Proposed Changes to the Wind Mitigation Will Hurt Treasure Coast Residents.

Proposed changes in the new wind mitigation form are being discussed in Tallahassee on Tuesday September 20, 2011. If passed as discussed, it will dramatically impact the residents of Saint Lucie, Martin, & Palm Beach county. The changes would require a 3 nail minimuim for a ‘CLIP’ rating. Many of the older exsisting homes have 2 nails. The cost increase could be several hundred dollars a year. A cost that many cannot afford.

Get involved and contact your representatives in the State and contact the Office of Insurance reglation.

Read more of my comments at the NACHI forum:

http://www.nachi.org/forum/f73/public-hearing-uniform-mitigation-verification-inspection-form-63786/

4 Comments

Leave a comment
  1. Darius H Grimes CRC, CSI-CDT, CWMI August 29, 2011 at 12:05 pm #

    Jay,

    You are correct that the industry is recommending this change based on the fact that a 2 nail clip is only slightly better than toe-nail.

    We are also recommending reducing the number of nails in a wrap based on new testing from Simpson Stong-Tie. And the opening protection section is being improved to make sure folks with all glazed openings protected are eligable for credits. In addition we are adding languge to make sure these forms are goof for 5 years as long as no material changes have occured to the structure.

    Most changes are positive but we are not trying to reduce rates for consumers with this form, that is not the purpose. The puspose is to match eligible credits with the OIR B1-1699 form adopted by the state. The purpose of the state adopting the 2002 Loss Relativities Study, and the Florida Building Code adding recommendations in the code based on the same study, is to harden Florida’s building stock to reduce damage and loss of housing.

    Under CFO Sink the MSFH program was twisted for political purpose into an insurance savings program, that program also was supposed to be about hardening homes.

    We have a lot of 2 nail clip homes in our area dating back to the late 1950’s when builder first started using them. The intent of form change is not to help or harm consumers, it is to comply with the OIR B1-1699 form, Florida Statutes, and the 2002 Loss Relativities Study developed by Applied Research Associates. This is based on science and research and the intent of credits has always been to incetivise consumers to harden thier homes, not to merely reduce rates based on exisitng features.

    Hope this helps.

    • Jay C. Murray August 30, 2011 at 8:54 pm #

      Hello Mr. Grimes,
      Thank you for commenting on the discussion. Readers should know that you are a well respected and distinguished leader in the Disaster Preparedness & Inspection Industry. You are also very involved in the process that designs these inspections for the State of Florida.
      The leadership of the Florida Chapter of International Association of Certified Home Inspectors (NACHI) and myself, will be attending the Sept. 20 meeting regarding this issue in Tallahassee. I hope we will have a chance to speak there and learn more about the data and the intentions behind the change in the new form.
      As you mention, the proposed changes will benefit some. The new nail requirement for a Single Wrap rating will help many homeowners. However, the new 3 nail requirements for Clips, will have a significantly greater impact on owners of older homes with the 2 nail ‘strap’.
      Your comments point out the intent of these changes are to encourage hardening of our homes. Improvements in the Florida Building Codes, especially regarding roofing enhancement, have significantly reduced damages from recent storms. But, if hardening homes is the impetus for the changes. Why is the shutter credit the least cost effective?
      I appreciate you insight and hope you will continue to inform us of the details involved in the new Wind Mitigation form.
      Jay C. Murray

      JCM Building Services
      Home Inspection & Wind Mitigation Provider
      http://www.jcmbuildingservices.com

      • Darius H Grimes CRC, CSI-CDT, CWMI October 15, 2012 at 10:58 am #

        Jay,

        I am glad you brought up the incentives part. It can seem that some credits are more cost effective than others. This is probably not as well represented by the FL mitigation credits but is represented in more advanced mitigation programs used outside the state of Florida.

        Aproximately 90% of damage to homes comes from the roof system. The best bang for you buck to stop most of that damage is sealing the roof deck (SWR), making sure the decking is nailed with 8d nails and not staples or 6d nails. And, using a high wind reistant roof covering that exceeds the minimum requirements of the Florida Building Code (e.g. ASTM D 7158 Class H, or metal roofing).

        If any one of the items comprising the roof is weak orhad not been mitigated then damage reduction may not be realized. While adding shutters may seem like a good idea, spending money on the roof has a larger benefit especially when the habitability fo a structure following a hurricane is factored in. Fo rhtis reason teh highest credits are a combination of the deck attachment, SWR, Roof Covering, and Roof to wall connection.

        Remember the building code is the lowest quality you can build to without going to jail or loosing your license, it is not designed to significantly reduce damage, only marginally reduce damage.

        Another important fact to consider when analizing Cost Benefit is the 2-10% windstorm deductible. Any savings realized from damage reduction strategies pays the homeowner first, not the insurance company. When you combine the credits with the reduction in potential loss and the ability to have a habital home follwong the storm, the benefits for mitigating hte entire structure are closer to $8-$10 dollars of savings for every $1 spent. Shutters are important but the roof system is the primary defense against hurricanes and thus the highest priority.

        In order for communities to survive hurricanes without significant fiancial hardship from loss of businesses and the tax base, you must have habitable homes. If there is no where for families to live there is no one to help restore the community and its tax base, and FEMA does not pay for that.

  2. Darius H Grimes CRC, CSI-CDT, CWMI October 15, 2012 at 11:01 am #

    Jay,

    I am glad you brought up the incentives part. It can seem that some credits are more cost effective than others. This is probably not as well represented by the FL mitigation credits but is represented in more advanced mitigation programs used outside the state of Florida.

    Approximately 90% of damage to homes comes from the roof system. The best bang for your buck to stop most of that damage is sealing the roof deck (SWR), making sure the decking is nailed with 8d nails and not staples or 6d nails. And, using a high wind resistant roof covering that exceeds the minimum requirements of the Florida Building Code (e.g. ASTM D 7158 Class H, or metal roofing).

    If any one of the items comprising the roof is weak or had not been mitigated then damage reduction may not be realized. While adding shutters may seem like a good idea, spending money on the roof has a larger benefit especially when the habitability of a structure following a hurricane is factored in. For this reason the highest credits are a combination of the deck attachment, SWR, Roof Covering, and Roof to wall connection.

    Remember the building code is the lowest quality you can build to without going to jail or losing your license, it is not designed to significantly reduce damage, only marginally reduce damage.

    Another important fact to consider when analyzing Cost Benefit is the 2-10% windstorm deductible. Any savings realized from damage reduction strategies pays the homeowner first, not the insurance company. When you combine the credits with the reduction in potential loss and the ability to have a habitable home following the storm, the benefits for mitigating the entire structure are closer to $8-$10 dollars of savings for every $1 spent. Shutters are important but the roof system is the primary defense against hurricanes and thus the highest priority.

    In order for communities to survive hurricanes without significant financial hardship from loss of businesses and the tax base, you must have habitable homes. If there is nowhere for families to live there is no one to help restore the community and its tax base, and FEMA does not pay for that.

Leave a Reply