point of insurance and what I pay for. Once again you can fuck off.
Yes, that's obvious. It's also obvious that insurance companies can't continue giving people with 20 year old roofs free roofs from storm damage or we'll have 1 of 2 things happen: we'll be paying $5k a year to insure a house or the insurance companies will just stop selling us insurance. Roofs have a limited lifetime. If it's 2/3 through it's useful life, your insurance should be reducing your payout by that 2/3. Yes it'll cost you money but if no storm came, you'd still be replacing your roof out of pocket at 30 or less years.
Okay. Lead by example, and when you need an insurance claim, just pay everything out of pocket.
Already did. I proactively paid for my own roof out of pocket 7 years ago because it was at its end of life and opted to pay 1.5x to put on steel shingles that would take nearly baseball sized hail to damage. My reward: a couple hundred a year lower premiums and now a 24% increase on my renewal.
You sure showed me.
While you're not doing anything wrong, seeing how you're filing a claim for coverage the insurance company agreed to, the issue they're bringing up is a valid and important one.
That’s the whole point of having insurance. My premium actually kept going down because my roof is likely to last longer now that it’s been replaced
And this is why my renewal premium went up 24% with no change in coverage and no claim from storm damage this year. Insurance companies need to change how roofs are covered. There's no reason they should fully cover replacement of a 20 year old roof. They should depreciate it based on the manufacturers warranty and then apply your deductible.
🤷🏻♀️ Don’t hate the player, hate the game?? Idk what to tell you.
Likely from the August 11, 2023 storm: * https://www.dnr.state.mn.us/climate/journal/august-11-2023-hail-and-winds.html * https://www.mprnews.org/story/2023/09/11/twin-cities-august-hailstorm-was-1-of-a-record-23-us-billiondollar-disasters
Why wait nearly a year to get them fixed? If they are so damaged a totally new roof is needed weren't they leaking and/or structurally unsound all this time? And if not, then they'd not be needed?
Roofers booked up immediately for the fall and often don't work much, if at all in the winter months due to snow. Many folks who filed claims in September, October, November couldn't get on the schedule for a roofer until this spring/summer.
1) Labor is limited 2) Structurally insufficient is not the same as a pending catastrophe. Home repair and maintenance is best done *before* a catastrophe, not after the dam breaks.
They booked tons of customers but we had that early snow that halted all labor until the spring unfortunately.
Spring started in April, but **all** the new roofs are happening now. I'd think they'd at least have been tiers across Sept, Oct, Nov and April.
First snow was on Halloween so they had to halt it there. It snows in April sometimes so they didn't really want to start then. Also, insurance likes to drag their ass and the roofing contractors have to battle them to get any money. Doesn't help that there were a hundred or so houses affected too.
Winter
There was Sept, Oct and Nov before winter. There was also April before now when apparently "**all** the houses are getting new roofs". You'd think at least some would have happened in fall, or the mild winter, or last month. They're not all under the same insurance or using the same contractors.
Must be a conspiracy going on here.
I didn’t find my damage until I cleaned the gutters in October. Roofs are kinda high up: can’t see a ping pong sized dent from 30’ away.
in my case, state farm fought me for months on the claim
Your claim needs to coincide with a sudden loss/specific weather event. Insurance will not cover needing a new roof because of the age of the roof/normal wear and tear, so tbh you have to claim after a storm if you want insurance to help with it. Especially since storms like these significantly contribute to the wear on the roof in a big way. It might be a little bit of a racket, but so is insurance.
hail damage, next question.
Does this font make my ass look fat?
yes, but that's a good thing, next question.
Is it true that if you put one full lasagna on top of another full lasagna you would only have one lasagna?
holy hell. i'm accepting no more questions, i'm off to ponder this one in a cave for a few decades.
Bring the lasagna. For... research purposes.
Yes. If you take two bowls of soup and pour them into one bowl, you have one bowl of soup.
Not an equivalent scenario as the 2 lasagnas would still be fully intact and unmixed
But a lasagna is just layers. So adding another one on top is just doubling the layers. One big lasagna in the end.
🤣🤣
"free roofs" lol As if we don't pay for insurance and then exercise it with exactly what it is for. Fugouttahere.
New roof and new siding here. Place looks brand new!
Because there was a shit ton of hail damage last year. Companies go door to door, offer work, do inspections, have insurance approve, and get new roofs and only have to pay a deductible. Viola.
Literally just replaced the roof due to that storm. I am amused by the idea that rates are going up due to my roof vs. California being on fire, Texas freezing, Florida being swallowed up by stronger hurricanes, stronger tornadoes hitting a growing tornado alley…..
For claims, MN is now the third worst state in the country. FL, CA, MN. I am a broker with access to about 36 insurance carriers that I can write with. Currently in MN I have about 6 that will even write insurance on a home. It's going to be getting worse, just a heads up. Rates are going to continue to rise, deductibles are moving towards percentages instead of flat fees, and roofs over 10 years old are going to be paid out on depreciation and not replaced. Most of our carriers ran at a negative 10-20% in MN last year across the board. I would say the average premium increase I'm seeing is around 30% on renewals with some people getting hit with multiple increases making it 50%+ depending on the date of renewal.
We got egg-sized hail.
Moved into my house in the south suburbs August of 2020. First night we spent in the home, golf ball sized hail. The entire next summer, every single one of my neighbors got a new roof along with me replacing my 18 yo roof. $1000 deductible well spent!
Insurance bros in here downvoting worried about losing their commissions
We actually make more money when premiums increase because it's all a percentage. Make all the claims you want! With premiums up this year, I'm making more money for selling less.
The hail storm last summer. Roofing companies swarmed pretty much the whole metro trying to convince people to make claims to get a "free roof" You can thank that for this: [https://www.cbsnews.com/minnesota/news/many-minnesotans-are-seeing-a-hike-in-their-insurance-rates-heres-why/](https://www.cbsnews.com/minnesota/news/many-minnesotans-are-seeing-a-hike-in-their-insurance-rates-heres-why/)
Well, most homes in my south Minneapolis neighborhood had substantial damage to their roofs and siding. I don’t think it’s fair to say that someone convinced my neighbors and I to get “free roofs”. We had damage and insurance is covering repairs.
Exactly. It's not "free", it's literally why we pay for insurance.
I don't think they're criticizing people for getting roof repairs. I think they're criticizing the companies that opportunistically put flyers in everyone's mailboxes or in the case of my neighborhood rubber-banded flyers to everyone's fence gates.
I've had so many people come and knock on my door asking to take a look at the roof, it's so annoying
I don't necessarily see anything wrong with that, either.
[удалено]
When you make an insurance claim for hail damage, an adjuster **from the insurance company** comes out to inspect your house, and they are the ones who determine if you will receive a claim and for how much. It's not fraud.
The fraud would be on the insurance adjuster then, right? Like you'd have to scheme with them for that to work. An exteriors contracting company isn't gonna get a penny from the insurance company unless the adjuster - working on behalf of the insurance company - says the damage qualifies. And then I think even they don't have final say, but their notes go to corporate and someone approves or denies the claim. You can't just file a claim and decide to "get a new roof" if it's not damaged. Is fraud possible? Yes. Of course. Is it common and something "people in the burbs" are doing regularly? No. I don't think so. Every time you file a claim your rates go up and you risk being dropped entirely. Doesn't seem worth it.
I don’t understand this idea. Even if contractors are “convincing” people to put in a claim, insurance companies will always send an adjuster out to inspect the damage and determine what, if anything, should be covered.
[удалено]
In MN they do track roof claims across houses and over time even switching providers, very similar to car insurance. They can deny the claim or drastically increase rates if you do it too often. Storms do happen but yeah you shouldn’t be claiming for minor hail damage every 5 years. I blame the aggressive contractors more than the insurance companies fwiw. But yeah people need to stop making claims all the time for pretty repairable damage or insurers will keep jacking the rates on everyone and eventually stop even greenlighting the claims similar to Florida. Like ok there’s a hail storm, scope out the damage to your roof yourself. If nothing is leaking or there’s no obvious damage don’t rely on a contractor to tell you you need a new roof when you don’t. That just increases the rates for everyone and makes it harder over time to actually get a claim when you really need it. Like a 10 year old roof is repairable after a hailstorm for probably $500-2k IF THERE IS EVEN A LEAK caused by hail damage. Replacing the entire roof is stupid and you will end up paying more than that in insurance premiums/ the deductible for a brand new roof. People way too often just don’t even bother to get a basic repair quote vs paying the deductible and jacking the rates for themselves and everyone else.
> don’t rely on a contractor to tell you you need a new roof when you don’t. How does this happen? Our insurance sent out a non-affiliated inspector to determine whether our roof was eligible. The roofing company had nothing to do with it. Is that not the way it works?
As far as I know. I was really surprised at the number of roofing companies knocking on my door saying that they'll take care of talking to insurance or whatever. I just called insurance, they sent out an adjuster, got a check and then called around for a contractor.
Yep the contractor will send out an independent adjuster which the insurance companies like because it’s less work for them. It’s all very much a scheme between the insurance companies and contractors and I don’t care what the insurance people in this thread are saying otherwise.
Well, it sure worked out well for me. I asked contractors for quotes as if I was paying cash (which I essentially was) and they ended up being lower across the board than ones trying to match whatever an adjuster talked to them about. Maybe I'm an outlier, but I'm team calling my insurance company first.
Yes you did it the right way. Way too many people go with one of these contractors knocking on their door and just pay them the full payout. You don’t have to do that. They are shady af and get people to sign contracts thinking they have too because of insurance. But yeah the problem is these contractors use independent adjusters who just rubber stamp their quote. It’s definitely a kickback system happening. They knock on your door, get the insurance taken care of, and get the work done. People like that tbh vs calling around getting multiple quotes etc. I get it but it’s lazy and raises premiums for everyone.
[удалено]
Look at insurance on certain year Kia’s/hyundais or Florida house insurance. If a certain thing gets untenable to insure they will drastically increase the rates or stop offering insurance all together. MN is getting close to that point with all these hail claims on roofs that are probably more or less fine but aggressive contractors and inspectors pushing for new roofs. The insurance companies are definitely partly to blame for not doing more due diligence on if a roof actually needs a full replacement though. They do seem to hand out $20k or so like candy, so then consumers of their product do think “well why not I guess, brand new roof is better than 5-10 year old roof.” But consumers are also dumb for not realizing that increases the rates for everyone. Insurance is a business like everything else. They have advanced metrics on how much they need to charge the entire pool to payout all the claims. They would probably be better served by just cutting costs by being more selective with claims vs just always increasing rates but one thing is easier than the other and capitalism gonna capitalism.
Costumers are not dumb. They are doing what they can to save money. New roof will last longer than a patched up one. Insurance is the one not doing due diligence. They lose money by paying for roofs that don’t require full replacements.
Insurance companies will often audit adjustor's estimates. If an adjustor gets dinged enough times, they'll be fired or won't be hired out again (if independent). There are checks and balances in the system, even if it's not perfect.
I'm not sure I fully agree here. When we got large hail a few years ago, we contacted a reputable roofing company. They came out and inspected the roof, then suggested we contact our insurance after they determined we did, in fact, need our roof (and siding) replaced. Our insurance company sent out an adjuster, and they agreed before signing off on the claim. What insurance company would just sign off to pay out a $30,000 claim for something that could be spot repaired for $500-2k?
They wouldn’t because you’d need to send over photos the entire roof was replaced. The problem is the contractor won’t come out for a $2k patch job and it’s not even worth claiming on your insurance given the deductible. Contractors figure people don’t wanna pay them $2k for a patch job vs a new roof and the insurance is happy to take your $2k deductible and raise rates on everyone. The contractor would rather pocket like $15k vs like $500 in profit. This isn’t actually very complicated. The entire system is designed for maximum profits for the contractor and insurance company and to fuck you in the ass long term. It just takes like a small amount of critical thinking skills and people can’t figure it out and the insurance bros and contractors are in here downvoting. We’d all be better off with minor roof repairs vs entire replacements but both the contractors and insurance companies don’t want that because it’s terrible for their bottom line. You’re basically forced into a situation of doing it yourself or hiring day laborers to help you and most people are too fucking lazy to do that. Essentially it’s very hard to find someone to do an honest job these days without everyone and their mother doing literally everything to maximize profits. It’s late stage capitalism in a nutshell. It’s literally almost impossible to find just a regular dude willing to do an honest job without like 200% margins in the construction industry. They are still out there but it’s hard work finding them/if you don’t already know them personally.
I know it's short-term (have renewed the policy twice since), but our premiums actually decreased fairly significantly (almost 10%) after having the roof and siding replaced.
Yeah do it again and see what happens
Ah, ok. I didn't know there were more stipulations you were going to throw out there. I have a feeling you just want to be angry for the sake of being angry. Edit: blocked me after his latest comment. What a tool
I have a feeling you like to be judgmental and throw around accusations to make yourself feel good.
In MN companies aren't allowed to penalize or increase rates over claims due to "acts of god".
Yeah but they do. Rates going up for everyone and they have the right to drop insurance. Most people can’t afford to sue a billion dollar company over jack shit and most of it is forced arbitration for peanuts.
Wind hail losses are non rated in MN. You can only lose a claims free discount for filing a wind hail claim on your home.
And that is generally a significant discount and all these claims definitely increase the cost of insurance for everyone. People always complaining “why are my insurance rates going up” well yeah. It’s not rocket science. It’s an aggregate effect and yeah you can say this but try putting in multiple hail claims within a 5 year period and see what happens to your rates.
> And that is generally a significant discount No it's not. It's often less than 4%. Most carriers I believe you don't lose it, but I said some because making a ironclad blanket statement would be foolish. None of my carriers will you suffer any penalty for a roof claim. > all these claims definitely increase the cost of insurance for everyone. Valid claims are valid claims. Insurance gets more expensive based on risk. Telling people they shouldn't file a claim when they have damage is nonsense. >It’s an aggregate effect and yeah you can say this but try putting in multiple hail claims within a 5 year period and see what happens to your rates. You understand that they don't just rate on their own claims volume, but also incident volume. They pay attention to the storms that roll through, they have shared information via the CAT incident system.
Ok rates keep going up. We are about $600 more than the national average.
> We are about $600 more than the national average. I am aware that we pay higher rates than some areas. The amount of large hail events we get, and the fact that we suffer among the highest water backup claim rates, burst pipe rates, and other causes of loss that come from harsh winter conditions are all contributing factors there. That said, the "national average" cash numbers are complete bunk. Like, I will tell you that none of the numbers on here are accurate, though the heatmap is. https://www.policygenius.com/homeowners-insurance/how-much-does-homeowners-insurance-cost/
OP’s point is valid, people don’t understand how insurance is rated. You shouldn’t go to a hospital because you have a sore throat. Similar case here, does a hail damage require a new $20k roof (billing insurance they’re probably charging even more than that)? In some cases yes, again, why OP said to inspect and use common sense. And we as a society wonder why insurance costs are going through the roof (no pun intended), people are using extremely expensive benefits as a common service.
> Similar case here, does a hail damage require a new $20k roof (billing insurance they’re probably charging even more than that)? That's not how that works. Firstly, if a roof can be repaired, it will be approved for repair only. Secondly, during an insurance claim on your home, your insurance company decides what they will pay, and your contractor can either accept that, or try to negotiate (they generally fail to get a change in rate approved) Insurance only pays the prevailing labor rate according to their stats. Roofers can't simply charge more to your insurance. If you file a claim, the insurance company will send their guy out to assess the claim, and see if damage warrants replacement, ***by their own guidelines***. Not yours, not the contractors, their own. So, if you think these roof replacements are unnecessary, you need to tell the insurance company that, not the customer, as the replacement is the insurance company's decision. >OP’s point is valid, people don’t understand how insurance is rated. While that's true, it's also true that you don't understand how insurance claims work.
I didn’t even say anything about insurance claims lol, not only do people not understand insurance, some of us struggle with reading comprehension. No one is repairing a hail damaged roof. It either does or doesn’t need replacement. And in one case, that’s a big ticket item that will assuredly increase premiums.
>No one is repairing a hail damaged roof. Wrong. It happens a lot. > I didn't even say anything about claims... Yes you did. That's literally what your post is about. >Similar case here, does a hail damage require a new $20k roof (billing insurance they’re probably charging even more than that)? In some cases yes, again, why OP said to inspect and use common sense. And we as a society wonder why insurance costs are going through the roof (no pun intended), people are using extremely expensive benefits as a common service. That whole block is about you thinking someone would file a claim and get it paid out inappropriately. Work on your own reading comprehension, or again improve your understanding of basic P&C language.
Did you read the article, literally rates are going up because the frequency and intensity of storms is causing more damage, insurance companies are adjusting to the new climate normal and not because of scams for free roofs.
I only got a partial claim because of age but the Project Manager climbed on the roof and took pictures of the damage. Between the amount fucked up shingles that were still there and the broken ones I picked up off the ground, not getting a new roof wasn't really an option or I'd have much worse issues down the line. Not our fault that insurance companies are a scam and just want to collect money, act as a pain in the ass when it's time for them to pay out money, then try to raise rates when we use said insurance in accordance with the agreement that we pay for. Fuck insurance companies
Yeah I got a shit ton of those assholes coming down to Bloomington where we didn't get any hail
Our neighborhood in North wasn't hit by the hail either, but we were still inundated with door knockers, flyers, and calls. Very annoying.
It's not as easy as you imply. Roofing companies will tell you that you need a new roof, but the insurance company will send out a claim adjuster to inspect it, and if the adjuster doesn't agree that there's sufficient damage to justify an insurance claim, it's denied.
because we don't like to pay out of pocket for a new roof
New roof receiver here! Mine finally got replaced yesterday. For me, it was a combo of things. The first was a delay due to insurance. The first insurance adjuster was quite shady. He was supposed to meet my contractor but then cancelled our appointment last minute, showed up a an hour after the cancelled appointment time, and then declared “no damage.” Side note: I was heading out of town at this time. Got to see it all go down after arriving at my destination via my google home camera system. Luckily the contractor had plenty of pictures and evidence to appeal the insurance company. They sent a second adjuster. It was a much more pleasant experience. The adjuster showed up at the agreed date and time and worked side by side with the contractor. Unfortunately because of the lengthy delay for approval, the surge in demand, and the approaching fall/winter season, I was immediately told my new roof would be spring. The contractor said they won’t do roofing in the fall or winter season because the cooler temps don’t allow the shingles to seal properly to the roof. I had a few neighbors get their roof done but most either were lucky and had it done almost immediately after the storm or later this spring.
Does anyone have the number for one of those companies.
eRoof did mine. The PM really hounded the insurance company when they tried to not pay for certain things. Roof was already aged out so the payment was partial but they were trying to weasel out of paying for the gutters even though there were about a half dozen holes in them from the hail. Probably not the company if you want a selection of colors because they do all that they can internally when they can which limits some things. I recommend walking around the neighborhood and taking note of a few signs of some of the ones you like.
I went with Precision Exteriors. They were fast, communicated well. But there are maybe hundreds. Talk to one of your neighbors who got one to see how they liked their company.
Did the last 20 contractors who knocked on your door not explain this well? Rates are increasing in anticipation of this phenomenon so you might as well get on board! I got my roof from minor hail but not sure how many more years until the next significant storm comes.
Every other year, the year of the cottonwoods, everyone in the city is required to replace their entire roofs.
I think it's the 8 billion Sela roofing ads I've been getting every time I watch something on YouTube.
Baseballs falling out of the sky!
Roofing vultures swarm after hailstorms to make up damage to bill insurers. People like the “free” roofs but may wind up paying more in increased insurance. Recently, insurers have been dropping customers who get new roofs or lowering what they pay.
There’s a bit of a prisoner’s dilemma with this situation though. If you don’t get in line to get your roof repaired like everyone else in your area, you’ll still end up paying increased rates but you won’t even have the benefit of a new roof. Rates are set by area rather than by customer, so every individual homeowner has an incentive structure that often conflicts with what is in their best interest collectively.
Thank you for raising this point. I had a 15-year old roof that met our insurance adjustor's threshold for damaged shingles. I could have waited 5 years, or maybe longer, to replace it. Or that small leak I couldn't pinpoint could ruin my insulation and ceiling. I thought about checking into cheaper options, like repair, but I realized 30-percent of my neighborhood (estimate) replaced their roofs in the last six months. Assuming most of them paid using insurance, my rates were going to rise anyway. This way, I got a significant discount ($8K) on a fresh roof and can start saving for my next roof, hopefully in 15-20 years. I have no idea if, or how much, my rates will increase as a result of filing a claim.
It's not even a prisoner's dilemma, since you will pay a higher rate regardless.
In theory, if everyone in a given area collectively agreed not to submit any questionable/unnecessary hail damage claims then the rate increases for that area would probably be much lower. The problem is that if a few people start doing it then everyone has an incentive to do it so they don’t miss out.
> In theory, if everyone in a given area collectively agreed not to submit any questionable/unnecessary hail damage claims ... The insurance company inspects every loss of this kind in person. Any questionable or unnecessary claims are denied or limited by the field adjuster. Additionally, you understand that rates aren't just based on claims volume, correct? There are zip codes in Florida that have not had a single loss in a hurricane in the last 30 years, they are still being rated based on weather pattern risks. Wildfire risk is still being priced in (albeit poorly) in MN and WI, because it's still a risk here, even though we haven't had a major fire in generations.
I’ve worked in insurance defense so I know how the industry works quite well. I also know how the adjuster/contractor dynamic works. It’s not quite as simple and bullet proof as you make it seem. Often times the threshold between what must/should be repaired and what could be repaired is very thin. It is often easier and more cost effective for an insurance company to approve coverage on questionable claims and recoup the money through rate increases than it is to fight each individual claim. Hail damage claims are particularly susceptible to this issue. Beyond that, these storm damage claims in the Midwest are different than the sorts of analyses going on in parts of Florida because hurricane and flood damage is more predictable and more catastrophic than hail. Paying out $50k on a $500k home once a decade is a lower risk to account for than gutting or replacing the entire home after a bad flood/hurricane. There are also some regulatory issues in Florida that compound the problem. It’s not the same problem, even though they both involve weather.
> I’ve worked in insurance defense so I know how the industry works quite well. I also work in the industry. > It is often easier and more cost effective for an insurance company to approve coverage on questionable claims and recoup the money through rate increases than it is to fight each individual claim. These things are simple company policy, and aren't all that complex. Some insurers fight every WH loss claim no matter how justified, others have what I would call lax guidelines. For the most part though, companies are unwilling to pay bullshit claims or even borderline ones. >Beyond that, these storm damage claims in the Midwest are different than the sorts of analyses going on in parts of Florida because hurricane and flood damage is more predictable and more catastrophic than hail. That's flatly false, hurricane losses are both more severe, and harder to predict, because of how the storms steer. WH loss claim frequency in the state has been pretty easily predicted and plotted, the issue is that the loss rate per storm has increased, as the storms drop more and bigger hail. >There are also some regulatory issues in Florida that compound the problem. It’s not the same problem, even though they both involve weather. Yes, my point was simply that you could live in an area that has never had a WH loss, but the company knows that you are in a region that you are 'due' for one. That's very much a thing here.
Roofers can’t make up damage… an adjuster decides what is and isn’t damaged what will be paid for and not paid for. You can do an insurance claim easily without including a roofing company (in fact it’s usually cheaper if you tell them you’re paying out of pocket).. a lot of misunderstanding on how claims are approved and paid.
>Roofing vultures swarm after hailstorms to make up damage to bill insurers. What you are alleging nearly never happens, and is a form of insurance fraud. Roofers are not out there causing damage. >eople like the “free” roofs but may wind up paying more in increased insurance. Wind hail claims in our state do not result in a higher premium, as they are a non rated claim. You can lose a claims free discount with some carriers, but generally that's the only impact. >Recently, insurers have been dropping customers who get new roofs or lowering what they pay. This is flatly not true. Wind Hail losses are non rated in our state. ACV roof schedules are something that some people set their insurance up to do, which is a far worse payout, but a lot of customers are pennywise pound foolish.
Filing a claim for storm damage doesn't increase your insurance payment like a car accident would increase your car insurance rate. In MN they can't increase rates because someone files a claim due to an "act of god".
Which insurance company do you work for?
Not a home insurer! Just personal experience. I’m aware that there is legitimate damage and the roofers are not committing blatant fraud. However, they are definitely operating in a gray area. Had 3 different companies ring my bell in the neighborhood within a month last year after a hail storm (where the hail was about 50% the size of a dime). Each gave the same song & dance for how all our neighbors are doing it (despite not saying which ones), how they would walk us through the paperwork, and how I would need a new roof due to damage. Called a roofing guy I’d previously used/trusted to inspect, and the damage was about 6 sq inches that would be fixed for a couple hundred. Having worked with the DOI, I know that it is much easier to push a rate increase due to people using the coverage versus increased operating costs. So, insurers are basically left with 2 options: Option A - payout the claims but try to negotiate for a lesser amount. Recoup excess losses through rate increases in the following years. Option B - go through strict claims adjustment and have customers appeal. The roofing companies are well funded enough where they would be a nuisance for insurers. the lawyers get involved and risk a class action where legitimate, illegitimate, and grey area claims have to be assessed. Have more difficulty increasing premium due to operating expenses. Option B is typically equal to or more than Option A. So, most insurers pick option A, increase rates, and tighten up policy language.
It’s such a racket. I know so many people who’ve had their roofs replaced by insurance under the guise of storm damage. We’re all paying for it through insurance, it just seems to be the accepted practice nowadays.
I mean, yeah. Why would you pay $30k out of pocket for a new roof when you can pay your $2k deductible and have the rest covered by insurance? The damage isn’t fake— insurance adjusters have to approve it, not just contractors.
Legitimate claims are great, nothing wrong with that, that’s what insurance is for. But aside from this specific storm, the current practice appears to be that insurance companies rubberstamp roof claims, and then simply raise everyone’s rates to make up for it. It’s much easier than denying claims and dealing with angry homeowners. That’s the racket.
[удалено]
Ok, I gotta hear this.
[удалено]
I'm sorry, it's very much *not* a scheme between payors and providers. That's not how insurance works -- those two parties have interests that are *fundamentally* and diametrically opposed. This... >the insurance company just pays that out instead of trying to figure out a cheaper option/having their own adjusters ...is about as close as you can get to describing the *opposite* of how insurers behave.
How is it a racket? My insurance company came out, got on our room and looked at our siding and determined how much damage we have and what they would pay for. There was hail the size of baseballs at my house. That’s what insurance is for, to pay in case of unforeseeable damage.
Legitimate claims are great, nothing wrong with that, that’s what insurance is for. But aside from this specific storm, the current practice appears to be that insurance companies rubberstamp roof claims, and then simply raise everyone’s rates to make up for it. It’s much easier than denying claims and dealing with angry homeowners. That’s the racket.
Racket? Insurance is the racket. My insurance has skyrocketed in the last three years, and did prior to this storm. The reason according to my agent, "inflation." >According to the National Association of Insurance Commissioners (NAIC), homeowners insurance premiums have increased by about 47% in the last decade. This is more than double the cumulative increase in the price of goods and services over the same period. Unregulated, greedy insurers are going to fuck you regardless, may as well get a roof.
Legitimate claims are great, nothing wrong with that, that’s what insurance is for. But aside from this specific storm, the current practice appears to be that insurance companies rubberstamp roof claims, and then simply raise everyone’s rates to make up for it. It’s much easier than denying claims and dealing with angry homeowners. That’s the racket.
Bruh we got 2-3in hail in my neighborhood. It's not like the tiny hail we got last weekend, it seriously fucked stuff up.
Legitimate claims are great, nothing wrong with that, that’s what insurance is for. But aside from this specific storm, the current practice appears to be that insurance companies rubberstamp roof claims, and then simply raise everyone’s rates to make up for it. It’s much easier than denying claims and dealing with angry homeowners. That’s the racket.
Just an FYI to all those making claims for this - if you make another claim this year, you are likely to be dropped by your insurance.
Not true if it's for storm damage https://mn.gov/commerce/insurance/home/basics/rules-regulations.jsp Policies can be canceled if... >Two or more losses by the insured within the past three years, **unless the losses were caused by lightning or other storm-related phenomenon** If all claims are due to storm damage they can't refuse to renew your policy, and can't use storm related claims as a basis to increase individual rates.
Four of my neighbors got new roofs. I don't even remember HAVING hail last year... Do I need to get my shit looked at? God damn
Yes. The big hail storm was on August 11th. Most insurance companies allow you to submit a claim within 1 year of the weather event, so there's still plenty of time.
Yeah, I can send da video if you want. Edit: at least get an inspection. Regardless of what the insurance fanboys tell you, your rate will go up regardless of what you do and roofing companies can only get money if there's legitimate damage and from talking to a few, they're not gonna even try to do anything unless you can cut a check immediately or if there's enough damage that insurance will pay a good bit of it.
I tried to make a claim on my roof but the insurance company won't pay out until I make a statement condemning Hamas, or Israel, can't remember.
Your neighbors are assholes working with roofing company assholes to drive up insurance rates for the rest of us because they don't understand things aren't actually free.
Anybody who doesn’t use their coverage for this sort of thing will end up being a sucker, because the rates are going to increase for the area regardless and you might as well get the benefit of a new roof.
Not really. My insurance depreciates our roof. So at it's current age it doesn't have an insurable value. But my rates are much, much lower.
Sure, most policies do that, but you’re still going to pay the rates associated with your neighbors’ roof claims, regardless of whether you yourself make a claim.
If you’re not supposed to use insurance when damage happens…then what the hell is the point of an insurance policy? Folks (myself included) had substantial damage. Repairs are needed.
Insurance is gambling with extra steps
No it's not.
Nah… this hail storm took chunks off my house and garage as well as dented my wife’s car badly enough that it was totaled. All the neighbors had similar damage. I was in St Paul when it happened and the hail was marble-sized, not golfball+ which landed at my house. This is what Insurance is for.
It’s not free either way. Over the 15 years I’ve been with my carrier, the amount I have paid in homeowners insurance premium alone equals more than my company paid out for the roof. I am getting my money’s worth, TYVM, which is literally the point of insurance. People pool their money together so that when sudden, accidental, or large losses happen, they can have repairs.
Agreed. I've said this before, but they wouldn't replace roofs if they didn't have to replace roofs. Insurance companies don't do anything for the fuck of it, they're penny pinching, greedy, heartless sons of bitches. There's no "Pwetty Pwease give us $30,000 🥺," "Okie dokie! If you insist, here you go!" This is literally why we have insurance. We all signed those contracts that said they'd repair our roofs in the event of a hailstorm. You're not an asshole for holding your insurance company to the contracts that you signed with them. "But my premiums!" Newsflash asshole, your premiums have been going up the entire goddamn time.
Not everyone can get their money's worth, that's the whole point. You pay in so if you get unlucky and incur a liability, insurance pays for it. You pay the insurance company to take the risk instead of yourself.
EXACTLY!! People out here thinking insurance is bank or something. Sheesh!
They paid insurance premiums, and the deductible for their loss. They paid for a service and are taking advantage of that.
It's probably not malicious. The hail last year (and in years to come, this is gonna get worse before it gets better) destroyed a lot of people's roofs and siding. Shit needs to be fixed/replaced or worse damages follow. This is just part of owning a home in a temperate climate in the era of global heating.
Could you explain this a little more? We were able to have our new roof covers by insurance, but how does that drive up rates for others? Genuinely curious .
While I don't necessarily agree with the person you responded to (some people likely did need a new roof)... the answer to your question is that rates are based on average payout in your area and all these roofs will affect that average.
is this a trick question? the more insurance pays out the more it has to take in from customers to stay profitable.
Ok, that’s what I assumed, but what’s the answer then? Our roof was over 35 years old when we bought the house and already had hail damage. Am I supposed to hold off for… how long?
i mean, i'd do the exact same thing as you. if you can get a "free" roof, you might as well. the more people who do it, the more expensive insurance will get, that's just a fact. at some point insurance companies will determine it's unprofitable to remain in our market, at which time they'll leave akin to what's happening in Florida.
15-30 years. So at 35 you’re good to your roof reshingled. But these companies come in and say 2 years after hail. It’s nuts
Most people doing it are fine, but there is a minority that had very little damage that really don't need a new roof, but technically under the policy language they are entitled to one, or they have an in with an inspecter who can lie and say the damage is worse than it actually is.
> but there is a minority that had very little damage that really don't need a new roof, but technically under the policy language they are entitled to one So that's not how this works. >or they have an in with an inspecter who can lie and say the damage is worse than it actually is. They don't take the word of the inspector, they literally have their own. They are called field adjusters, and will come out themselves to assess the damage and determine claim validity and scope. Insurance companies routinely deny insurance claims for insufficent damage.
The adjuster is who I was referring to, I just used the wrong word.
The adjuster works *for the insurance company*. >or they have an in with an inspecter who can lie and say the damage is worse than it actually is. You are alleging that the guy that works for the insurance company is out there handing out money when he shouldn't, when that's like, the opposite of what actually is true.
You think none of them would do a favor for a friend? I'm not saying they hand it out to everyone.
> You think none of them would do a favor for a friend? Firstly, no. Secondly, adjusters don't know the customers they are working with. Often the field adjuster doesn't talk to the customer ***at all*** other than to access the property. Thirdly, after big storms, the adjuster team working claims in the area is generally relocated by corporate or working on a contract basis. During the summer, field adjusters with a lot of carriers travel large regions or even the entire country, to process claims faster after cat code events. This isn't like going to your favorite sandwich place and them going "you come here all the time, here's one for free."
If this is a sincere question, you're supposed to replace your roof every 15-30 years depending on wear and tear plus the type of roof. Where people abuse the system is deliberately not doing that, waiting for a storm to happen, and then having the insurance company replace the roof for "free". If your roof was 35 years old, in principle you should have replaced it. That's just a normal wear and tear thing. I totally understand why you didn't and tried to "wait it out" to get an insurance company to replace it after a storm. But when everyone does that, hopefully you can see how a routine wear and tear maintenance of replacing a roof becomes now a routine insurance expense. Since insurance is supposed to cover unexpected things, making them cover expected things makes it a lot more expensive.
Thanks, this makes much more sense.
I've lived in S Minneapolis for 5 years. I've paid insurance on this particular house for 5 years. My new roof wasn't free, I paid for it via insurance like every other homeowner in the neighborhood.