Trampolines are a menace when the wind picks up—mine ended up wedged between a fence and a lilac bush last spring, and I’m still finding springs in the grass. As for insurance photos, I’ve definitely been there with the “too close, missed the obvious” problem. It’s weird how you can focus so much on one thing and totally overlook something major. I started doing a quick walkaround video before storms now, just in case.
About the insurance bill drop after an inspection—yeah, that surprised me too. I always assumed they’d use it as an excuse to raise rates or nitpick stuff. But after I put on a metal roof (went with standing seam, not cheap but supposed to last), my insurer knocked off a chunk because of the fire rating and wind resistance. Didn’t expect that at all. Did your inspector mention anything specific that helped your rate? Or was it just general “roof in good shape” kind of thing?
I’m curious if anyone’s had luck with green or “cool” roofing materials making a difference on premiums. I asked my agent about solar shingles and reflective coatings, but she seemed pretty indifferent—said it’s mostly about age and condition for them. Seems like there should be more incentive for stuff that’s storm-resistant or energy-saving, but maybe that’s just wishful thinking.
One thing I learned: if you’re taking photos for claims or inspections, get shots from all four corners of the house plus any obvious trouble spots. Wide shots help catch stuff you’d miss otherwise (like your branch situation). And if you’ve got trees close by, insurers seem to care a lot about overhanging limbs—even more than shingle type sometimes.
Anyone else get pushback from insurance when switching to something non-traditional? My neighbor tried going with a living roof (sedum mats), and his insurer basically shrugged and said “nope.” Makes me wonder how much innovation they’re actually willing to reward...
Wide shots help catch stuff you’d miss otherwise (like your branch situation). And if you’ve got trees close by, insurers seem to care a lot about overhanging limbs—even more than shingle type sometimes.
This is spot on. I had an adjuster point out a maple limb hanging over my garage I’d basically tuned out after years—he flagged it as a “potential hazard” before even looking at the actual roof. It’s funny, I spent weeks researching impact-resistant shingles and reflective coatings, thinking that would matter most, but the inspector was way more interested in tree clearance and gutter condition. My rate only dropped after I took down two limbs and patched a bit of flashing. The roof itself? Just got a “good condition” note.
I asked about cool roof coatings too, but got the same “doesn’t affect premium” answer. Maybe it’s a regional thing, but around here (Midwest), they mostly care about wind, fire, and hail resistance. Anything “innovative” seems to make them nervous. My cousin tried to get credit for solar panels and they barely acknowledged it. Guess the industry just isn’t there yet, which is kind of a bummer if you’re trying to be proactive.
Had a guy once who was obsessed with his “Class 4” shingles—kept showing me the packaging like it was a golden ticket. Meanwhile, he had a pine tree basically hugging his chimney. Guess which one the adjuster cared about? Not the fancy shingles... I always wonder if they just want less paperwork from falling branches. Anyone else notice they barely glance at the actual roof sometimes?
- Seen this a lot—folks get fixated on the “Class 4” label, but miss the stuff that actually gets flagged.
- Insurance adjusters seem to care way more about what’s *around* the roof than what’s nailed to it. Overhanging trees, clogged gutters, moss... those get their attention fast.
- Not saying Class 4 shingles are useless—they do help with hail claims in some regions. But if you’ve got branches scraping the roof or a tree ready to drop a limb, that’s what’ll get you dinged.
- Had a client last month with brand new impact-resistant shingles, but his neighbor’s maple was basically leaning over his ridge vent. Adjuster barely looked at the shingle paperwork—just pointed at the tree and made notes.
- I get it, though. Trees = more claims (wind, ice, critters). Shingles are only as good as what’s not falling on them.
- Sometimes I wonder if adjusters just want to avoid arguing about shingle specs. Easier to say “trim that pine” than debate UL ratings.
- Quick tip: If you want a lower premium, clear the overhangs and keep stuff off the roof. Fancy shingles are nice, but clean surroundings seem to matter more for most carriers.
- Noticed in my area (Midwest), they’ll sometimes ask for photos of the attic too—looking for leaks or old water stains. Never had one ask for a close-up of shingle packaging...
- Maybe it’s different out West where hail is king? Around here, trees and drainage are what get flagged every time.
- Bottom line: Don’t ignore the basics just because you’ve got “premium” materials up top. The boring stuff still matters most when it comes to insurance eyes.
I’ve seen the same thing—adjusters barely glance at the shingle type if there’s a big limb hanging over the eaves or moss creeping up the north side. Curious if anyone’s actually had an adjuster flag something like gutter guards or attic ventilation as a positive? Or is it mostly just “clear the trees, clean the gutters” and move on?
