Patrick Carr has an interesting YouTube Channel that focuses primarily on topics of interest to restoration contractors, including the topic raised in yesterday’s post, The Reasonably Comparable Shingle Debate. I met Patrick while he oversaw the taping of me in Orlando about ten days ago. Jen Silver and Crystal Waterson interviewed me in
The Reasonably Comparable Shingle Debate
A significant adjustment debate is often the availability of reasonably comparable shingles. The typical disagreement arises when a shingle is no longer manufactured or does not match existing shingles on a damaged roof. The insurer will investigate. It then makes a payment based on a finding that comparable shingles exist and can be used to repair the damage. The insurer does not invoke the right to repair.
Continue Reading The Reasonably Comparable Shingle Debate
Matching is a Factual Determination and Can Be Resolved by Appraisal
The Connecticut Supreme Court ruled that matching is a factual determination rather than a legal coverage issue and can be resolved by the appraisal process.1 This is a huge win for policyholders. I want to give a big shout-out to Merlin Law Group attorney Shane Smith who volunteered her time to work on this case by filing an amicus brief2 on behalf of United Policyholders.
Continue Reading Matching is a Factual Determination and Can Be Resolved by Appraisal
Is Matching Required in Kentucky?
Matching is required in Kentucky. A Kentucky regulation requires insurance companies to “replace all items in the area so as to conform to a reasonably uniform appearance.”1 The problem for policyholders is that the Kentucky federal courts will not enforce the regulation.
Continue Reading Is Matching Required in Kentucky?
Is Florida’s Matching Statute a Minimum Limit of Required Indemnity or Can Insurers Contract Out of Matching?
A lawsuit by Olympus Insurance Company challenges Florida’s Office of Insurance Regulation about issues of paying for property that matches following a repair. The lawsuit also challenges whether the Florida matching statute is a minimum limit of indemnity and if insurers can contract out of matching.
Continue Reading Is Florida’s Matching Statute a Minimum Limit of Required Indemnity or Can Insurers Contract Out of Matching?
Do Insurers In Louisiana Have To Match Damaged Property?
Whether damaged property can be “matched” during a repair is a major property insurance adjustment issue. There is one Louisiana appellate case discussing the matching issue,1 and it found for the policyholder. A prior post, Provide the Right Proof so Your Insurer Will Pay Costs to Repair or Replace to Match Texture, Color, and Likeness, should be studied because the result may depend upon the policyholder’s presentation of loss.
Continue Reading Do Insurers In Louisiana Have To Match Damaged Property?
Repair vs. Replacement in Pennsylvania
Greene v. USAA1 is probably the most cited case by first-party insurance carrier attorneys in Pennsylvania. It is an appellate level case that centered on whether an insurance carrier is required to replace a roof when the existing shingle is no longer in production, but shingles of “similar color, texture, function, and shape” are available. In Greene, the Superior Court of Pennsylvania (appellate) held that using shingles similar to the damaged shingles in function, color, and shape satisfied the insurer’s obligation to pay for repair or replacement with like construction.
Continue Reading Repair vs. Replacement in Pennsylvania
Line of Sight Rule for Matching of Undamaged Materials in Iowa
It is not uncommon for a hail or windstorm to cause damage to only one or two sides of a structure, leaving the remaining sides undamaged. Expecting replacement materials to match in color and quality, many policyholders are perplexed when their insurance carriers suggest they owe only for the damaged materials without any consideration for the altered appearance of the mismatched building.1 The result is magnified where damaged materials are no longer available, resulting in an obvious aesthetic difference between the undamaged and repaired areas of the structure.
Continue Reading Line of Sight Rule for Matching of Undamaged Materials in Iowa
Matching of Damaged Property Topics and United Policyholders Support of Fast and Cost-Effective Resolution of These Issues—Tuesday AT 2 With Chip Merlin
Matching of damaged parts of a building is nothing new. This “Give Me Your Walls” episode from the classic Dick Van Dyke Show demonstrates a typical concern most property owners have about the aesthetics of matching property:
Some insurance companies are now selling “swiss cheese” and “cheap” insurance because they specifically say they will
Connecticut’s Matching Statute
Matching can be one of the more difficult and contested issues in the property insurance world. Some jurisdictions address the issue by statutes and regulations requiring the replacement of undamaged items when the damaged items cannot be replaced in a way that achieves a reasonably uniform appearance. Other jurisdictions address the issue through case law.
Continue Reading Connecticut’s Matching Statute