| Author |
 Topic  |
|
|
Lon Sterling
68 Posts |
 Posted - 09/12/2002 : 18:30:18
|
What types of new roof investigative techniques have you been exposed to recently? I have taken the full Haag compliment of seminars as well as others offered by manufacturers and trade associations regarding roof investigation.
Did anyone read the following article in Claims Magazine?
http://www.claimsmag.com/Issues/September99/by.asp
|
|
|
ALANJ
USA
159 Posts |
Posted - 09/12/2002 : 19:45:21
|
Lon:
Are you really a roofer? Most of the roofers in Alabama do not know what email is much less a website. Send me an email or something showing you are a roofer. Feel free to email me. ALANJACKSONJD@AOL.COM Something smells. |
 |
|
|
KileAnderson
USA
875 Posts |
Posted - 09/12/2002 : 20:28:10
|
Lon, I'm beginning to believe you are sincere. Thanks for the link, by the way, Jim, the article in your link is the exact same article as Lon's link. Just a different site. There is an author out there who is double dipping. Now if we could only find someone who can easily explain the granular loss issue to the homeowner.
|
|
|
|
Lon Sterling
68 Posts |
Posted - 09/13/2002 : 02:05:38
|
I can explain granule loss and have done this quite honestly for many years. Yes, I have stood facing an angry homeowner and his "roof expert", both armed with a double handful of the little dyed ceramic particles just harvested from a "gutter full of them" and helped many an adjuster explain why they were not from hail and that their loss had not "shortened the lifespan" of their otherwise pristine roof.
Here's my "capsulized" version for both roofers and adjusters. You can take it to the bank. Feel free to give to any roofer or homeowner who brings up "granule loss" as a covered peril:
General granule loss is unavoidable and is a function of normal aging on any composition roof exposed to any and all kinds of normal weather patterns. Just as a carpet sheds and paint fades, granules leave the surface of any composition roof from the very first day it is put on until the day it is removed.
It IS both normal and inevitable. If a person says there are MORE granules in the gutter or on the walks and driveway because of hail, he cannot do so with ANY MEASUREABLE degree of accuracy whatsoever. The presence of a gutter full of granules proves nothing and is like trying to rely on only a fraction of the truth in a much more complicated equation.
The real truth is that heat and sun are the biggest enemies of granule adhesion on any composition roof. They cause oxidation of the asphalt coating and that oxidation allows for granules to be loosened as the oxidized coating loses its hold on the imbedded granules during normal climatic cycles.
There are also granules referred to by oldtimers as "RIDER" granules. They are the granules that are dropped onto the shingle but that do not stick into the hot coating. They "RIDE" the shingle all the way through the packaging process. Years ago, some companies even used EXTRA granules added to the packages to "make the designated weight". That is one of the reasons you never see shingles guaranteed to be 240 pounds or 300 pounds per square any more. All weights are approximate today. Now, many are referred to as 25, 30, 35, 40 or 50 year shingles. And, a subject for another day is VASTLY OVERSTATED WARRANTIES!
It WOULD NOT be unusual for a roof to lose more granules in 6 heavy rains than in two hailstorms with marble sized hail. As long as the shingle does not BRUISE or crater, the granule loss may be no more significant than three or four rains. SO - in a HOT, DRY year where oxidation is more advanced, there might acually be more granule loss in a few thunderstorms than in a year where there were more gentle rains and less heat but with the addition of a couple of small hailstorms. Granule loss is much more pronounced in Phoenix than in Chicago for example. However, that type of granule loss is clearly "inherent vice" and not a covered peril.
As long as granules are not removed in sufficient quantities to leave bald places exposed to ultraviolet degradation, there IS NO DAMAGE. I do not support the theory that no fracture of the mat means no damage to the shingle. It is simply not true. Any event which causes granule loss that leaves bald spots is an event that has damaged that shingle MORE than cosmetically.
When insureds or roofers scream about overall general granule loss on a roof that manifests itself in the form of what they perceive to be MORE granules than "NORMAL" in the gutters, the ONLY way ANYONE can tell for sure is by performing a "rub" or "scratch" test in a laboratory.
A special machine is used to remove granules from sample shingles (from THAT particular roof) at a certain number of foot pounds of pressure per square inch and the results are gauged by counting the remaining granules in that area that has been "scratched" or "rubbed".
Usually, only the actual manufacturer of that particular shingle is able to test for that since he will know from special markings, the age and plant at which the shingles were manufactured. Those results are then tested against their own data to see if the shingle is losing granules at a "normal" or "abnormal" pace. (We all know why manufacturers do not mark there shingles with plain printing on the release tape - can you say "warranty claims"? - today, in most cases, only impact resistant shingles are marked on the release tape because it is required for insurance discounts and by regulatory bodies in certain states.)
All manufacturers will perform these tests on their own shingles if two sample shingles are mailed to them by the homeowner. Of course, a professional roofer should blind nail two replacement shingles into place and repair the felt or cement the vacant nail holes.
The only other signs of granule loss have to do with defects in the actual shingles. These can be in the form of patches where granules are thin, missing or have let go. Usually, a pattern of granule loss will repeat itself from shingle to shingle and affect a certain part of each shingle more than another part of the shingle. Look for the pattern to follow specific (non-random) patterns many times in concert with the installation path used by installers. Sun and heat generally accelerate these patterns, too, so check South and West exposures for the most obvious manifestations. Very rarely, even though most shingle manufacturers operate computer automated equipment today, there could be a problem with coating temperature or the coating mixture itself that cause granules to adhere less than an adequately.
On one point, I disagree with some of Haag's literature. That is on large hail. While smaller hail is greatly affected by wind direction, it is also the least damaging so when blisters deface the South and West slopes only and a roofer says that was the direction from which the hail came but can't produce any classic characteristic hailstone signature marks, it is probably the South and West exposure that is the true culprit. However, with hail larger than golf balls, be careful about putting too much faith in the "directional diagrams" found in the Haag literature. Those diagrams show hail blowing at approximately a 25 degree angle and hitting a roof of 9/12 or so. For the directional theory to apply, hail would have to be blown at that angle and the home's slopes would have to exactly match the glancing blows depicted in the diagram.
In my experience, the bigger the hail, the less it is affected directionally by wind because of the force of gravity and the microbursts or downdrafts associated with larger thunderstorms.
By the way, thanks for the link on the second microscopic story in Roofer magazine, Jim! YOU BEAT ME TO THE PUNCH! I had intended to post that link next after everyone read the Claims mag link!!!! Good job! Kile, Jim and Alan, read both stories closely and use your duly noted powers of perception to see if you can see what I saw. Hint. It is in the last part of each story. Alan, I am indeed a roofer. I'll send you a private email.
I'll check in tomorrow. |
Lon |
|
|
|
Lon Sterling
68 Posts |
Posted - 09/13/2002 : 13:12:00
|
This not only for Jim but for all of you guys and gals,
First, Jim, your intelligence and deep down caring nature was also explained in the private emails I received, so please accept my apologies for ruffling the feathers of one who knows more about the policy than I will EVER learn. I didn't figure that you would be mentoring so many if that nature were as uncaring as your sharp and stinging wit first implied. I knew there was a good person in there but just like a concerned parent, you were protecting this place and it's members from attack by what may have been an enemy. Yes, I'm sure we'll have our differences in the future but I doubt we'll be afraid to share our reasons for them. That's a good thing.
That aside, I'll try to find time to post some more information on the issues you mentioned later in this weekend. While I'm more attuned to Texas issues, some of them are also country-wide and some will continue to affect both our industries in a similar way.
In this particular thread I put the Claims magazine article first because I thought a group of professional adjusters would be more likely to read something from Claims Magazine and then I put the one in Professional Roofer in a different post. I have a problem with these articles and the information supplied therein because I have seen "up close and personal"ly what an "expert" can do simply by establishing himself as an expert.
I would love to have someone point out what I see in the articles (without accusations that could get them in trouble) and post it. My dear departed Mother amazed me when I was a child because she was a "voracious reader" and was able to discern clever wording whenever some politician used it. She always asked me to see if I could pick out what that politician didn't say that would make a material difference in the the meaning he was trying to "sell". By the way, that is not a hint on the articles. I don't think clever is the word I would use. Just compare the two and be cognizant of the dates they were published.
So much for my inquisitive and questioning nature right now. How about the board's on these two articles? Don't print anything inflamatory, just point out the differences you see ad then I'll share some of my research and observations on this particular subject.
As Alan will tell you, even though you may be sued for libel, the truth is an absolute defense and if you speak the truth without malice or without the intention of hurting the party and without invading their privacy, you'll have a good defense. Besides, in America, we are allowed to have and speak out on opinions in most cases as long as they are not intended to harm others. Alan can jump in here with case law should I be a little off. After all, I started as a "roof thumper roofer" (I love Jim's term and use it frequently) with little previous knowledge and allowed my thirst for answers to help me grow.
It is indeed good to have at least the ear of Jim Flynt because I consider him to have earned his "wings" in your industry.
Soon, I see both roofers and storm adjusters having some VERY common goals based in honesty, knowledge and a willingness to stand up to both insureds and insurers when they are wrong.
The next Texas legislative session has some proposed laws I think will help both honest and knowledgeable catadjusters and roofers.
Here are the two links again (hint read them in chronological order):
Professional Roofer Magazine 1999
http://www.claimsmag.com/Issues/September99/by.asp
Claims Magazine 2000
http://www.professionalroofing.net/past/apr00/feature.asp
Because of the letter I posted from Farmers earlier this week, I was almost mad enough to decline to help a nice and honest female Farmers adjuster today. However, I realized I'd be shooting the messenger AND at the same time giving her the wrong impression of what an HONEST roofer would do. If I am to represent what should be done by persons in my own industry, and many do call me for advice, then I should show what is RIGHT with our industry and discourage the behavior that is wrong.
I'm off now to provide two-story access on a cedar shingle roof and one of those gawd-awful aluminum ones. I'll check in later. I imagine the insureds already have "roofers" but that doesn't matter to me. If the people have damage, I want to point it out. If they don't, I don't want Farmers to pay for something they don't owe.
As I said once before, I believe that I'm living long enough to see that what went around is beginning to come around. In some parts of my life, I should probably worry. He He.
|
Lon |
Edited by - Lon Sterling on 09/13/2002 13:27:34 |
|
|
|
KileAnderson
USA
875 Posts |
Posted - 09/13/2002 : 17:33:11
|
Thanks for the info, Lon. I always use the tire analogy. The roof is like the tires on your car. Like the tread on the tires the granules are meant to be a wearable surface that takes the brunt of the friction of the weather. I'll print out your post and refer to it often I'm sure.
Jim, just curious, what specific event caused your depression today? |
|
|
|
KileAnderson
USA
875 Posts |
Posted - 09/13/2002 : 17:44:10
|
| Never mind Jim, I just read the other thread. I know what you're talking about. |
|
|
|
Lon Sterling
68 Posts |
Posted - 09/13/2002 : 20:21:09
|
Jim, your laments are not lost on me. I understand completely. Clayton, sadly, is right on track and it is happening to professional roofers, too. With the advent of the "roof salesman/adjuster", insurance companies are being led down a path of ruin and taking both of us with them.
We are going to have to re-invent ourselves and re-establish the need for our superior knowledge. Hopefully, that will come sooner rather than later and can be accomplished without years of toil.
Already, I have seen small storms where roofs are paid for only if a certain company is the carrier. I have climbed on some of those roofs and others near them, all without seeing ANY damage. By the time these roofs were spot-checked by the carrier, the roofs had already been changed and with no right to look at other roofs near their already-roofed "losses", the roofing company/adjusting company simply got away with creating imaginary losses and lining their own pockets.
I have spoken with the regional claims managers of several big insurers and many have confided that these preferred-provider/adjuster relationships are both cyclical and unmanageable but that upper management tends to re-invent the wheel every few years by ramping up with these programs in a futile attempt to reduce overhead and increase profits.
I actually caught one of these guys who got a $5,000.00 plus check isssued for a "hail damaged roof" and the homeowner called me to look at it, too. When I got there I saw no hail and asked why the insurance company had issued a check. The homeowner told me that the other roofing company had seen hail damage and was a preferred provider/adjuster and had pushed her hard to sign a contract and begin work right away. Her leaks were from improper application of the underlayment and there was not a mark on her shingles. Luckily for me, while I was talking to her, the phone rang and it was a claims supervisor informing her not to attempt to cash the check. He further stated that a random check of her roof earlier that day while she was away, had revealed no hail damage and the supervisor was to again meet the preferred contractor at the dwelling. I say that was lucky for me because I had already told her what the real problem was and I imagine she would have thought I had turned her in had I already been gone.
I told her I would call back during the next week. I did and was told that the other "roofer" had made the excuse that it was getting dark and that he had been in a hurry to get off the roof to look at the interior. We all know what had really happened. There was not a mark on the 5 year old roof. Final disposition? The check was reclaimed by the manager and the homeowner became distrustful of the other "roofer" and we did the job. However, the "roofer" is still a preferred provider/adjuster. Evidently, all you have to do is apologize all over yourself for making a "mistake" and they'll keep those claims coming.
It is a hard pill to swallow but it may be that preferred provider prices have gotten so cheap that they are now having to resort to cheating to keep the doors open. If so, the natural balance of the marketplace will teach carriers that reducing adjusting cost by letting the foxes guard the chicken coup is just not good business.
Now if I can just convince the carriers that good and honest roofers may be 30% higher but if they only have to pay 50% fewer claims by using experienced roofers and adjusters, it still makes them money.
More ideas later. I hope Jim is finding peace at his campsite at this moment. I just got notice that Zurich is non-renewing our GL. I'm sure that new premium prices will force us to raise our prices again. Are we having fun yet?
No guesses as to the parts I find odd on the two Magazine article links yet either? I promise not to make fun of any poster who puts forth an idea about the articles.
Later. |
Lon |
|
|
| |
Topic |
|
|
|
Roof investigation techniques
Forum Locked
