TAMPA, Fla. (WFLA) – James Lowe and Lorana Troncozo both own their own part of the duplex where they live. They own their part of the roofs over their heads, too, and their insurance companies are viewing those roof very differently.
Troncozo received a letter from her insurance company recently, informing her they have done a visual inspection and determined that her part of the roof needs to be replaced. If it’s not done by May 15, she’ll lose coverage.
Next door, Lowe was worried to hear the news, but was puzzled when he called his insurance company and was told the roof is fine for now.
“They said they would give me a year’s notice when they thought it was time to replace it,” Lowe explained.
Now Troncozo finds herself in the middle of a roofing runaround documented by Better Call Behnken. Insurance companies, making up for years of what they call fraudulent claims, are scrutinizing roofs and requiring older roof be replaced.
It’s not surprising they’ve zeroed in on the roof owned by Lowe and Troncozo: it’s 22 years old, after all. What is unusual is the reaction of the insurance companies.
Troncozo wonders how two companies can view the same roof so differently and why she’s not being given more time to come up with the money to replace her side of the roof.
As for Lowe, he had a difficult decision to make: replace his part of the roof early so it continues to match his neighbor’s roof, or do as some in the neighborhood have done and have his neighbor replace only her side.
“It didn’t make sense to me that we do it separately at different times since we had done it together before and so it just kind of blindsided me as far as scrambling to get some money together and that sort of thing,” Lowe said.
