LEGALLY SPEAKING
Encouraging policyholders to pursue appraisal 
without understanding its implications can lead to 
unfavorable outcomes, potentially costing roofing 
contractors jobs or legal trouble. Moreover, if 
contractors intend to conduct repairs post-appraisal, 
they cannot participate in the appraisal to avoid 
bias, leaving them uninformed until an award 
is granted. This underscores the importance of 
referring policyholders to legal counsel. 
Consider two scenarios where policyholders, 
facing substantial roof damages due to severe 
storms, pursue appraisal without legal consultation. 
In one scenario, the appraisers, influenced by the 
insurer, undervalue damages, and the policyholder’s 
appraiser agrees to excessive depreciation. 
However, as the policy is an actual cash value 
policy, not a replacement cost value policy, the 
policyholder cannot recover depreciation, receiving 
inadequate compensation. In the other scenario, 
despite obtaining a favorable award for significant 
hail damages on a metal roof, a cosmetic roof 
endorsement precludes coverage for cosmetic hail 
damage to metal surfaces. Because appraisal only 
determines the amount of the loss and not issues 
of coverage, the insurance company refuses to 
pay the award. The policyholder, after already 
spending several thousand dollars and months of 
delays, is now faced with trying to find legal counsel 
to enforce the award. Further, in both scenarios 
the policyholders will need to complete all repairs 
outlined in the awards (likely out of pocket) or face 
future denials.
The repercussions extend beyond the 
policyholders. Roofing contractors who 
recommended the appraisal face consequences 
like dissatisfied clients and potential legal 
actions. Inadequate compensation may hinder 
repairs or replacement, causing delays or subpar 
workmanship. Moreover, contractors’ reputations 
may suffer, as clients attribute unfavorable outcomes 
to their recommendations. Now, the policyholder 
may have potential causes of action against the 
roofing contractor, such as violations of consumer 
protection acts, breach of contract, or breach of 
warranty, just to name a few.
Roofing contractors, though proficient in 
diagnosing damages, may lack expertise in insurance 
policies and legal matters.  More importantly, they 
may be prohibited from providing any guidance or 
advice to customers or face stiff penalties or even 
criminal charges. By referring policyholders to 
attorneys with extensive knowledge and experience 
in insurance law, roofing contractors empower 
them with comprehensive guidance and advocacy 
throughout the claims process safeguarding them 
from liability.
Attorneys offer invaluable insights into the 
policyholder’s insurance policy, ensuring that the 
appraisal process aligns with the policyholder’s 
best interests. They can review the policy terms, 
assess the fairness of the appraisal clause, and 
advise on potential risks and alternatives. By 
recommending legal consultation before appraisal, 
roofing contractors demonstrate their commitment to 
protecting policyholders’ rights and interests. They 
recognize the complexities involved in insurance 
disputes and acknowledge the importance of 
seeking comprehensive legal advice. Additionally, 
referring policyholders to attorneys fosters trust 
and transparency in the client-roofing contractor 
relationship.
Conclusion
While appraisal is a vital tool for resolving 
insurance disputes, particularly when it concerns 
roof damages, its pursuit requires careful 
consideration. Advising policyholders to seek legal 
consultation before appraisal is imperative. By doing 
so, roofing contractors empower policyholders 
with the knowledge and advocacy necessary to 
navigate insurance disputes effectively. In this 
collaborative approach, policyholders can receive 
fair compensation for their property damages, 
safeguarding their financial stability, and preserving 
the reputation of the roofing industry.
About the Author: Michelle Le is the owner of the law firm 
Law Offices of Michelle C. Le, PLLC and she serves as 
Of Counsel for the law firm Graybill & Hazlewood, LLC. 
Michelle focuses her practice on insurance recovery litigation 
by representing policyholders in claims related disputes with 
their insurance companies. Michelle’s passion for helping 
policyholders began in 2013 where she was responsible for 
a large insurance docket in a mid-sized firm in San Antonio, 
Texas. In 2017, she established the Law Offices of Michelle 
C. Le, PLLC so she could better serve policyholders dealing 
with insurance disputes by giving personal attention to each 
client’s case. Michelle is admitted to practice law in Kansas, 
Texas, Colorado, and Mississippi.  
www. mrca. org  —  Midwest Roofer
13

View this content as a flipbook by clicking here.