Allstate denied to cover ice and water shield what should i do?

  • by Sara
  • Jan 03,2019
  • 10 answers

I have a roof claim and they say i don't have a building code coverage. My city requires ice and water shield. The contractor said "It doesn't matter you have it or not, if it's required by the city then they have to cover" Now what? On top of $1000 deductible I have to pay for ice and water shield? Please help and explain to me. I don't know why my home policy doesn't cover building code if it's required?


LIKE OR DISLIKE:

  

Insurance Answers (10)

car253 2 months ago

Casey had the best answer. Building Code upgrades usually comes with included in your policy with 10% unless you purchase more coverage than that. You need to ask your insurance agent why they did not suggest having the building code upgrade. Ask the claim rep if you have it. Ask your insurance agent why you don't have it if you don't. Usually policies policies come with it. Allstate has not sold homeowners policies for many, many years. So, unless you have been with Allstate a very long time, then your homeowners policy is not with Allstate. Your policy may be with a company the Allstate agent brokers with.
This question can be a tricky one. Yes, the roof has to be replaced and it has to be replaced with new building requirements, that would be "building code upgrade". I would file a complaint with your Department of Insurance in your state and then them help you figure this out. They will tell you if Allstate is right or wrong.
You might want to post your state for more help.

Help others find the most helpful reviews
Was this review helpful to you?  

Dinesh 2 months ago

Punch them in the face!

Help others find the most helpful reviews
Was this review helpful to you?  

lucy 2 months ago

https://www.bennettandporter.com/what-is...
Explanation of ordinance or law coverage that you (add/pay) more to be covered. As poster Casey stated, you was grandfathered in with this bill. But once you renovate (loss from your claim) for your roof, then since did not have the coverage, thus had to pay the additional costs.
Just like a friend of mine is "supposedly" in a flood zone. I don't think there has been a flood where she lives in the last 100 years. Now all residents of that area are grandfathered in, thus don't have to buy flood insurance. But once a home is sold and a new buyer, must buy flood insurance. But when she went to re-finance her house, then at that time, to get the loan, (like a new home buyer) she had to buy flood insurance which cost her an additional $4,000 a year.
Sucks, but many not aware, until if/when they file a claim.

Help others find the most helpful reviews
Was this review helpful to you?  

babyboomer1001 2 months ago

It's required and you don't have it so you are in violation. Why should they cover it? You have to BUY the coverage if you want the coverage.

Help others find the most helpful reviews
Was this review helpful to you?  

Rick 2 months ago

You pay for it
Insurance companies only pay for damage, not to bring your house up to code

Help others find the most helpful reviews
Was this review helpful to you?  

Beverly S 2 months ago

Home Policies only pay for damage, they fix what was damaged. They do not cover upgrades (even if the city now requires it). It is considered an upgrade since it wasn't there before.

Help others find the most helpful reviews
Was this review helpful to you?  

Billy 2 months ago

You should pay for the new shield is what you should do. Either that or you should sell the property damaged and take a check from the insurance company for the estimated cost of repair to make up the difference between what you can sell it for and what it was worth before it got damaged.
The insurance company won't pay to replace something that wasn't ever there.
Example:
You have a 1,000 square foot house. The city passes an ordinance that any new home construction in your neighborhood must be at least 5,000 square feet. Do you think your insurance company is obligated to build you a house that's five times bigger at five times the cost just because some local yokels passed an ordinance the insurance company didn't even know about requiring more square footage than you originally had? If that were the case, then insurance companies would have to be apprised of such ordinance changes and you'd have been paying five times as much in insurance premiums because insurance premiums are based on the value of what's actually there, not on what the local government now requires over and above what was actually there.

Help others find the most helpful reviews
Was this review helpful to you?  

emsrr 2 months ago

olgpmnuz

Help others find the most helpful reviews
Was this review helpful to you?  

Casey Y 2 months ago

That is blatantly untrue on the part of the roofer.
Its called Law and Ordinance coverage...which you may or may not have. Most policies include 10% of coverage A for Law and Ordinance coverage, but yours may not for some reason...
Law and Ordinance coverage is additional coverage used to "improve" a home following a loss where required by law. Your house was grandfathered by the law to permit the house to continue to be occupied, but once you renovate, you must correct the issue. As it is an improvement to your home, it wouldn't be covered by the standard coverage lines in your policy...

Help others find the most helpful reviews
Was this review helpful to you?  

Bela 2 months ago

The insurance company only covers the loss. If you didn't actually lose an ice and water shield, then the insurance won't pay to replace it. Maybe your roof was put on before that requirement existed, but that's neither here nor there. All the insurance company is obliged to repair or replace is what was existing, not upgrades that are now required that you never had.
Basically, you insured your existing roof, so what the policy covers is replacing that roof with one just like it, not giving you an upgraded roof that you never had.
Let's say I have a 10-story building with no elevator. The top 5-stories of the building burn and are a total loss. The amount the insurance will pay is the amount it would cost to repair and replace those top 5 stories. So if the city now requires all 10-story buildings that are so substantially renovated to have elevators and putting an elevator in that building will cost me $250,000, then that $250,000 comes out of my pocket. My alternative is to sell the building for what it's worth damaged and collect a check from the insurance company for the loss, which together will be worth what the building was worth before the fire.

Help others find the most helpful reviews
Was this review helpful to you?  

Post a Answer

Your comment was successfully posted!

Or use your account on Blog

Error message here!

Hide Error message here!

Forgot your password?

Or register your new account on Blog

Error message here!

Error message here!

Hide Error message here!

Lost your password? Please enter your email address. You will receive a link to create a new password.

Error message here!

Back to log-in

Close