Mn Siding Match Law

And because just the hail damaged panels could not be replaced without creating a color mismatch the buildings had sustained a distinct demonstrable and physical alteration.

Mn siding match law.

Because the appraisal panel properly concluded that siding of comparable material and quality required a reasonable color match between the damaged and undamaged siding we affirm the court of appeals decision. I ve been told minnesota has a match law that requires insurance companies to cover all shingles or siding on house if part of the shingles or siding is damages and they can no longer match size or color. Because real estate law varies from place to place can you tell me what state this is in. That case directly addressed american family insurance s failure to provide match replacement for homeowners roofing and siding storm loss claims.

Just wondering if that is true. Sometime insurance companies insist on only replacing a portion of a roof or siding particularly the area that has direct physical damage. Normal damage that occurs to your home s siding like fading from sun exposure or dirt and grime is your responsibility and won t be covered for the replacement cost. Material and quality requires the replacement of all siding even undamaged siding in order to provide a color match.

This may be one slope of a roof or one side of a house. This may be one slope of a roof or one side of a house. A good illustration of the matching uniformity problem is found in a 2014 minnesota federal district court case in which a manufacturer discontinued the shingles used on the insured s roof thus. Matching issues are frequently problematic when storms damage only portions of an insured structure s exterior and it proves impossible to replace the damaged sections with material that is an exact match for the rest of the building s roof or siding.

This coverage is not available in mn at this time. The match law issue in minnesota arose out of a 1999 district court case brought by then attorney general mike hatch against american family mutual insurance company. It is a matter of great importance to insurance companies because matching problems with a slightly damaged section of roof or flooring can lead. Sometime protection companies insist on only changing a portion of a roof or siding particularly the area that has direct physical damage.

Shingles siding carpet cabinets etc whether and when a carrier must replace non damaged portions of a building in order for there to be a perfect match remains a point of contention. The minnesota supreme court determined that the policy s provision for replacements of comparable material and quality required a reasonable color match between new and existing siding. Is there a minnesota law requiring insurance companies to match your shingles or siding in an insurance claim.