Actually, I must continue to disagree as well:-) I don't think you are aware of the facts behind this technology nor how rapidly it is progressing and becoming commonplace. Seattle is by no means on the forefront of green roof activity - we are well behind Portland and Vancouver BC in this regard - but the real hotbed of activity is in the midwest. Chicago has more green roofs than any other US city - over 200 and covering more than 2.5 million square feet. Dearborn, MI has the largest, 10.4 acres covering the Ford Motor Company truck plant. Minneapolis, Philadelphia, Baltimore, Washington DC, Raleigh NC, Atlanta, New York City and Toronto are all very active green roof areas as well. And then of course there are the dozens of green roofs scattered across California, both commercial and residential. This is not an isolated movement nor is it a flash in the pan technology. Modern green roofs have at least a 30 year history in this country. There is a very active and increasingly growing community of architects and contractors specializing in this approach and scores of companies dedicated to the technology and materials to build and plant living roofs - a simple search through Google will turn up literally hundreds of them. One of the incentives that stir this on is the same you claim to be a deterrent - the downturn in the economy has made it even more appropriate to pursue this technology. Initial costs may be higher to design and install a living roof compared to a conventional roofing system, but this is easily offset by the extended lifespan, the lower maintenance and the energy savings realized over the life of the structure - an investment in a living roof actually saves money.

Let's address the wind vs water debate. I'm not going to dispute some claims were improperly denied, just as some were paid that shouldn't have been. Here's what a typical homeowners policy says (this is a Louisiana policy, BTW): ------------------------------------------------------- LOSSES WE DO NOT COVER We do not insure for loss caused directly or indirectly by any of the following Such loss is excluded regardless of any other cause or event contributing concurrently or in any sequence to the loss 1 Real Property and Tangible Personal Property We do not insure for loss: a Caused by water damage, meaning: (1) Flood, surface water, waves, tidal water, overflow of a body of water, or spray from any of these, whether or not driven by wind; (2) Water which backs up through sewers drains; (3) Water below the surface of the ground, including water which exerts pressure or seeps or leaks through a building, sidewalk, driveway, foundation, swimming pool or other structure; or (4) Water emanating from a sump pump, sump pump well or similar device designed to prevent overflow, seepage leakage of subsurface water Direct loss by fire, explosion or theft resulting from water damage is covered. ------------------------------------------------------- So where did the damage from Katrina happen? When you consider they found boats six miles inland from where they were docked it's evident there was tremendous storm surge. Now let's say the storm surge, which is flood and is covered under a National Flood Ins Plan policy, knocks a home off its foundation and weakens the structure considerably. Now the winds from the hurricane further break the house apart. What's the proximate cause of the loss? The storm surge. Had the surge not happened many of the homes wouldn't have suffered the damage they did. The city of New Orleans is BELOW sea level with a system of levees holding the sea back. Yet, many homeowners chose not to carry flood insurance. They gambled and lost. You can buy a flood policy in most areas for less than the cost of cable TV. Yet I'll bet almost all the people that chose not to carry flood insurance had cable. I never wished this disaster on anyone, but I have a tough time feeling sorry for people that make decisions not to protect themselves when coverage is readily available. The items you cite are minor. Sure, it might be nitpicking, but the home got rebuilt and you were paid. So your going to pay an attorney to help you settle minor issues. Let's see, it took you three hours to get $200 of molding from the company. If your attorney took care of it at $250 per hour what's the point? Yes, just like your business and every other business, insurance companies exist to make a profit. What's your point? Would you want your insurance with a company that doesn't try to control costs and payouts? All the companies I represent are glad to pay what's due and verifiable. We send out surveys on all claims asking for feedback. Close to 90% rate the claim handling as very good or excellent. I consider that fantastic, because as you know as a businessowner, you'll never satisfy 100% of your customers no matter what you do. Kevin

My house is somewhere between 1,200 sq. ft. and 1,400 sq. ft. Its roof has only a small front porch (over the front door) and a small back porch as complications. Last November, I received a letter from my insurance carrier informing me that the insurance on my house would not be renewed unless I provided proof that the shingles on the roof had been replaced, and pointing out that it might be a good idea to get the chimney repointed. Neighbors gave me estimates between $4,000 and $10,000 for getting the roof replaced. After a single shingle fell off, I called a local roofer. The owner of the company came to my house on a Saturday morning. I asked him what it would cost to replace the roof without compromise. Two layers of shingles needed to be removed, a ridge vent needed to be installed, and the chimney needed to be repointed. The owner of the company told me that replacing my roof with GAF Timberline Presqtique shingles with the limited lifetime warranty, installing the ridge vent, installing GAF Leak Guard, installing an 8" drip edge, and repointing the chimney would cost $4,900. I could hardly contain myself, and asked the owner of the roofing firm why some estimates were so much higher. To my amazement, the owner told me that he is selling a service, and some roofers are selling a product. If he interviews 10 perspective customers, he sells 3 or 4 roofs. If people selling a product interview 10 perspective customers, they sell 1 or 2 roofs. Guess who gets to pay for all of the failed sales attempts. For months, I cringled in shame whenever I saw my roof. Now, I have gone from having the worst one on the street to having the best one on the street, done by a roofer with a GAF Certified Master Elite certification.

I thought I'd chime in with an update: Here in Colorado we have had a LOT of BIG hail. Roofing claims are off the charts! *-My insurance deductible AND depreciation were deducted from the total damage estimate. *-They cut me a check....for about a third of what the total damages came to. I think their estimate was low. *-I then scheduled a NEW roof. *- Will take photos of the roof just before they're done, with the roofing estimate paperwork...send that in to the Insurance company and they will reimburse me the depreciation. If I don't repair the huge double redwood deck(needs sanded & stained), cedar fence/dents or gutters/dents, I will have enough to pay for the roof. So in essence....YES....I'm getting a new roof free and clear from the insurance company....but I'm using the money alotted for the deck, fence & gutters repair to do that. ---------------------------------------------------------------- Everything went as the OP said....except....there were other damages that were paid out, but only had enough to pay for the roof.