Insurance Agents: Can you answer this?

[Raiden256]

[Yoo hoo.. down here! Damn time warps.]

Not sure if it affects the answer, but FYI I currently have a homeowner's policy through Allstate.

So here's the deal: I just signed a contract on a new house, and I am getting ready to sell my current house. I do, however, have a roof leak that I will need to get repaired before I can list the house.

So I had a roofer come out today and he's basically telling me this section of roof will need to be replaced. (I know, get another opinion / you can't trust roofers etc., but assume this is accurate for the purposes of my question).

The trick is, knowing whether or not Allstate agrees with this assessment involves filing a claim and getting an adjuster to come out. That could very well result in someone coming out and approving $600 worth of work, which is only $100 over my deductible. At that point, there's no way I would pursue the claim.

So my question is this: Does filing a claim, even if it doesn't pay out anything, in itself have a negative connotation for future rate increases etc? I understand, at least with Allstate, that generally the first claim doesn't hurt you in that respect, but a second claim would generally trigger a rate hike etc. So would this claim be considered the "first claim" or would it not because they didn't pay anything out on it?

I hope I'm making sense. Anyone?

 

[FoBoT]

claim? what claim? what happened? was the roof damaged by a hurricane or tornado?

 

[Jumpem]

I would think you should just be paying to fix the roof yourself.

Why would homeowners pay for something that falls under routine maintenance?

 

[Raiden256]

Basically it appears that the original builder, some years ago, put the roof on wrong, with the wrong side overlapping the other in this valley section, and water appears to be seeping in under this. Plus no ice/water guard underneath.

Don't want to get into the details of the problem. Just want to know how a non-pursued claim affects my insurability / rates later.

 

[BoomerD]

Originally posted by: Jumpem
I would think you should just be paying to fix the roof yourself.

Why would homeowners pay for something that falls under routine maintenance?

This. Unless the roof was damaged in a covered incident, (fire, storm, etc.) why would your insurance even be involved?

Besides, even if this WAS from a covered incident, since it's only going to pay $100 more than your deductible, why would you "waste a claim" for $100?

(I understand that once the roof is opened up, tons of other damage could be found, jacking the price way "through the roof." )

 

[kranky]

My understanding is that asking if something is covered is still recorded in the CLUE database even if a claim is never filed, although they don't tell you that. Especially if the question is about water damage. They are very concerned about subsequent mold claims which cost a ton to mitigate.