Done With this topic

John Have you looked at the report John ? Because you have been in the insurance industry for as long as you have Weren't you considering being a risk manager ? Which of course requires that you understand claims handling. Now , your agent licensing you scored a 90%. Then of course you got an independent adjuster 520 license by paying $55 to state of FL. Are you still planning on obtaining AIC designation and getting a legal studies degree. ? Very admirable endeavor . Your desire once was to work for a lawyer suing/defending . So now I need to ask ," was this a leading question ?" Are you testing us or ready to teach us about Hail ? I am very curious . Also grateful you are here . Stick around . B) ;) B)>>>

John, Why the emphasis on ALLSTATE? From your experience as an underwriter, are they any better or any worse than the others?>>>

Years ago on this forum we had a similar issue proposed that involved forensic discovery and differentiation between real and faked hail damage. That one was interesting. They were measuring and mapping and analyzing the roof wounds and were able to show the difference between natural hail damage and that caused by a human with limited patience and a ball peen hammer. That's one thing; what you're asking is another.

Your current issue (it seems to me) needs to run a couple of gauntlets. If someone were interested in the phenomenon for the sake of pure science, then there would have to be an examination of accumulated sediment and weathering on a previously stressed surface and a comparison of that with a freshly stressed surface. Surely this must be possible for a legitimate and honest engineering firm to accomplish. Maybe that's what they did and then again maybe they are just forcing someone else to prove otherwise, taking the legal viewpoint that makes us all cynical: 'how much is it worth to you to be right?' I couldn't say, but I do know that if the engineering firm makes an analysis, its reputation has to stand on its ability to document the criterion it uses to reach its conclusions and the results of its inspections and analysis as they relate to the criterion or else it is no more than subjective opinion or complicity in a stalling tactic. If you find an axe stuck in a tree, that's new hail. If you find a tree growing around an axe, that is old hail. I have no doubt they can verify post-stress weathering if they had a mind to. If they were really dialed into the science of it, I would bet they could even determine the approximate date of the hail damage based on degree of weathering. But I doubt if they have actually developed any such methodology or done any such thing. jmho.>>>

If I understand your post correctly .What you are asking is . After you get in an accident, you buy coverage , arguing for repairs because you now have the coverage .?? Is this it ? B) ;) ;) B)>>>