For those of us that practice in the area of property damage in Colorado, June 6, 2012, is a day with much notoriety. A large wind and hail storm passed through the state, causing extraordinary damage. Even though it was classified as a catastrophic event, many insurers still challenged damages, so I represented a high volume of clients from this storm. However, this was not the only thing that happened on this date in Colorado. Governor Hickenlooper also signed into effect Senate Bill 12-038, “Concerning Measures to Protect Consumers who Engage a Roofing Contractor to Perform Roofing Services on Residential Property.” The full act is available online, but I wanted to draw your attention to certain parts of it as they have been topics of many recent phone calls.

Continue Reading Who pays the deductible? Requirements of roofing contracts in Colorado

Public adjusters and policyholder attorneys were enamored with the possibility of filing class action lawsuits against contractors and roofers with contingent fee contracts or contracts that include public adjuster services. Contractors, roofers and their attorneys writing these types of contracts should be on Red Alert because those types of contracts are illegal and could result in huge disgorgements of payments to prior policyholder customers.

Continue Reading Unauthorized Practice of Public Adjusting and the Lon Smith Roofing Case Should Scare Contractors and Roofers with Contingent Contracts

Note: This is a guest blog written by Dwayne Hall, a public insurance adjuster in Texas.


On June 11, 1993, the Texas Department of Insurance (TDI) issued a bulletin to address replacement of damaged roofs. The bulletin specifically set forth the position of the Department regarding the payment of a claim for a roof damaged loss to include the cost of the removal of the damaged roof as part of the covered loss to the roof caused by the insured peril.

Continue Reading Review of Texas Department of Insurance Bulletins on Roof Replacement with Multiple Overlays

In Gutkowski v. Oklahoma Farmers Union Mutual Insurance Company,1 the insurance carrier (Farmers) found that the policyholder’s roof warranted a complete replacement due to hail damage. Farmers only agreed to pay for the "direct physical loss to the composition shingles," though, and not the "decking to which the composition singles were attached."2 Farmers argued that, pursuant to the applicable policy language, the decking surface did not sustain a direct physical loss as a result of the hail storm.

Continue Reading Are the Necessary Components Making Up a Roof Divisible and Separate?

Roof insurance claim disputes are on the rise because insurance companies are closely monitoring the scope of roof repair. Roofing contractors and public adjusters call me with novel arguments made by insurance adjusters to limit amounts paid following roof damage. I pity the unfortunate insurance claimant with no expertise trying to handle their own roof claim and roof repair.

Continue Reading Roof Insurance Claims – Damaged Newer Roof Over Old or Overlaid Roof

State Farm advertises extensively to promote an image of providing "Good Neighbor" service. Since many insurance companies have a less than sterling reputation, this marketing strategy is important. So, when ABC News has a headline that reads, State Farm Faces Criminal Investigation Over Hurricane Claims, you can bet executives at State Farm’s home office are asking its claims department, "what the heck is going on?"

Continue Reading State Farm Faces Criminal Probe Regarding Roof Claim Handling