Attended the class in Jax yesterday. (Thanks Steve for alerting me to this). Very in-depth class on the requirements and background on the 1802 and proposed changes. This class was very helpful to me and a bargain at the price.
One thing I learned (and I’m PO’d) that I did not pick up anywhere else:
There is no wind mit credit for reinforced masonry wall construction. We inspect for it and we report on it but it does not mean one thing. Any credits for reinforced masonry (if any) are applied to the homes rating for fire, etc. A solid concrete home, properly constructed or over constructed does not count any more than a wood frame home or other frame home.
Bill York reports it is proposed to be dropped on the new form. So save yourself some time, and tell your clients to quit worrying about their “block home” - doesn’t mean a thing.
Interesting point, John. Why don’t you send that over to Bill York and ask him why he is saying there is no credit for reinforced masonry? Citizens personnel were in the class yesterday and not one of them disputed Bill York (one guy appeared to be some sort of honcho but he wouldn’t talk to any inspectors). I have always found it interesting none of the insurance co’s place a credit value on the 9 items per the 1802; they are all vague.
I think, as usual, there is a tick in the woodpile!
Richard, per Bill York, any amount of wood framing will be classified as wood frame construction by the insurance co’s, even small gables and then he said, it doesn’t matter anyway since there is no wind mit credit for masonry, reinforced or non-reinforced. It is a BIG SECRET and I for one am PO’d as I have basically confirmed to clients they should receive some level of wind credit for reinforced masonry. I know for a fact, this applied in the past based on my own premiums on my properties and the homes I have built - what I don’t know is When Did They Stop giving it or Stop Disclosing They Are Not Giving It?. This is their way of internally reinventing the rating system to avoid credits and it should not be allowed.
Bill - Unless I am missing something… I think I have to disagree with your assessment. While there may not be a “discount” for reinforced masonry. The form still helps agents determine how a home should be rated frame or block. This rating can make a huge difference in premium… …
I think that the confusion here relates to the intent of the “Wind Mitigation Inspection program”. While masonry block construction may provide a discount on a homeowner’s insurance policy, it has no discount for the “wind” portion of the policy. The official wind mitigation program was developed by the legislature in Statute (FS 627.711) and implemented by the OIR through the “Rule Making Process”. Governmental agencies( in this case- the OIR) can only implement rules to enforce a statute or law. With that said, the law or statute only relates to wind storm mitigation credits. As such, the OIR and the insurance industry may have exceeded their authority when developing the rule and the current OIR B1 1802 by adding the wall section to the form that has no effect on wind storm premium credits. It does, however, affect the overall credits on a homeowner’s policy. I think what Bill was trying to convey is that the insurance industry and the OIR may have overstepped their authority by collecting additional data over and above what would be required for “wind storm credits”. The new version of the form will likely have this item removed as well as the gable end bracing section.
Ditto, “what Steve said”. Yes Michelle, there is a credit for masonry over wood frame but that credit is not based on the OIR wind inspection report. Insurer’s may perhaps be using this portion of our report for other perils but we are not being paid to provide this. My issue is, it is a part of the 1802 and as such, implies there may be a credit; otherwise, why would it be on the form? In fact, there is no credit and this is very misleading. Secondly, the Nachi WM course alludes there is a credit for reinforced masonry so the course is wrong. I suspect other courses do the same. It appears, at least I and most likely others, have been improperly trained and we have advised our clients incorrectly. I actually wonder if the agents know Section 7 is meaningless. I consider John Shishilla an “expert” on wind mits and he was not specifically aware of this. Now, when Nachi doesn’t know of this, when John S. doesn’t know of this, when hundreds of “approved inspectors” do not know of this, when the agents do not know of this…what are we all doing and how much more do we not know? To me, it sounds like pure manipulation and I do not like being manipulated.
William we should not be worrying about premiums and discounts, that is not our domain. It is nice to be knowledgeable about what is and is not a discount but no inspector should be discussing it with a client in terms of policy rates. If you are you are crossing the line from inspector in insurance agent. Insurance companies underwriting guidelines change all the time. It would be impossible to write a coarse that addressed all the guidelines. The 1802 form is has been re-interpreted based on those guidelines. That being said I will look at the coarse to see if the wall structure section is worded properly. If you are concerned about insurance companies taking advantage of us and clients you should voice your opinion to the OIR they have the power to control it. We just answer the questions.
If anyone thinks that is the only "additional’ information that the insurance companies gleam from the form, they would be sadly mistaken. Just, include a picture of a trampoline, diving board, pool slide or man eating dog.
Anything above 33% frame increases the premium 25%… So, Masonry construction means cheaper insurance than wood frame. This has been true for years. It doesnt seem that confusing to me
It’s big factor here…The clarification on it factoring to the price of ‘fire/other perils’ than the windstorm coverage.
Anyone heard of a frame house with 100% Hardiboard, being priced as though it was 100% masonry?
Agent asked my to add that detail, so the client would get the lower insurance (masonry credit). I thought it was nuts. But if the Masonry issue is related to fire rather than Windstorm, it makes more sense.
Nothing in my post alluded to my ever discussing “rates” with a client and I almost resent the implication, O Wise One. Thank you for confirming Section 7 is meaningless to a wind mit report which is all my post is about. What have you been telling your clients who simply ask, “what kind of credit do I get or do I get a wind mit credit, for having a solid, 48” thick, 7500 psi concrete, triple mat 7/8" rebar, wall?" Bet you haven’t said, "Sir, I can not cross the line between a HI and an IA or insurance rater as to do so would violate my COE and misrepresent the facts. I am simply here to complete a checklist issued by the OIR and I do not have any knowledge of how it is used or what part of the form is used and I don’t care since I am just a HI and I suggest you direct any questions to the OIR…or you can say, “I am the Wind Mit Guru and I know more about Wind Mits than anybody in the world but I don’t know which sections of the report are utilized for credits or even if they mean anything and that is not important because I can’t cross the line by understanding what I’m doing as it applies to the purpose in your hiring me in the first place”
Knowing that insurance underwriting guidelines change every year and that they are different for every company, why would anyone think they could understand them all. Agents and underwriters use computers to calculate rates and change input lines to figure what items can save money for clients. I tell clients “generally or should be a discount” if they must know, but they always need to discuss it with their agent.
That being said, I hold Bill York in the highest regard have taken his class several time myself. I have even had him at our chapter meetings. He has more insight to wind mits than any other person I know. I even told people(on another thread) they should take his class.
Will, I do resent you sarcasm. I have never called myself a wind mit guru and have always tried to help other inspectors understand the complexity of insurance inspections. If you have ever been miss lead by me I do apologize and understand you frustration. You are taking you frustration out on a fellow inspector that has put in time and effort to help his brothers with nothing to gain personally. IF you are po’d at me for that then you are less of a man than I thought. I am done with you and this thread, best of luck, sir.
Mr York’s class is excellent. Many college classes I took were excellent. When editing a freinds dissertation for their doctorate we realized anything can be manipulated to prove your research/stats are correct. Henceforth, I never totally believe what I hear, see, or read. That is why you have a mind and free will. Do some research…