Roofing Insurance Restoration Contractors in DFW and surrounding counties

 

If you're looking for a roofingcontractor in the Dallas/Fort Worth area who specializes in insurance restoration and can help you navigate your deductible requirements, there are several options available to you.

One way is to call a local, dedicated reputable FortWorth roofing contractor Roofing Professionals of Texas. Insurance companies often work with local contractors who have experience with insurance restoration work and who meet certain criteria for quality and reliability.

Another option is to search online for roofing contractors inthe Dallas/Fort Worth area and read reviews from previous customers. Look for contractors who have experience with insurance restoration work and who have a good reputation for quality and customer service.

 

Here are a few roofing contractors in the Dallas/Fort Worth area that specialize in insurance restoration:

McKinney Roofing Pros – Collin County Roofing Contractor

Keller Roofingand Gutters - Tarrant County Roofing Contractor

Azle Roofing  - Parker County Roofing Contractor

Denton Roofing Gurus - Denton County Roofing Contractor

Remember to always do your research and choose a licensed and insured roofing contractor with a good reputation to ensure that your Dallas roofing insurance restoration project is completed safely and to your satisfaction.

Who is on your team during your insurance claim???

Texas Residents and Property Owners, the stakes are way too high when it comes to handling an insurance claim.

You cannot afford to have your “team” lose.

When it comes to your insurance coverage…no matter what kind of insurance…you need to have a team. But…

WHO DO YOU HAVE ON YOUR TEAM?

The insurance company has well trained adjusters who are experts in the claims process.

DO YOU HAVE ANYONE LIKE THAT ON YOUR TEAM?

The insurance company has well trained claims examiners who are experts on reading and interpreting YOUR insurance contract.

DO YOU HAVE ANYONE LIKE THAT ON YOUR TEAM?

The insurance company has staff attorneys that can answer their questions if a legal issue comes up in your claim. The company will hire the best trial lawyers money can buy to defend the insurance company in court if your claim goes to trial.

DO YOU HAVE ANYONE LIKE THAT ON YOUR TEAM?

The insurance company has Training and Compliance experts to make sure that the claim is handled correctly, and according to the state statutes where the loss occurred.

DO YOU HAVE ANYONE LIKE THAT ON YOUR TEAM?

The insurance company has forensic engineers at its disposal, who will make engineering inspections and write reports for them.

DO YOU HAVE ANYONE LIKE THAT ON YOUR TEAM?

The insurance company has forensic accountants at its disposal. These are accounting experts who can evaluate a complicated loss, like a luxury home or a business income loss.

DO YOU HAVE ANYONE LIKE THAT ON YOUR TEAM?

The insurance company has personal property replacement companies at its disposal. These companies give super low prices to insurance companies on everything from automobiles to electronics to jewelry, and everything in between. You’ll probably have to pay retail.

DO YOU HAVE ANYONE LIKE THAT ON YOUR TEAM?

The insurance company has salvage companies at its disposal, in order to take damaged goods and sell them, thereby recovering some of the money the insurance company paid in your claim.

DO YOU HAVE ANYONE LIKE THAT ON YOUR TEAM?

The insurance company has private investigators at its disposal. These people will perform background checks, neighborhood interviews, public records searches, even conduct surveillance of YOU at home and at work.

BUT, WHO DO YOU HAVE ON YOUR TEAM?

DO YOU EVEN HAVE A TEAM?

DO YOU THINK THAT YOU MAY BE AT A HUGE DISADVANTAGE?

Keep reading…your disadvantage is just about to disappear!!!

If you have an insurance claim problem right now, and need some direction on what to do, please contact us at 469-906-2600. We will do whatever I can to help you.

WWW.ROOFINGPROTX.COM

Roofing Professionals of Texas recycling all reusable roofing material to rebuilding roads in the DFW Metroplex

Contact: Joshiwa Justin
Roofing Professionals of Texas
Phone 469-906-2600
Fax 469-906-2601
legal@roofingprotx.com
7020 Baker Blvd.
Richland Hills TX 76118

Roofing Professionals of Texas

Press Release

Roofing Professionals of Texas commitment to reduce carbon footprint Roofing Professionals of Texas commits to recycling all reusable roofing material for rebuilding roads in the Dallas/Ft. Worth Metroplex Area

Richland Hills, TX, January 8, 2018: Hail, wind and storm damage are measured as an insurance loss on your homeowner’s policy. Most insurance agencies will pay the entire cost, less your deductible, for replacing the roof if it is damaged. The roof claim is also considered a natural disaster and does not count against you for future rate increases. Roofing Professionals of Texas specializes in accident and weather-related damage repair and replacement; including exterior roofing, gutters, siding; and interior / exterior painting, sheetrock, ceiling texture, flooring, and even carpet cleaning.

Roofing Professionals of Texas marks its 7th year of continued success with converting roofs to roads in Tarrant, Denton, Dallas, and Collin Counties. With well over 3,000 roofs under their roofers’ tool belts, Roofing Professionals of Texas’s plan for the future involves maintaining the status quo—installing top quality roofing systems that last and protect.

Roofing Professionals of Texas is doing everything it can to reduce their carbon footprint and maintainable practices, including asphalt shingle recycling. Landfills everywhere are overflowing with construction debris and recycling an old roof is the equivalent to eliminating more than a year's worth of household waste. Roofing Professionals of Texas has taken the Owens Corning Shingle Recycling Pledge. We pledge to recycle the shingles from your roof while at the same time providing you with a new high-quality roof system that is built to last.

Asphalt shingles are the most common roofing material used in the DFW Metroplex. Shingles contain asphalt and aggregate which are both valuable resources. New technology has allowed for old roofing shingles to be ground down, recycled, and reused in asphalt paving. Roofing Professionals of Texas is an industry leader and was the first to recycle at the Riverside Masonic Lodge # 1331 (Haltom City TX) and at Whispering Woods Apartments (Arlington TX). Our alliance with Riverside Masonic Lodge 1331, local roofing distributors and Owens Corning the largest asphalt shingle manufacturer in the USA gives us the ability to take roofing materials that would have been sent to a landfill and reuse it for asphalt roads. Roofing Professionals of Texas has received a tremendous amount of positive feedback from homeowners since the inception of this program in 2011. Some homeowners have told us that the reason they chose us to install their new roof was due to our shingle recycling efforts.

When the old shingles are removed from your roof they are separated from other roofing debris such as wood and metal. (The metal is also recycled). The old asphalt shingles are then loaded in a dump truck that transports them to the nearest participating landfill.  Certain Shingle Recycling Centers are located within city limits, near jobsites, and near one of our roofing material distributers. At the recycling center, the old shingles are tested for asbestos. If asbestos is not present in the shingles, they are cleaned and all debris (including nails) is removed. Asbestos and debris free asphalt singles are then moved into processing. The old shingles are sent through a grinder and become Recycled Asphalt Shingles (RAS). The RAS is then incorporated into asphalt paving to make roads and parking lots.

We strongly encourage asphalt shingle recycling. In fact, Roofing Professionals of Texas is the only roofing company that partners with shingle recyclers. Make this country green again.

Myths About Hail Damage and Insurance Claims

Myth: I looked at my roof and didn’t see any problems, or my roofer inspected it and there are no problems.

Fact: Roofing systems must be physically inspected by someone who has training and experience to determine if there is actual hail damage. Insurance companies send their adjusters too special training so they can properly identify hail damage to property, unfortunately there is not much ongoing training for the roofing or home inspection industries.

Myth: I’m not missing any shingles so I must not have damage.

Fact: Missing shingles are related to wind damage claims and can happen during a hailstorm if the winds are high enough. However, hail damage is sneaky in nature and may not physically cause leakage for years after a hail storm.

Myth: I only have 1 year to file my insurance claim.

Fact: Many insurance companies do have a one-year time limit and some even less, however due to the nature of hail damage they may pay claims past the deadline. This usually happens if a hail storm is widespread geographically.

Myth: My roof is new so it’s covered by the manufacturer’s warranty, home builder, or contractor.

Fact: Manufacturers specifically name hail as an exclusion to their product warranty; so, do home builders and roofing contractors. Newer roofs can be more susceptible to hail damage versus older roofs due to the time it takes a new roof to cure from exposure to the elements.

Myth: I was told my roof has minimal or very little damage and therefor I don’t need to file a claim.

Fact: If your roof has any damage what-so-ever you have a valid insurance claim and should file with your insurance company. Damage might not cause your roof to leak for years. Therefore, it’s important to have a qualified person inspect your roof.

Myth: My insurance company will cancel my policy if I file a claim.

Fact: Most states prohibit insurance companies from cancelling policies for filing claims arising from severe-weather-related events. Check with your state however and your policy language as well.

Myth: If I don’t file my claim, my insurance company won’t raise my rates.

Fact: After a disaster, insurance companies may raise everyone’s rates. If you are the only one who doesn’t file a claim, your personal rate increase is paying for everyone else’s damage except yours.

Replacement Cost Includes Profit and Overhead

Florida Supreme Court Says That Replacement Cost Includes Profit and Overhead

Florida Supreme Court ruled in Trinidad v. Florida Peninsula Ins. Co., 2013 WL 3333823 (Fla. July 3, 2013) held that replacement cost coverage was required to include overhead and profit in cases where the insured was reasonably likely to need a general contractor for the repairs. Florida Supreme Court further held that insurance companies were not statutorily permitted to hold back any portion of the replacement cost payment, including costs for overhead and profit, contingent upon the insured’s actually repairing or replacing the property and as such found that insureds were not required to actually incur expenses for the repairs in order to be entitled to overhead and profit.

Florida Supreme Court began its analysis by recognizing that “[r]eplacement cost insurance is designed to cover the difference between what property is actually worth and what it would cost to rebuild or repair that property.” Florida Supreme Court also noted that “[r]eplacement cost is measured by what it would cost to replace the damaged structure on the same premises.” In contrast, actual cost value was generally defined as “fair market value” or “replacement cost minus normal depreciation,” with the depreciation representing a “decline in an asset’s value because of use, wear, obsolescence, or age.”

After making these observations, the Florida Supreme Court then stated that “[b]ecause replacement cost insurance provides coverage based on the cost to repair or replace the damaged structure on the same premises, we conclude that overhead and profit necessarily must be included within the scope of a replacement cost policy where it is reasonably likely a general contractor would be needed for the repairs.” As such, overhead and profit was a necessary component of replacement costs inasmuch as replacement cost insurance was intended to compensate the insured for what it would cost to repair or replace the damaged property.

Next, Florida Supreme Court analyzed § 627.7011, Fla. Stat. (2008) in light of its ruling that RCV included overhead and profit when it was reasonably likely the insured would need a general contractor to perform the repairs. This statute required insurers to pay RCV without reservation or holdback of any depreciation in value irrespective of whether the insured replaced or repaired the dwelling or property. However, insurers were permitted under the statute to limit their liability under the policy by providing that the loss would be adjusted on the basis of RCV which was the lesser of (a) the limit of liability shown on the declarations page; (b) the reasonable and necessary cost to repair the damaged, destroyed, or stolen covered property; or (c) the reasonable and necessary cost to replace the damaged, destroyed, or stolen covered property.

Florida Supreme Court found that the statute did not permit insurers to exclude overhead and profit in a payment simply because overhead and profit had not yet been incurred. Under the statute, if the insured is unlikely to incur overhead and profit, section 627.7011(6) would permit the insurer to withhold payment of overhead and profit cost consistent with section 627.7011(3) because those costs would not be “reasonable and necessary” to the repair. That is to say that if the insured is not reasonably likely to incur overhead and profit in repairing the damaged property, then overhead and profit are not replacement costs of the insured’s covered loss. However, if overhead and profit are going to be “reasonable and necessary” to the repair, then the statute mandates their payment as replacement costs irrespective of whether they were incurred.

Ten Things About Your Insurance That Your Insurance Company May Not Want You to Know

	by Ray Bourhis Bourhis & Wolfson The average American spends thousands of dollars per year of insurance. Homeowners, automobile, medical, life, business, disability, umbrella and other coverages. Because most of us never suffer the large losses that everyone worries about, people have very little experience in dealing with insurance companies on large claims. Those that do are often in for a bit of a shock. Delay, the use of complex policy language to deny claims, and substantial underestimating of losses by carriers are common. Many people don't realize that insurance companies, like banks, earn their profits from investments, stocks, bonds, venture capital and real estate. The profitability of a company depends on how much money they have available to invest. If a company owes X million to all claimants at a given point in time, it can save 8% or more of that per year in investment profits by merely engaging in delay. It can save another 30 to 40% by engaging in lowballing. Another 20 to 30% can be saved by wrongful claim denials on confusing policy language. Whether an uninsured will recover for a legitimate claim at all, and if so, the amount he or she will be paid, depend largely on the policyholder's own knowledge of his or her rights and responsibilities. Policyholders are often at the mercy of their insurance company. The company wrote the policy, the company interprets the policy, the company evaluates the claim and the company holds the money. So the policyholder is really at a substantial disadvantage to the insurer. However, there are ways to begin to level the proverbial playing field. To do so, you must familiarize yourself with important principles of insurance law which judges and legislators have fashioned over the years for your protection. Here are ten such principles: 1. An insurance company must act in utmost good faith in the interpretation of their policies, and in the investigation and payment of claims. It is unlawful for an insurer to engage in unreasonable delay; to put their financial interests ahead of the financial interests of the policyholder; or to lowball (underpay) claims. They cannot use deception or trickery in sales or claims handling. They cannot compel an insured to hire an attorney in order to be paid what they are owed. They must be fair to their policyholders. The violation of any of these standards is a violation of the duty of good faith which the law imposes on insurance companies. It exposes the carrier to potentially significant damages. 2. If an insurance company unreasonably denies a claim or breaches its duty of "Good Faith and Fair Dealing," and you must sure them in order to recover your policy benefits, the insurance company must pay for your legal costs and attorney's fees. If the attorney's fees and other damages were not available, the policyholder could not be made whole and the insurer would be able to under-settle claims merely by arguing that they are offering more to settle that than what the uninsured would net on the actual value of the claims, after payment of their legal fees. If an insurer makes this argument to you in an effort to underpay, thank them in advance for offering to pay your costs and attorney's fees. That is exactly what they doing by engaging in such conduct. 3. If an insurance agent misrepresents the coverage being provided at the time the agent sells you your policy, the insurance company will have to honor the coverage representations made by their agent. Insurance agents are really nice. Otherwise, they wouldn't be able to sell you any policies. The same is true for claims adjusters. Otherwise, they wouldn't be able to settle any claims. It is important to distinguish these nice individuals from the company itself. The purpose of an insurance company is not to be nice, but to make money for its stockholders. If it makes more money than expected, the stock goes up. If it makes less money than expected, the stock goes down. When the stock goes up, executives are given bonuses. When the stock goes down, they are given headaches. The name of the game in the home office begins with the word "profits." Don't ever forget this. When the home office trains agents or claims adjusters they don't tell them to be sinister. There are no conventions at which agents are taught to misrepresent coverage and adjusters are taught low-balling techniques. What does happen, however, is that agents are told very little about the policies they are selling. They may know something about what is covered, but they know very little about what is not. If you were to spend the rest of your life talking to insurance agents about policies they are selling, you would probably not find a single agent who would be able to simply pull out a policy and explain it. The truth is that agents don't understand policies. They just sell them. Most agents won't even show you a copy of the policy they are urging you to buy. If you ever see a policy at all, it will probably be sent to you in the mail directly by the insurance company days, or weeks, after you have purchased the insurance. So at the time of sale, you don't know what you are buying other than what the company or agent promotional or sales pitch conveys to you. 4. If the amount of your insurance coverage is not sufficient to cover your actual loss because the insurance agent recommended that you insure for less than the amount you actually needed, the insurance company may be responsible for paying your entire loss, not just the amount of the policy benefits. For example, when an individual purchases business property or homeowner's insurance, they will often ask the agent what the policy limits should be before the particular property in question. Sometimes, the agent, in attempting to give you the lowest premium bid possible (in order to beat out the competition), will underinsure the property, (e.g. insuring a property for $600,000 that would cost $800,000 to replace) thus lowering the premium quoted. Perhaps the agent rationalizes that the policy contains a "replacement guarantee" anyway. The problem is that replacement coverage is useless unless you actually rebuild the property with "like, kind and quality: of what was destroyed. In the event of catastrophic loss, many policyholders decide to take their insurance payment and buy elsewhere, rather than actually rebuilding. In that case the underinsured policyholder loses a bundle. Moreover, personal property and business property are usually insured under these policies as a percentage of the face value of the policy, not a percentage of the replacement value of the property. Therefore an underinsured policyholder is uninsured for both the building coverage and the personal or business proper coverage. This is another good reason to take notes when you buy your policy in the first place, and to keep these notes in your insurance file. If the limit which your purchased were recommended by the insurance agent and they are insufficient, you are entitled to be paid for all losses on the basis of what your limits should have been. 5. Any ambiguity in your policy must be interpreted in your favor and against the insurance company. Take a look at this paragraph from a State Farm homeowners' policy: "We do not insure under any coverage for loss consisting of one or more of the items below: a. conduct, act, failure to act, or decision of any person, group, organization or governmental body whether intentional, wrongful, negligent or without fault; b. defect, weakness, inadequacy, failure unsoundness in: (1) planning, zoning, development surveying, siting; (2) design, specifications, workmanship, construction, grading, compassion; (3) materials used in construction or repair; or (4) maintenance; of any property (including land, structures, or improvements of any kind) whether on or off the residence premises." Every insurance company has a Mad Hatter Department. This Department is in fierce competition with its counterparts at other insurance companies to see who can write the most incomprehensible and loophole-filled gobbledygook in the industry. I'm convinced that insurance companies have secret awards dinners at which bonuses are given to those who have written the most obtuse, self-canceling phrases of the year. The reason policies are so incomprehensible is not because insurance companies cannot find people who can write in plain English. It is because the companies know that the less clear the policy is, the less clear their obligation to pay will be. So they write policies that they have to obtain "coverage opinions" on from law firms to whom they pay hefty fees to explain what they have written. Believe it or not, even these lawyers are often wrong. You can turn this confusion from a disadvantage to you and into an advantage by simply showing that an applicable provision is ambiguous. If it is, coverage must be provided, and the claim must be paid. 6. The insurance company, not the policyholder, has the obligation of providing the applicability of a "limitation" or "exclusion" in the policy. Insurance policies typically contain a very brief "insuring clause" describing what's covered. Dozens of paragraphs and thousands of words are then spent listing exclusions, exceptions and limitations. When a large claim occurs, insurance companies want to be able to write a letter to their policyholder denying coverage by quoting from one or more of the "exclusions." The bottom line will be that they sure would like to pay your claim, but golly darn, they just can't. Many insureds will either accept what they are being told or will seek advice from someone in the insurance industry or from a lawyer who doesn't specialize in this field. As a result, many legitimate claims go either unpaid or severely underpaid. What you should know is that the insurance company, not you, has the burden of proving that an exclusion or limitation in the policy is (1) clear, (2) conspicuous and (3) applicable. The shifting of this "burden" concerning exclusions - to the insurers - is contrary to the usual rule of the law that the party making the claim is the one who hears this burden. Because most policyholders are unaware of this rule, insurance companies often avoid paying legitimate claims based on exclusions that, if challenged, the exclusions, to the company. 7. In cases involving your insurance company's duty to defend, its duty to defend is broader than its duty to indemnify. The liability portion of every business, homeowner, auto or similar insurance policy is the portion of the policy that protects you from lawsuits by others. It requires the insurance company to pay your legal defense costs and fees if you are sued. Sometimes an insurance company will say that it doesn't have to defend you because you have been sued for something that is not specifically covered in the policy. It must also defend you in any situation which potentially seeks covered damages. For example, if a complain filed against you does not see damages within the scope of your overage but is capable of being amended or modified to include such damages, your insurer must defend. Furthermore, if the insurance company learns of facts from any source which would trigger coverage (not just the complaint itself), it must also defend you. In addition, it must defend where the policyholder has a reasonable expectation that it will do so. If there are multiple causes of action in the complaint against you, let's say that you were sued in a complaint alleging both negligence, breach of contract and intentional misconduct, then if the insurance company must defend any of those causes of action, it must defend all of them. If an insurance company that has a duty to defend in a particular case refuses to do so, then it may well be responsible for all resulting damages, including payment of the amount of any judgment entered against you, or of any settlement (including collusive or fraudulent.) 8. An insurance company that tries to rescind (eliminate) your policy coverage once you have made a claim, on the grounds that you made a misrepresentation on your insurance application, may be violating the law. This point can be complicated. Just remember that some policy application questions are very, very broad. For example, on a health care policy application, you may be asked to "list all of the physicians you have seen during the past five years." Or, "have you ever been treated for diabetes, cancer, heart disease, head injury or pain." Note that such a question is tricky. If an agent asks this question verbally, most people will think in terms of important medical visits or serious conditions. They will not think of every doctor they have seen during the past five ears and may not focus on treatment for tension headaches, which technically fall within the latter question as "head injury or pain." After fifteen or twenty questions all containing numerous sub-parts people tend to glaze over somewhat. So when the agent slides an application across the table one assumes that the answers the agent has written down are accurate. They sign under a declaration citing penalty of perjury. I have seen many insurance companies later try to escape paying a large claim by accusing a policyholder of trying to defraud them by obtaining insurance under false pretenses. They point out solemnly that doing so is illegal. Some people become so frightened that they give up their claim. If you are innocent of any wrongdoing, don't give in to such tactics. There are three important principles to remember on this subject: (1) Read all policy applications yourself and read them skeptically; (2) Don't fall for a bluff when an insurance company tries to rescind. If you have been honest, stand up for yourself and fight it. You will probably win and will wind up proving that the insurance company was engaging in bad faith as well by trying to take away your coverage after the claim occurred; and (3) There are "incontestability periods" in most policies and under the law. That means that beyond a particular date (e.g. two years), the company can no longer rescind the policy for an alleged misstatement on the application. When they try to rescind, don't rollover, examine the situation carefully. 9. Punitive damages are awardable against insurance companies of engaging in oppressive, fraudulent or malicious conduct. Use this fact in negotiations where applicable. Insurance companies love to tell anyone who will listen that punitive damages are a terrible and unwarranted things, a concept cooked up by lawyer parasites to get rich off innocent, misunderstood insurance companies. Don't buy it. Punitive damages are the only thing that prevents insurance companies from engaging in even more outrageous bad faith conduct than they already do. If a given insurance company has, let's say $100 million, in valid claims that have been made, it knows that its investment profits on this money alone will likely exceed $15 million per year. It also knows that if it merely delays, long enough, many insureds (particularly if they are ill or have lost substantial assets or property) will substantially under-settle their claims. If they have died during the delay, the company may never have to pay. In addition, the company knows that if it wrongfully denies the claims, many policyholders will not be willing or able to fight them. Last, even as to those who do fight, insurers know that most people will not be willing or able to fight them. Last, even as to those who do fight, insurers know that most people will probably wind up with a lawyer who knows little about insurance law or who doesn't have the financial capacity to fight a multi-billion dollar industry with an infinite supply of lawyers. Therefore, instead of just paying out the money to policyholders to whom it is owed, an aggressive insurance company can keep much of the money owed, and can earn even more back on investments made during the delay period. So that little, or none of the actual money owed is ever paid. The insurers also know how difficult it is to recover punitive damages in courts these days. Punitive damages are disfavored by judges and juries alike. If you are going to recover punitive damages against an insurance company, you had better have some very persuasive evidence or the judge will not even permit the issue to go to the jury in the first place. If punitive damages do go to the jury and the case is not extremely strong, the jury will toss you out the door. In addition, if punitive damages are awarded, the judge can reduce them. Finally, the insurance company can appeal the verdict. So the insurance company has quite a bit going for it in avoiding ever having got pay a substantial punitive damages award. The rarity of punitive damages awards that actually stick, makes it very important that such an award be appropriate in light of the conduct and wealth of the particular insurance company. For years, insurers have been trying to get state legislatures or Congress to cap punitive damages at say, $300,000 or $400,000. That sounds like alot of money until you look at the figures. If you must deter someone with a bank balance of $500 million from making money illegally, it would certainly not be too much to award one to ten percent - to make it less profitable to engage in the legal practice. Naturally, an insurance company is not going to be deterred by smaller amounts. But if you take the same percentage, 4%, or 5% and apply it to an insurance company with a net surplus (beyond reserves and expenses) of $800 million, then punitive award comes to $40 million. There are very few $40 million or more punitive damage awards upheld against insurance companies. But a $300,000 or $400,000 cap would be laughable to a multi-million dollar insurance giant. They would continue with business as usual, because the illegal profits earned would be far greater than the potential damages threatened. In any event, the prospect of punitive damages can give you as the Insurance consumer, important leverage to encourage an insurance company to treat you fairly in the first place. That is really what punitive damages are for, to make an insurance company think twice before ignoring the law. The companies realize that even those who know the least about insurance law may happen to wind up in the hands of a lawyer who, after subpoenaing the claims file, and fighting through fifty or so depositions, obtains the evidence necessary to ask a jury to set an example. This fact can be helpful for you to know when trying to negotiate a fair claim settlement on your own behalf. 10. You can usually get free legal advice from an insurance law expert so that you know your rights before you talk to your company, rather than after it is too late. Lawyers who take on these insurance bad faith cases have to evaluate them carefully beforehand. These cases are usually taken on a percentage or contingency fee with the lawyer advancing all the costs. The cases had better be good ones or the lawyer will soon be out of business. Therefore, a great deal of time is spent giving free legal analysis to insureds, whether a case is ever filed or not. Use this to your advantage to get free advice regarding your claim. Make certain that the lawyer you are getting the advice from is truly an expert in this field. Seek a referral to a specialist from a lawyer friend, and question the attorney thoroughly before relying on his or her options. Obviously you should make sure that the expert insurance lawyer does not specialize in representing insurance companies. As mentioned earlier you are spending a great deal of money every year on insurance. Be aware that to get what you're paying for, against this industry, you have to know something about your rights. Store this article with your insurance papers. If the insurance underwriters were right in their projections, you will never need to review it because like most people you will never have a large claim. Remember that protecting yourself and your family starts but does not end with this information. When it comes to insurance, Caveat Emptor is always the rule!
	This page was a reproduction for educational and informational purposes only.   Original by: Bourhis & Wolfson Insurance Law and Policyholder Representation 1050 Battery Street, San Francisco, California 94111 info@bourhis-wolfson.com

Various Myths About Filing an Insurance Hail Damage Claim for Your Roof

When a hail storm hits, there can be lots of confusion. Don’t get fooled into believing the hype. Here are the top 5 myths that we hear about insurance claims due to hail damage.

1. You are swindling your insurance company.

Regardless of what you think or what a contractor tells you, a representative of your insurance company makes the final determination of whether your property has been damaged by hail. They will also determine whether they are paying for part, whole, or none of the replacement of your roof.

2. Your insurance premium will go up if you file a claim.

This is actually a true and false situation. Storm damage is an act of nature. By rule your insurance premium should not go up if you file a claim for damage that is deemed an act of nature. However, property-owner insurance premiums are determined by geographic area. If there is a large number of claims in your area, your premium will probably be going up anyway. So, are you going to pay for your neighbor’s roof and not get one yourself?

3. I don’t see hail damage on my roof so I don’t have it.

Some hail damage is obvious, some not so much. When hailstones hit an asphalt shingle it knocks off the protective gravel that shields the tar of your roof shingles from the sun’s UV damaging rays. In many cases, when this initially happens, it is difficult to see the damage. But as time, weather, and UV rays deteriorate the area where the hail hit your shingles, the damage becomes very obvious. Unfortunately, this may take several years and will put you past the time you can file an insurance claim for the damage, which is generally 1 year from the storm date.

4. My insurance company came out and said I don’t have damage, so I don’t have damage.

Understand that your insurance company is not always your friend. Insurance companies, with a few exceptions, are public traded companies that have investors. Most property owners are fooled into thinking their insurance companies work for them. Insurance companies work for their investors. It is in their best interest to deny claims. Less paid out claims equals more profits equals happier investors. You get the picture.

5. I don’t need a contractor, I can file my claim myself.

Famous last works for sure. You don’t need a contractor until you need a contractor because your insurance company only bought half your roof or denied your claim all together. The problem is, it becomes much more difficult to work with your insurance company after your claim has been adjusted the first time. It is in your best interest to work with an experienced restoration contractor from the very beginning of the process.

If you suspect that you have hail damage to your property call the Experts at Roofing Professionals of Texas. We have been helping Texas property owners restore their properties after damaging storms for over 25 years.

What makes Roofing Professionals of Texas different than all other roofing contractors out there:  experience and expertise. Roofing Professionals of Texas knows the ins and outs of insurance restoration so you will have the best chance of getting your claim approved. If your claim has been denied or only partially bought, we know how to work with your insurance company to get the work done.

And best of all, we handle everything for you. From filing your claim the right way to final clean up after the project is complete, Roofing Professionals of Texas makes the process as painless and easy as possible.

Concerned about quality? You should be! Roofing Professionals of Texas has been voted the best roofing and siding contractor in Texas 4 of the last 5 years.

So what are you waiting for, call us today! (469) 906-2600

When Insurance Adjusters Can Be Liable for Errors & Omissions

According to our attorneys, they say ‘Yes’. Insurance adjusters in Texas can be liable for independent acts, errors and omissions (E&O) when they violate insurance codes, breach contracts or negligently handle claims. The primary reason for this is that insurance adjusters, who are trustees, have specific duties and obligations to fulfill when investigating and processing a claim. Failing to honor these duties can open adjusters up to liability and lawsuits.  We are not attorneys.  We are not adjusters.  We are roofing contractors who guide and navigate the chaos and headache for you.

It’s important to note that this liability is not limited to company adjusters (i.e., adjusters who are staff of insurance companies). It can also impact independent and public adjusters.

If you believe an insurance adjuster has made an error or omission that compromised your claim, contact Roofing Professionals of Texas.

We have decades of experience handling thousands of insurance claims on behalf of consumers. Perseverant, enthusiastic, diligent and relentless… we have the skills, knowledge and resources to effectively prevent bad faith insurance practices and help our clients get what is owed to them. We are ready to explain your options during your free consultation.

Has an insurer undercut, compromised or denied your valid hail damage claim?

Adjusters’ errors and omissions can take many forms, some of the most common of which include:

1.    Failing to acknowledge the claim – Adjusters are legally required to promptly respond to new claim submissions and communications regarding the claim. Ignoring claims and failing to communicate with the claimant can constitute an unfair settlement practice for which an adjuster can be liable.

2.    Making misleading or false statements – Written or oral statements an adjuster makes to deceive a contractor or policyholder can open the adjuster up to liability. These statements are typically made in an effort to undercut or deny the claim – or to get a policyholder to withdraw the claim. For example, insurance adjusters may make misleading or deceptive statements like (but not exclusive to):

·         The policy doesn’t cover the damage associated with the claim, despite the fact that the damage IS covered.

·         The policy only covers part of the damage and necessary repairs, despite the fact that all of the repair costs (including O&P) SHOULD BE covered per the policy.

·         You need to accept this settlement offer because it’s the best you’ll get, despite the fact that claim IS worth more and that negotiating IS a viable option.

·         You don’t need to or shouldn’t retain a lawyer because a lawyer can’t help you, despite the fact that an attorney CAN help you protect your rights, interests and claim.

3.    Failing to provide complete, accurate claim information to the provider – When a property damage claim is submitted, the insurance adjuster should collect certain information as part of the claims process. This information should then be promptly and accurately passed onto the insurance provider. Failing to collect all of the necessary information or failing to accurately provide all of the necessary information to the insurance provider can be the basis of an E&O claim against the adjuster.

4.    Failing to meet claim deadlines – Property damage claims (like many other types of insurance claims) are time sensitive. If the adjuster misses a filing deadline for a claim (for any reason), that adjuster can be held accountable for the error.

5.    Breaching the contract – The insurance policy is a contract between the policyholder and the insurance provider. Although the adjuster is not specifically a party to the contract, (s)he can be personally liable for mishandling the claim. For example, when an adjuster fails to reasonably investigate a claim or when (s)he relies on unqualified “experts” to assist in the claims investigation, (s)he can be liable for breach of contract.

It’s important to point out that these are not the only ways in which insurance adjusters may open themselves up to E&O liability.

4 Red Flags You May Have an Errors & Omission Claim against an Insurance Adjuster

Here are a few common warning signs that an adjuster may have been professionally negligent in handling your claim:

1.    The adjuster is unresponsive to your claim submission or fails to promptly respond to any of your inquiries regarding the claim.

2.    The adjuster uses ambiguous, convoluted or conflicting language when explaining your coverage or the claims process.

3.    The adjuster uses high-pressure tactics to try to coerce you into accepting a low settlement offer.

4.    The adjuster denies your claim without providing any (or a valid reason) for the denial in writing.

If you have experienced any of these (or other) questionable incidents when dealing with your insurance adjuster, contact Roofing Professionals of Texas to provide you with a no cost assessment.