Insurance Inspections

[Pirate]

Someone posted on a topic regarding wood stoves that his house was inspected by the insurance company. Is this common?

I have never had the insurance company out, even after a big loss.

 

[grsthegreat]

My insurance company only wanted to know if the wood stove was UL approved. never looked at it

 

[Soundguy]

mine will allow me to have a wood stove.. or a heatalator.. but not a traditional fire place.

 

[Tollster]

No issues here for over 2 years,but it never hurst to have you fire company come out and take a look before the insurance man comes around, throw them a few bucks to boot as they normally do it for free.

 

[MarkV]

Someone posted on a topic regarding wood stoves that his house was inspected by the insurance company. Is this common?

I have never had the insurance company out, even after a big loss.

Well I know it happens but I suspect not everywhere. I have a friend that got a letter saying they were canceling him if he didn't get a railing on a back deck. They included photos taken by an inspector that stuck a camera through his gate to the back yard. That was in a big city though.

MarkV

 

[Bird]

mine will allow me to have a wood stove.. or a heatalator.. but not a traditional fire place.

That's something I never heard of. Our current home has a traditional fireplace. We've been here over 6 years and when we first moved in, I thoroughly cleaned the ashes out of it, and we've never lit a fire in it.

 

[KTurner]

When we moved here about 3 years ago (from 6 miles away), we had to switch from one large ins. provider to another. The first one no longer created new policies in our area because we're too close to the ocean, even though we had been a claim-free customer for almost a decade. We're 30 miles inland from the mouth of the chesapeake bay. Anyway. I don't remember how long it was after we moved and became a customer of the second provider, but the local agent came to our house and checked things out. He took measurements on the wood stove, including how close combustible materials were to it, how the brick surround was made (checked for a gap between it and the wall), and a couple other things. I forget what other things he looked at, the wood stove sticks out because he spent a lot more time with it. He did ask if we were going to fix the inground pool.

Keith

 

[JD 4520]

Insurance carriers and companies are simply being way more cautious about what they are insuring and the relative risks and replacement costs. So it may have not been normal in the past but more and more inspections are part of the underwriting process.

It's too easy to misunderstand or misrepresent what is being insured including the quality of finishes or risks and then dealing with a problem later when a claim occurs. It's called CYA.

 

[powerpace]

I mentioned the Insurance Inspection in a previous post. In Oregon all woodstoves are to be installed according to code. They must also be checked by the local building inspector. If you have a fire of any kind in your house and you do not have the installation inspected they are inclined to not cover you.

My brother-in-law was going to install a wood stove in his 60x60 shop. Corrugated metal over steel frame on slab. The insurance company would not cover the building if it was installed. I believe the reason being the flammable liquids stored in the building in the form of fuel tanks in vehicles and extra fuel.

In Oregon you cannot advertise or resell a nonapproved woodstove. Used or new. It must have the approval plate attached.

Fire Departments are overstepping their authority to inspect a private residence for safety or code. At least in Oregon.

 

[ultrarunner]

Fire Departments are overstepping their authority to inspect a private residence for safety or code. At least in Oregon.

I was surprised a couple of years ago when two firemen were standing at the door saying they needed to inspect inside the home... they have been doing outside inspection for a few years... looking over fences or from neighbors yards with binoculars...

The citizens approved a new parcel tax to fund these inspections.

This is in the SF Bay Area...

 

[bp fick]

Wood stove installation inspections are now common for both municipality and insurance companies. Usually the inspection covers them both.

 

[dmccarty]

I was surprised a couple of years ago when two firemen were standing at the door saying they needed to inspect inside the home... they have been doing outside inspection for a few years... looking over fences or from neighbors yards with binoculars...

The citizens approved a new parcel tax to fund these inspections.

This is in the SF Bay Area...

I get the inspection at installation time but inspection afterwards? I really have to wonder at the legality. If you refuse the inspection I would assume there is a fine. How is that different from a LEO demanding entry to "inspect" the house? I am afraid I would tell them to get a warrant.

Yet another reason to avoid CA like the plague.

When we built the house and got a new policy I spent a good half hour on the phone with the insurance company talking about the house. They asked about wood stoves and fireplaces but it did not seem to be a problem. We spent more time trying to figure out how to list our floor type since we have finished concrete which was not on their list.

The were VERY interested in that we had a GSD.

We got insurance but switched a year or so later because the Farm Bureau was very much cheaper for the same coverage. The new company DID visit the house but it was to take photos of the tractor and implements. :laughing:

Later,
Dan

 

[Depmandog]

FIL got a letter from his insurance company telling him he had to reroof his house or they would cancel the policy.

Mind you he didn't have any roof leaks - yea the roof was at the end of its useful life but it's not like had tarps patching holes..

He ignored it, then got a cure letter, fix it within 30 days or the policy is termed.

He decided he better comply, so he tore off the old, and put on a new one.

 

[Western]

FIL got a letter from his insurance company telling him he had to reroof his house or they would cancel the policy.

Mind you he didn't have any roof leaks - yea the roof was at the end of its useful life but it's not like had tarps patching holes..

He ignored it, then got a cure letter, fix it within 30 days or the policy is termed.

He decided he better comply, so he tore off the old, and put on a new one.

I've heard of this several times here on TBN. I guess there are 2 advantages, 1 you have a new roof and 2 If there is damage to the roof in the future you have a good idea on replacement cost if the Insurance Co tries to "low ball " you.

Personally, I have never seen an insurance inspector, even when I had roof damage, they just sent me a check?? Kind of like I do for them every freak-in month:laughing:

 

[ultrarunner]

I get the inspection at installation time but inspection afterwards? I really have to wonder at the legality. If you refuse the inspection I would assume there is a fine. How is that different from a LEO demanding entry to "inspect" the house? I am afraid I would tell them to get a warrant.

Yet another reason to avoid CA like the plague.

When we built the house and got a new policy I spent a good half hour on the phone with the insurance company talking about the house. They asked about wood stoves and fireplaces but it did not seem to be a problem. We spent more time trying to figure out how to list our floor type since we have finished concrete which was not on their list.

The were VERY interested in that we had a GSD.

We got insurance but switched a year or so later because the Farm Bureau was very much cheaper for the same coverage. The new company DID visit the house but it was to take photos of the tractor and implements. :laughing:

Later,
Dan

Without an inspection... there is no certificate of compliance for the year. This can create a problem with your insurance carrier.

As far as I know... a home owner can refuse to allow inspectors to enter and in that case, the inspector is limited to an outside visual inspection...

Anyone that rents or has a business cannot refuse...

There have been several high profile cases... one, the widow owner and her tenant refused the city of Hayward entry and the city would not back down... eventually the city obtained a warrant to conduct the inspection.

The city was also requiring the owner to make the property available... even if against the tenant's wishes... there have been several rulings on this.

I managed a few rentals in Hayward and no longer do so because of this... if the city finds a single violation... the owner is bill several hundred dollars for the inspection and one re-inspection...

One of the single family homes failed due to a loose downspout and another due to a wobbly fence post ON THE NEIGHBORS PROPERTY! It was deemed a safety hazard because the fence was within 24" of the property line... the city also doesn't allow any exposed plastic piping... so no plastic P-traps under the sink.

http://www.naylornetwork.com/caa-nwl/articles/index-v2.asp?aid=133173&issueID=22014

http://rhosource.wordpress.com/2011/12/26/rho-v-hayward-appellate-court-rules-on-inspection-program/

Insurance Inspection is becoming more the norm here...

 

[dmccarty]

Without an inspection... there is no certificate of compliance for the year. This can create a problem with your insurance carrier.

As far as I know... a home owner can refuse to allow inspectors to enter and in that case, the inspector is limited to an outside visual inspection...

Anyone that rents or has a business cannot refuse......

That is simply unreal.

These are inspections every year? Are these inspections for the wood stove only or do they do more?

Years ago the Journal of Light Construction covered how the CA plumbers where fighting the a code change to allow PEX. The current code required copper and the plumbers did not want to use PEX. I guess because it would cost LESS to install PEX than copper.

Later,
Dan

 

[powerpace]

If they didn't want to install PEX because they couldn't charge as much they were cheating themselves. It is much easier to install PEX than copper. In my case "because of Mercury and Arsenic in the water" We had a duel PEX installation. One for drinking purposes the other for all other, Dishwasher, clotheswasher, bathroom, showers. It could also be used for all the systems. This was done for water treatment or delivered water if needed. Hose bibs on each corner of the residence also.

The cost for the duel system was about half that of copper. That was when copper was cheap. Two guys did it in less than a half day. No problems in five years. The previous house had electolysis problems with copper. Almost everyone I know that has a house built over ten years ago has copper pipe problems.

One of the problems I have heard of with PEX is rodents chewing along with the wiring. That sounds more like a Rat problem than a PEX problem.

 

[ultrarunner]

That is simply unreal.

These are inspections every year? Are these inspections for the wood stove only or do they do more?

Years ago the Journal of Light Construction covered how the CA plumbers where fighting the a code change to allow PEX. The current code required copper and the plumbers did not want to use PEX. I guess because it would cost LESS to install PEX than copper.

Later,
Dan

The City Fire Inspections are every year in the month of June... they do a defensible space inspection that also includes what is on the property and chimney/firebox... we are assessed for this service... that came about when they were looking for a way to channel more money to the fire department.

The Code Compliance Inspections for rentals in the neighboring city are every 5 years and the city has spent untold thousands to enforce this... it was truly unbelievable when I received the notice... nothing ambiguous in it... It said the owner WILL Comply... for me, it was a business decision to no longer do business in that city... having to ask a neighboring property owner to put in new fence posts because the city gave me the order was nuts...

The neighbor was an old retired guy... bought the home new in 1959 and put in the fence... I showed him the letter I recieved and told him I had no luck... he gave me permission to replace the posts for the 5' fence and even offered to pay for the material... he was to frail with Parkinson's to do any of the work...

My brother is in the business and he has lots of things to comply with... some areas require all copper piping or new low flush toilets as a condition of sale... others require new sewer laterals... actually an inspection and if you have anything be plastic underground... it is an automatic fail...

All have Smoke Detector ordinances... most now require hardware and one for every sleeping area plus one for each level... had to put in 5 for a 1200 square foot home...

As to the wood stoves... it is becoming less of an issue because of the no burn periods...

 

[Clyde]

These are inspections every year? Are these inspections for the wood stove only or do they do more?

Years ago the Journal of Light Construction covered how the CA plumbers where fighting the a code change to allow PEX. The current code required copper and the plumbers did not want to use PEX. I guess because it would cost LESS to install PEX than copper.

Later,
Dan

In this state, one has to be aware of the consequences of refusing admittance to property appraisers and insurance companies. For the appraisers, if you want to argue about the appraised property value, they can assess at any value they see appropriate and you have no options for rebuttal. They seem to appear about every 2 years.

As for insurance companies, read the contract very closely. By denying access, you are consenting to basically insuring yourself to any item on the list for causing the damage to your property. All of us know the politics that go with any of these services and there is always a loophole to cover their butts. I never will nor have I denied entrance for these reasons. Other than the original visit to my property, the insurance company has never come back to re-evaluate. Basicly, they are looking for the obvious items that might cause a claim. I can see the questionability of a fireplace even though I disagree with it. How many fireplaces exist in houses today? It makes no difference to them that the fireplace is cleaned out - it is the fact that it takes 15 minutes to light a fire. All of us are conscientious enough to close the screens or doors on the fireplace before we go to bed, but there are a heck of alot people who don't have a clue. I haven't had a claim for house or car insurance in 30 years so one has to wonder why we have to pay the price we do for insurance? Unfortunately, there is no I.Q test required before one can buy insurance.

As for PEX in any application - to me it is a quick install, cost effective, and lasts forever. Impervious to electrolysis and put together without any lead solder and no exfoliation of the PEX. One has to figure that in CA that the plumbers have a good union to pay the lobbyists to lean the politicians in their favor. It should be nation wide and all in one manual. Right now, every state, every city and every township in that state, writes their own codes. Hmmm...

Gary

 

[kco]

Insurance inspections seem to be required when a home changes ownership where I live in British Columbia, and they pay particular (but not unreasonable) attention to wood stoves and furnaces. Inspectors make sure clearances to walls and ceilings are equal or greater than those specified for the stove or furnace. The clearances are specified on a nameplate.

Another item checked, and which seems to have changed, is the chimney. In the past it was acceptable to run a steel pipe into an ordinary masonry chimney. Now the metal pipe must continuous to the top. The previous owners of our house had to make this change (cost $1,500) when they bought it. Also, our new neighbours had to similarly modify their installation when they moved in several years ago. It seems like old installations are OK until there is a reason to do an inspection, then they require it to be brought up to the new code.