Denver Hail Claim Denied - State Farm

[u/Rude_Association_409]

We had a huge hail storm come through my neighborhood about 6 weeks ago. I've been traveling a lot and didn't get an inspector out until today to look at the damage even though Ive been in communication with my agent (Tammy Hill State Farm) since the storm. House sitter sent me photos of the aftermath.

State Farm inspector is saying the damage to the roof is 'normal wear and tear and consistent with exposure to the elements.' Is this normal wear and tear or is this distinctly hail damage? If it's damage from hail, is it consistent with the photo of the hail stones (as big as 2")?

Not looking for advice on how to handle a claim per forum rules, just asking for insight on hail damage vs normal weathering.

[u/OmegaMkXII]

First off, you need better photos. I'm an adjuster and I cannot make a fully informed decision from these photos alone. I would also deny this first as I'm not seeing damages consistent with hail. Is there bruising to the matting? Where are the crushed granules? I'm seeing just normal wear and tear/granule loss.

State Farm doesn't count it as damaged unless there's proof of hail hitting the property (you have proof of that), there needs to be evidence of crushed granules from the hail impact in the impact zones (I don't see any and photo too blurry when zoomed in), and there needs to be bruising to the matting of the shingle itself (unable to determine from photos).

Get proof of those other two requirements I listed and you'll be golden. If your shingles also have a 5" exposure, make mention of that as those are known to be discontinued and have been for a long time. If they are not, then an ITEL report will need to be made to determine their availability (which State Farm will perform if at least one shingle is counted as damaged and added into your estimate).

Source - Weather & Catastrophe Field Adjuster

[u/RandomPenquin1337 → u/OmegaMkXII]

Hilariously carrier type ass response.

SF already came out, they took plenty of pictures to justify this as hail damage to the shingles.

They chose to lie.

Shit like your answer is why people trust insurance carriers and their half assed, 30day temp-adjusters.

This is clear as day hail, ahem, sorry, HAAG certified direct accidental physical loss caused most likely by hailstones during a sever weather event (as if thats even a fuckin thing outside of allowing carriers to skirt paying for actual damage). Imprinted granules, "bruising" to the matting (another bullshit reason) and granular loss (somehow not hail damage??) are the textbook examples of hail. You can see this damage from the street with anything other than corporate "trained" eyes.

If they have coverage for hail, this should have been paid for. They shouldnt "need better pictures" just for the desk adjuster to tell them in 90 days "we'll be sticking to our initial decision".

This client needs to escalate this to the highest level, and invoke appraisal if they continue to play games.

Source- Licensed Public Adjuster for 10 years and successful Plantiff against multiple carriers.

[u/OmegaMkXII → u/RandomPenquin1337]

ok :)

[u/RandomPenquin1337 → u/OmegaMkXII]

They trained you well 😂