Roofing Insurance Laws in Pennsylvania

Authority

Papurello v. State Farm Fire & Cas. Co., 144 F. Supp. 3d 746 (W.D. Pa. 2015), applying Pennsylvania law, holds that under the replacement-cost-less-depreciation method the property whose value depreciates is the finished product, so labor may be depreciated. No Pennsylvania statute, regulation, or appellate decision bars the practice. Pennsylvania appellate law confirms that depreciation deductions are proper where the policy expressly provides for them. London v. Ins. Placement Facility of Pa., 703 A.2d 45 (Pa. Super. 1997); Kane v. State Farm Fire & Cas. Co., 841 A.2d 1038 (Pa. Super. 2003). Both address depreciation generally rather than labor specifically. Kurach v. Truck Ins. Exch., 235 A.3d 1106 (Pa. 2020) concerns contractor overhead and profit, not labor depreciation, and does not cut against Papurello.

Papurello v. State Farm Fire & Cas. Co., 144 F. Supp. 3d 746 (W.D. Pa. 2015) — full opinion (Casemine) · Kurach v. Truck Ins. Exch., 235 A.3d 1106 (Pa. 2020) — PA Supreme Court on overhead/profit in ACV (confirms deductions proper where policy authorizes; not contrary on labor)

Authority

Greene v. United Services Auto. Ass'n, 936 A.2d 1178 (Pa. Super. 2007), construing replacement cost of that part of the building damaged and like construction language, holds the insurer owed replacement of one damaged slope of a twelve-slope roof, not the whole roof, and that like construction requires only similarity in function, color, and shape. Collins v. Allstate Ins. Co., 2009 WL 4729901 (E.D. Pa. 2009) recognizes the availability exception: where replacement materials of like kind and quality in similar color, size, and texture are not reasonably available, the repair-versus-replace question goes to the fact-finder. Outcomes turn on the exact policy wording and on whether like-kind materials exist.

Greene v. United Services Automobile Association (2007) — full Pa. Superior Court opinion, FindLaw (primary) · Collins v. Allstate Insurance Co., No. 2:09-cv-01824 (E.D. Pa. Dec. 10, 2009) — full opinion, Casemine (primary)

Authority

The Home Improvement Consumer Protection Act's prohibited acts provision, 73 P.S. § 517.9, enumerates twelve prohibited acts; none mentions deductibles or rebates, and its only insurance reference is the contractor's own liability-insurance obligation at § 517.9(10)(ii)(B). The general statutes reach the fraudulent version. 18 Pa.C.S. § 4117(a)(2) makes it a crime to knowingly present a claim statement containing false, incomplete, or misleading information; it has no deductible-specific subsection. The Unfair Trade Practices and Consumer Protection Law, 73 P.S. § 201-1 et seq., incorporated into HICPA by 73 P.S. § 517.10, reaches deceptive advertising. A disclosed discount is lawful. Because the carrier owes the covered loss less the deductible, a lower real price means a lower carrier payment, so a discount does not relieve the homeowner of the deductible. Financing the deductible is not waiving it.

Home Improvement Consumer Protection Act, Act 132 (73 P.S. § 517.1 et seq.) — full text, PA Office of Attorney General (primary/.gov) · 73 P.S. § 517.9 — Prohibited acts (HICPA) — verified: no deductible/rebate language · 18 Pa.C.S. § 4117 — Insurance fraud — verified: exists, no deductible-specific clause · 73 P.S. § 517.10 — Unfair trade practices (HICPA incorporation of UTPCPL)

Authority

Public Adjuster Licensing Law, Act of Dec. 20, 1983, P.L. 260, No. 72 (63 P.S. §§ 1601-1608). Section 1601 defines a public adjuster as any person advertising, soliciting business, or holding himself out to the public as an adjuster of claims for losses on property insurance in the Commonwealth who receives compensation for giving the insured advice or assistance in the adjustment of such claims. Section 1602 bars acting directly or indirectly as a public adjuster without a license. The definition is conjunctive: holding out as an adjuster plus compensated advice or assistance in adjustment. Its only exemptions are insurer agents and employees adjusting losses under policies they wrote, and producers adjusting without compensation. There is no contractor exemption and no express contractor prohibition. Implementing regulations appear at 31 Pa. Code Ch. 115; § 115.7 incorporates the act's penalty provisions and the Unfair Insurance Practices Act for a pattern of violations or a single flagrant violation. Two qualifications. The Home Improvement Consumer Protection Act, 73 P.S. §§ 517.1-517.19, says nothing about insurance claims, claim negotiation, public adjusting, or deductibles; its prohibited-acts section covers registration, refunds, false completion certificates, abandonment, deviation from plans, fraudulent financing, false advertising, and deposit limits. And no Pennsylvania court opinion or Insurance Department bulletin applies Act 72 to roofing contractors specifically, so the estimate-versus-negotiation line rests on the statutory text.

Public Adjuster Licensing Law, Act 72 of 1983 (63 P.S. §§ 1601–1608) — full official text, PA General Assembly · 31 Pa. Code Ch. 115 (Public Adjuster Contracts) — table of contents and statutory authority citing 63 P.S. §§ 1601—1608 · 31 Pa. Code § 115.7 (Penalties; incorporates Act §§ 6–8 and the Unfair Insurance Practices Act) · Home Improvement Consumer Protection Act, Act 132 of 2008 (73 P.S. §§ 517.1 et seq.) — full text; § 9 prohibited acts contain no insurance-claim provision