Roof Damage To Be or Not To Be

I’ve been in the chat rooms today where the conversation remains active regarding State Farm Insurance being investigated in Texas. What has amazed me is the number of adjuster who adamantly state that roof shingles that have been lifted by wind but are otherwise physically fit are not considered to be wind damaged … in their humble opinion. As you might imagine, I adamantly disagree. The crux of their argument, if I understand it correctly is that because the shingles have no other blemishes or observable defects aside from being lifted by wind, that they are not considered as damaged.  

Of course if you are a homeowner, this means you’re not going to get paid.

I believe this type of analysis is flawed and here’s the reason why.  As I’ve stated on many occasions property insurance policies do not insure property: they insure people. They insure people against risk of direct physical loss, but nowhere in the policy does it define what is meant by direct physical loss. So in my not so humble opinion you (the insured) are entitled to the broadest possible interpretation of what constitutes direct physical loss. To restrict the investigation and subsequent observation to the shingles in these situations is myopic at best and wholly disingenuous. Roofs are a system. They are put together in a systematic fashion and each part of that system is dependent upon the other parts to ensure it fully functions as it is supposed to.  When one part of the system fails, as is the case of wind lifted shingles the entire system is impaired. That impairment is direct physical damage.

I used the analogy of a piece of tape being pulled up. When put back into place it never seems to have the strength of bond equivalent to the original bond. Shingles are no different.  The system is broken when the shingle are lifted and no amount of pressing them back into place will restore the system to its’ pre-loss condition. In my not so humble opinion.

Bill