Farmers Insurance Problems


#1

In the past six months, Farmers has been denying wind damage claims that we see consistently getting approved by other carriers for homes with similar or less damage. We had one situation last week where they approved repair of 64 individual shingles on what we felt was a non-repairable roof. There were leaks in 3 or 4 interior rooms which they agreed to pay for. What was even more odd was the Farmers’ Adjuster tore off around 10 shingles which led us and the Homeowner to believe they were going to total the roof.

Our experience with Farmers is with multiple Adjusters and two different states.

Was wondering if anyone else has had similar experience with this company and had any idea(s) why they’ve taken this stance so dramatically different than any of the other insurance companies.


#2

Farmers changed there policy for wind repairs in early 2009. There wind policy now is if it is not blown off, it can be repaired by hand sealing of the tabs.

I’m not sure what part of the country you are in, but I would be more than happy to send you some storm guidelines from Farmers for your review.

Let me know if you would like me to email you the guide lines.


#3

Id love to see those guidelines. It seems to me that this will be one of those things that ends up being temporary. Ive seen claims with over 60 shingles blown off on multiple slopes get denied even when it is completely non-repairable. There will be a class action lawsuit soon enough and they will be paying out a ton on non paid claims like state farm had to do in Indiana last year.


#4

[quote=“Mr Shingle”]Farmers changed there policy for wind repairs in early 2009. There wind policy now is if it is not blown off, it can be repaired by hand sealing of the tabs.

I’m not sure what part of the country you are in, but I would be more than happy to send you some storm guidelines from Farmers for your review.

Let me know if you would like me to email you the guide lines.[/quote]

Mr Shingle, we’re not talking about “lift” here, we’re talking about missing tabs and/or full shingles that have completely blown off.


#5

Mr. Shingle;

Could you please email the guidelines to aspinprop@yahoo.com. Thanks.

I am getting initial turn-downs from almost every insurer for wind damage. I believe I will win every one eventually.

I have shingle manufacturers’ specific documentation that says shingle that lost their adhesive strip from excessive wind are damaged. Here, the insurance policies state that wind damage is covered - period.

I have the building code that says shingles must be sealed. That is IRC 2006 905.2.4.

I’ve found several other odds and ends that prove wind damage is blown up shingles, not even blown off shingles. However, it is about the magnitude of damage. Check whether debris is blown up under the shingles still on the roof. If you have enough damage, the roof should be totaled. Don’t give up and let them cheat the homeowner.

Ironically, Farmer’s is the best insurer here lately. State Farm has lost it here. Isn’t that the way it always goes?


#6

Its a cycle. They all take turns being the bad guys.


#7

Well i have a way to make the insurance guy love you and give you well the top tier in money and the problem will solve it self since the report kicks out everything you could ever imagine. Email me if interested and im not selling anything for the record.


#8

[quote=“Authentic_Dad”]

[quote=“Mr Shingle”]Farmers changed there policy for wind repairs in early 2009. There wind policy now is if it is not blown off, it can be repaired by hand sealing of the tabs.

I’m not sure what part of the country you are in, but I would be more than happy to send you some storm guidelines from Farmers for your review.

Let me know if you would like me to email you the guide lines.[/quote]

Mr Shingle, we’re not talking about “lift” here, we’re talking about missing tabs and/or full shingles that have completely blown off.[/quote]

Hire a roofing consultant. The insurance companies know they will lose their battle with a consultant in court if the consultant is even half-competent. A good consultant will know about FM wind uplift loss prevention, manufacturer’s requirements, and industry standards vs. practices.

From a personal stand point (as a homeowner), if my insurance company would not honor a legitimate claim, I would tell them to them refund me all of my insurance payments and interest from over the years. Kind of either “pay the claim” or “refund my premiums” type of attack. They do this with life-insurance claims when they find out a non-smoker is actually a smoker, or things of that nature; so I figure turnabout is fair play! Of course, they won’t give you back your premiums, but what a great start off point for negotiations/lawsuit.

Luckily, I don’t have to worry about such things . . . I have USAA. 8)


#9

FM wind uplift, I thought, is primarily a commercial standard that is inherently dependent upon the use of an FM Global approved or certified deck.

Their standards and testing are not going to apply to most residential roofing.

It seems that the real question here is what is repairable versus non repairable. Several persons in various threads appear to believe that a roof can never be repaired… especially if insurance is involved.


#10

[quote=“jtdew”]
It seems that the real question here is what is repairable versus non repairable. Several persons in various threads appear to believe that a roof can never be repaired… especially if insurance is involved.[/quote]

Hmm, I didn’t get that impression of the comments on this site whatsoever. It is my opinion that the members on this site want to determine clarity on that very issue, though.

Clearly, there is a wide variety of opinions, I’ll give you that. Cheap shots don’t help matters any - from either side. I am curious - what is your opinion of what is repairable or not. If not, perhaps you prefer the current ability for people who hold the power to state opinions that are based on old wives’ tales, not facts.


#11

I have emailed you a copy of the storm guidelines from IN.


#12

[quote=“Gary”]

Unfortunately, there is no consistent answer. Every roof is different from age, type of shingle, exposure, installation, ventilation and a myriad of other factcrs.

Being in the insurance industry, each claim is supposed to stand on its own merits. I know of no way to apply a “one size fits all” standard.

The insurance policies are clear that the insurer owes the lesser of repoair or replacement.

Unfortuately, it’s like swimming in murky water. If you put on a pair of goggles, the water is still murky. You can just see it better.


#13

Jtdew

I’m not sure I agree with you on the statement “repairable versus non repairable. Several persons in various threads appear to believe that a roof can never be repaired… especially if insurance is involved.â€Â


#14

There is a big difference between a broken seal and a seal that is not adhering.

A shingle that has a broken seal with a creased or damaged mat needs replaced every time and I disagree with any adjuster who thinks otherwise. But, if its loczlized damage on say a two year old roof and that shingle is available, then it very well may be a repairable roof.

A seal that is not adhering is not alway a broken seal and can be a different issue. Why is it not adhering? Is it a seal failure? Is it wind damage? Is it curling from natural wear? Did the sealant deteriorate?

Hand Sealing is acceptable as long as the shingle hasn’t been compromised. Naturally, the condition of the shingles will play a big part. You can’t seal brittle shingles.

Even at installation the manufacturers write that Hand Sealing may be necessary if the shingles don’t seal. Some people I’ve run across call all non-sealed shingles wind damage.


#15

jt, the issue at hand here is the significant, obvious difference there seems to be with the way Farmers is making decisions on storm damage. We have participated in over 200 inspections with a large variety of insurance companies in the past year. As I mentioned in the first post on this thread, the last one really went over the top. He allowed for 64 shingles to be repaired on a roof that is so unrepairable calling it blatantly obvious would be an understatement. Further, the Adjuster himself ripped off 10+ shingles while doing the inspection for no unknown reason. Both our Rep and the Homeowner witnessed this.

With respect to judging storm damage and when a roof is justified for replacement, there appears to be a reasonable amount of consistency among the insurance companies, at least the ones we have worked with EXCEPT for Farmers. For whatever reason, they seem to be way, way, way out of phase with everyone else. I started this thread to inquire if other people had experienced something similar or if this was somehow unique to the 8 to 10 experiences we have had with them in two states. I doubt this as we’ve had at least one of their Adjusters, who had come to Farmers from another insurance company, complain openly about Farmers’s policies and how he disagreed with them.


#16

[quote]jt, the issue at hand here is the significant, obvious difference there seems to be with the way Farmers is making decisions on storm damage. We have participated in over 200 inspections with a large variety of insurance companies in the past year. As I mentioned in the first post on this thread, the last one really went over the top. He allowed for 64 shingles to be repaired on a roof that is so unrepairable calling it blatantly obvious would be an understatement. Further, the Adjuster himself ripped off 10+ shingles while doing the inspection for no unknown reason. Both our Rep and the Homeowner witnessed this.

With respect to judging storm damage and when a roof is justified for replacement, there appears to be a reasonable amount of consistency among the insurance companies, at least the ones we have worked with EXCEPT for Farmers. For whatever reason, they seem to be way, way, way out of phase with everyone else. I started this thread to inquire if other people had experienced something similar or if this was somehow unique to the 8 to 10 experiences we have had with them in two states. I doubt this as we’ve had at least one of their Adjusters, who had come to Farmers from another insurance company, complain openly about Farmers’s policies and how he disagreed with them.[/quote]

Authentic Dad-

If the homeowners on your side, I always have my attorney shoot off a letter on their behalf with “bad faith claim” in the language. They seem to respond.


#17

Jtdew

It is the policy of all major carriers to do property inspection before underwriting will issue a policy for the property. The carrier inspected the property and considered it a viable risk to insure. Why would I ever assume that there was a pre-existing condition on the seal strips.

When you have a wind storm that has exceeded the wind rating of a shingle, common since would tell you that would be the cause for the broken seals. There is absolutely no way in 30 minutes on the roof to come to any other conclusion. I have yet to see one adjuster remove a shingle and send it to the manufacture or Haag Engineering to be de-constructed for testing.

Authentic Dad

If the adjuster took the shingles he removed from the roof. They most likely sent them to Itel to help build the new data base for roofing shingles, which Farmers is pushing very hard at the moment.


#18

[quote=“jtdew”]FM wind uplift, I thought, is primarily a commercial standard that is inherently dependent upon the use of an FM Global approved or certified deck.

Their standards and testing are not going to apply to most residential roofing.

It seems that the real question here is what is repairable versus non repairable. Several persons in various threads appear to believe that a roof can never be repaired… especially if insurance is involved.[/quote]

I didn’t say to apply FM standards. I said a good consultant will understand such, that way you know you likely aren’t getting someone who one day decided to hang up a shingle and call themselves a consultant.


#19

[quote=“Mr Shingle”]

Authentic Dad

If the adjuster took the shingles he removed from the roof. They most likely sent them to Itel to help build the new data base for roofing shingles, which Farmers is pushing very hard at the moment.[/quote]

Mr Shingle, it is my understanding that he simply threw them to the ground. I can’t imagine why he would have needed 10 test shingles from the same roof either.


#20

well i could help you with that since i have com accross with some niffty info just for insurance. Contact me drag70buickgs@att.net

Then i can explain more. I dont think you want your phone number here or pm me wither way. but i have a way to elimiate alot of that bs.

AN no im not selling anything.