Thread: Manufacturer's warranty on a roof...

DID YOU KNOW...

...that a brand new roof may not have a manufacturer's warranty? It's true. If a new roof is installed on a dwelling, and it is NOT the first layer, it likely will not carry a manufacturer's warranty. Most manufacturers boast of a 20, 25, or 30-year warranty on the performance of their product. Unfortunately, this usually comes under the condition that the product is installed by a manufacturer-authorized company and that it be the primary layer. So, when replacing a roof, or purchasing a home with a new roof, be sure that it is the first layer. Otherwise, you may be purchasing something you didn’t bargain for.

Similar Threads:

• Home Inspection Warranty
• Home warranty inspections
• HWA Launches First National, Licensed Home Inspection Warranty Program - RisMedia.com
• Builders Warranty - Texas
• Buyer Tip: Get Home Warranty Funded by Seller - Realty Times

No, say it ain't so, Joe!

Is there a point to your postings beside trying to improve your web appearance?

Originally Posted by Jim Luttrall

No, say it ain't so, Joe!

Is there a point to your postings beside trying to improve your web appearance?

LOL.. Joes no fool.. Just a little slow.
It just took him 10 years to figure out that this IS the H I site to get the most web exposure.

DID YOU KNOW....

Joe Farsetta is an incompetent Chair of the ESOP, and vendor now a pushy vendor trying to establish himself as reputable and honest vendor here on a reputable board trying to drum up business.

Me thinks he shouldn't be so stingy and pay for advertising on Inspection News like all the other vendors.

JF: Can we agree that GAF is the largest shingle manufacturer in North America? Can we agree that their standard warranty says nothing about overlays voiding the warranty? Can we agree that their installation instructions state plainly how to deal with installing new shingles over existing shingles?

So then, can we agree that you original post on the subject is less than informational, or even true?

IKO

</TITLE> <meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=iso-8859-1"><style type="text/css"> </style></HEAD> <table align="center" border="1" bordercolor="#FFFFFF" cellspacing="0" cellpadding="0" width="800px"> <tr> <td align="left" valig

Q: Can I apply new shingles over existing shingles?
A: Yes. You can apply new shingles over existing shingles, but it depends on the condition of the roof. If the roof has one layer of shingles that are lying flat and the deck is in good condition, the existing shingles typically do not have to be removed. Check with local officials to make sure that building codes are being followed. During re-roofing is a good opportunity to examine roof ventilation to ensure vents are sufficient in number, positioned properly and are unobstructed.
See CASMA Technical Bulletin No. 6 (1993) or ARMA Form No. 223-RR-96 (1996) for more information.

Originally Posted by Raymond Wand

IKO

</TITLE> <meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=iso-8859-1"><style type="text/css"> </style></HEAD> <table align="center" border="1" bordercolor="#FFFFFF" cellspacing="0" cellpadding="0" width="800px"> <tr> <td align="left" valig

Q: Can I apply new shingles over existing shingles?
A: Yes. You can apply new shingles over existing shingles, but it depends on the condition of the roof. If the roof has one layer of shingles that are lying flat and the deck is in good condition, the existing shingles typically do not have to be removed. Check with local officials to make sure that building codes are being followed. During re-roofing is a good opportunity to examine roof ventilation to ensure vents are sufficient in number, positioned properly and are unobstructed.
See CASMA Technical Bulletin No. 6 (1993) or ARMA Form No. 223-RR-96 (1996) for more information.

I am not getting on you specifically but I just don't understand why anyone would say it is OK to put a second layer on a roof. The second layer will never have the same life span as a single layer roof just from heat buildup alone. Now, as far as removing 2 layers in the future the cost for labor almost double and the waste cost is double. There is no good reason for anyone to not remove the old shingles other than trying to save a few dollars and putting it off on to someone else in the future.

One layer of roofing material of any kind over any kind of old roofing material is never alright. It is just putting something off that is inevitable and putting the cost on someone else.

Good morning Ted,

I agree, but the point is; that it doesn't void the warranty of the shingles to put a second layer over old as per this manufactures statements.

I think you answered your own argument Ted. Around here tear off down to the deck adds +/- $1600. in the City, +/-$3000 in the burbs to the cost of a new shingle install. That is a fair amount of money for a client to either save or spend on other household improvements. The cost for tearing off 2 or 3 layers years later is typically the cost of another dumpster over tearing off 1 layer.
Additionally, a tear-off is much more intrusive to the property. Adds another 1-2 days to the job, exposes the house to potential weather damage and can cause plant damage or worse depending on the roofers.
I don't disagree that is would be better to do a tear-off but it isn't always feasible depending on the client and property conditions.

Originally Posted by Markus Keller

I think you answered your own argument Ted. Around here tear off down to the deck adds +/- $1600. in the City, +/-$3000 in the burbs to the cost of a new shingle install. That is a fair amount of money for a client to either save or spend on other household improvements. The cost for tearing off 2 or 3 layers years later is typically the cost of another dumpster over tearing off 1 layer.
Additionally, a tear-off is much more intrusive to the property. Adds another 1-2 days to the job, exposes the house to potential weather damage and can cause plant damage or worse depending on the roofers.
I don't disagree that is would be better to do a tear-off but it isn't always feasible depending on the client and property conditions.

Yeah I know. A little off on the cost later to pull those 2 layers later. About double in labor to remove and double the waste price. Shingles are usually required to be in their own dumpster because the cost for dumping is wore.

The likelyhood of leaks is much greater layering roof materials. They never flash the flues properly and usuall either do not pull off plumbing and roof vents and then shingle around them improperly or they use the old ones. Step flashings are never done correctly up against sidewalls or chimnies. Come to think of it I do not believe I have ever seen a second or third layer applied properly. The home owners are hardly ever there to absorb the cost later but of course going to a new home they want an allowance for a two or three layer roof or want it replaced. The whole idea of "I wnat everything for mine and I do not want to pay anywhere near top dollar for yours really prevails.

Just a bad idea whether one can afford it or not. It either gets paid for later with a reduction of cost on their home when selling, the new buyer eats it or they live there long enough to eat it themselves later which is hardly never the case.

Yeah I know. Sometimes folks just cannot afford it....But most of the time just want to pass it off.

Aaron,

Spoke to the warranty folks and technical specification folks at GAF this morning. I asked for clarification on warranties for residential roofing products installed as a 2nd layer. There is warranty coverage for GAF products installed as a 2nd layer, but never as a 3rd layer.

The warranty is subject to the terms of GAF’s limited warranty, which refers specifically to installation guidelines, and further mentions something called sound roofing practices. The warranty pertains exclusively to manufacturer defects, and is pro-rated. Further, it would require that the product not be installed over cracked, curled, or cupped 1st layer shingles. These shingles would need to first be removed and replace with a product of similar size and thickness. The same holds true for missing shingles. Warranty claims are subject to an inspection by a GAF rep.
So, while technically allowed, there are enough caveats to adversely impact or further limit the warranty’s beneficial terms and conditions. They are careful that the product is installed in a sound manner, and wrap the warranty under that umbrella, which we both know is open to interpretation by GAF, itself.

Originally Posted by Joseph Farsetta

Aaron,

Spoke to the warranty folks and technical specification folks at GAF this morning. I asked for clarification on warranties for residential roofing products installed as a 2nd layer. There is warranty coverage for GAF products installed as a 2nd layer, but never as a 3rd layer.

The warranty is subject to the terms of GAF’s limited warranty, which refers specifically to installation guidelines, and further mentions something called sound roofing practices. The warranty pertains exclusively to manufacturer defects, and is pro-rated. Further, it would require that the product not be installed over cracked, curled, or cupped 1st layer shingles. These shingles would need to first be removed and replace with a product of similar size and thickness. The same holds true for missing shingles. Warranty claims are subject to an inspection by a GAF rep.
So, while technically allowed, there are enough caveats to adversely impact or further limit the warranty’s beneficial terms and conditions. They are careful that the product is installed in a sound manner, and wrap the warranty under that umbrella, which we both know is open to interpretation by GAF, itself.

JF: When one is winging it vis a vis posting dubious information on this forum, one needs all the caveats one can muster.

Aaron,

Nice jab, but I present this data from the point of a warranty in practice, versus the technical argument you make. May one claim that its okay? Sure. May one claim that recovering a defective roof with another is okay, and that a warranty is still in effect? Sure.


But when dealing with technicalities, it is important to examine those technicalities in a practical sense, and from all sides. In this case, it is important to realize that it may be satisfactory to install those shingles over an existing roof providing that one's opinion of the condition of said roof is the same as the manufacturer's opinion of that existing roof at the time of failure and inspection.


Do you truly believe that any manufacturer would admit to a manufacturer defect on those pro-rated shingles, which failed in service, installed as a second layer? It's their opinion versus yours. They hold the purse strings. They have statistical data which would support their contention that the product failed because it was installed improperly (over a bad surface).


So much for the warranty in that case. Anyone... tell me the advantages (beyond saving a few bucks) of installing a second layer of roof? Now, tell me the disadvantages. Does anyone believe that a manufacturer doesn't know these same scenarios?

Originally Posted by Joseph Farsetta

Aaron,

Nice jab, but I present this data from the point of a warranty in practice, versus the technical argument you make. May one claim that its okay? Sure. May one claim that recovering a defective roof with another is okay, and that a warranty is still in effect? Sure.


But when dealing with technicalities, it is important to examine those technicalities in a practical sense, and from all sides. In this case, it is important to realize that it may be satisfactory to install those shingles over an existing roof providing that one's opinion of the condition of said roof is the same as the manufacturer's opinion of that existing roof at the time of failure and inspection.


Do you truly believe that any manufacturer would admit to a manufacturer defect on those pro-rated shingles, which failed in service, installed as a second layer? It's their opinion versus yours. They hold the purse strings. They have statistical data which would support their contention that the product failed because it was installed improperly (over a bad surface).


So much for the warranty in that case. Anyone... tell me the advantages (beyond saving a few bucks) of installing a second layer of roof? Now, tell me the disadvantages. Does anyone believe that a manufacturer doesn't know these same scenarios?

JF: Bob and weave as you might, you're not destined to win this fight. Who is, and who is not, making a technical argument here is certainly questionable. Your feigned common sense approach notwithstanding, the facts are what they are: you cannot illustrate to me where any shingle manufacturer voids their standard warranty due solely to an overlay installation.

I am sufficiently perspicacious to observe how the attorneys for manufacturers of literally anything are quite adept at penning their purchaser-interface paperwork to allow for the largest volume of sales and the most possible latitude regarding future warranty denial. That is how companies in this country operate: unethically. However, that does not obviate your responsibility to admit that the avenue to overlay shingles has been left wide open.

So then, technically I am correct. In practice, you may or may not be correct. In the end, the consumer will be screwed, regardless.

Aaron,

While you and I argue the technicalities, you and I can BOTH agree that in the end, the consumer gets hosed. I suppose its where technicality and practicality meet in a head-on.

you and I can BOTH agree that in the end, the consumer gets hosed.

JF: Yes, we can.

Originally Posted by Ted Menelly

The second layer will never have the same life span as a single layer roof just from heat buildup alone.

Are you saying a two layer roof is hotter than a one layer? Why is that?

It may or may not be hotter, but it is definately heavier. Now you have to check the roof framing a little more intently.

JLMathis

Joe,

Why are you coming over here and spreading your dis-information?

Just curious why now, and why not ask questions about what you do not know than try to tell us something which is wrong and incorrect?

You have an entire board of followers "over there" who may not (they should, but may not) know you are incorrect.

Nice to see I get a response from the great and powerful Jerry Peck.

Jerry, just as soon as you recognize the fact that people can be well informed and intelligent... and STILL disagree with you, the sooner you will realize that everyone doesn't subscribe to your philisophies.

I submit that I do not spread mis-information. My opinions may differ from your own, but that's not to say that you are always correct. In many instances, differing opinions result in readers thinking about what is being said. They examine things from both sides, or compare their own thoughts to what is written. Sometimes, they become enlightened, and often the authors become enlightened.

It's when one's head becomes so inflated that they can't see the keyboard that the trouble starts. I can take the jabs. Can you? You were never known to have very thick skin...

Originally Posted by Joseph Farsetta

DID YOU KNOW...

...that a brand new roof may not have a manufacturer's warranty? It's true. If a new roof is installed on a dwelling, and it is NOT the first layer, it likely will not carry a manufacturer's warranty. Most manufacturers boast of a 20, 25, or 30-year warranty on the performance of their product. Unfortunately, this usually comes under the condition that the product is installed by a manufacturer-authorized company and that it be the primary layer. So, when replacing a roof, or purchasing a home with a new roof, be sure that it is the first layer. Otherwise, you may be purchasing something you didn’t bargain for.

Originally Posted by Joseph Farsetta

I submit that I do not spread mis-information.

Joe,

The above quote, the top one, is yours, not mine, and it is incorrect, i.e., it is misinformation ... and you came here spreading it, starting off with your know-it-all-better-than-us DID YOU KNOW ... crap - and you were wrong.

So, you did come here spreading misinformation.

Jerry,

I stand by my assertion. Read the fine print in the warranties. They are full of caveats. The manufacturer has the final say. Not you. Not me.

(red bold is mine)

Originally Posted by Joseph Farsetta

DID YOU KNOW...

...that a brand new roof may not have a manufacturer's warranty? It's true. If a new roof is installed on a dwelling, and it is NOT the first layer, it likely will not carry a manufacturer's warranty.

Originally Posted by Joseph Farsetta

I stand by my assertion. Read the fine print in the warranties. They are full of caveats. The manufacturer has the final say. Not you. Not me.

Even though the different manufacturer's say just the opposite and say it is acceptable??

You are certainly not saying what the manufacturer's are saying. That is not called being correct.

Is it just me, or does it appear that ole Joe is getting a whooping here and doomed to just being welcome on the HI site where venders, and the site owner get away with bragging how great they are to google eyed, kool aid addicted newbys.

Well you know how I feel Dan, you cannot trust Joe F. He is manipulative and has positions within Nachi that he has manipulated to suit his narrow minded myopic views, and sits of a board that has sold a useless very questionable designation that doesn't even meet the requirements its been touted to be.

One need look no further than his ability to promote his favourite subject; himself and his products.

And anyone who sits on the ESOP and does what Joe does and get away with it is not worth the salt he thinks he is.

Here is another joke. I rec'd this from Nacho Dip Nick. Considering I am a supposed disgraced member. And Nacho Dip Nick is no bragging that there are 700 Nacho member in Canada and that is simply embellishment.

---------------------

Raymond Wand,

Our records indicate that you cancelled your InterNACHI membership (member ID NACHI05091196) on 2/16/2008. If you have since re-joined, or if you no longer perform inspections, please disregard this message. Otherwise, please consider renewing your membership at $24.08/month.

Introducing $24.08/month renewal pricing

At InterNACHI we try to provide a tremendous bang for your buck: with over 75 hours of free continuing education included with membership, listing on our powerful lead generation web sites, and access to hundreds of other membership benefits, we think $289 is a steal. But we also understand that small businesses need options, and that's why we started our $24.08/month renewal pricing.

Renew your membership now at $24.08/month

If you have any questions, feel free to contact me directly at my personal e-mail address or on my cell phone:

E-Mail: gromicko@msn.com
Phone: 720-272-8578

Thanks for your past (and hopefully future) participation in our wonderful organization!

Nick Gromicko
InterNACHI Founder

Dan,

If you believe that I am "selling" anything here with these "Did you know" posts, you are mistaken. I believe that LOTS of folks visit this board, and remember the days when I used to come here and read and learn; absent of the rhetoric. These were days long before I knew who Nick was, and used to see him get pounced on, much the same way I am today. I don't mind though. I hardly would call Mr. Peck's and Mr. Wand's attacks at getting a "whooping".

To the contrary; the more they speak, the more obvious it becomes that it is about me, as opposed to the intelligent discourse I have had with some others who also disagreed with my initial statement. To understand what I am speaking of, and the realities of manufacturer's warranties, one would need to carefully view the warranties (there are more than one with terms and conditions) and look at the caveats. Surely GAF (as an example, they are a fine manufacturer), technically allows their product to be applied as a second layer, PROVIDED certain conditions are met. In a perfect installation, over a perfect surface, their product will perform as intended.

But, when a product fails in service prior to its engineered lifecycle, a logical person would ask why such a failure occurred. This holds true for the batch of shingles produced; why did it fail on THIS roof as compared to all the other roofs this batch of shingles is applied to? Dan, if you were the field inspector for GAF, what would you think? The roof is installed as a 2nd layer and lasted 15 years, as opposed to the 30 years its rated for. It looks like crap, is cracked and is cupping. Significant granular loss is noted, and the roof feels spongy when walked on. Will you believe it's your company's product that failed?

This is my point. We all know what the concept of the caveat is. Manufacturers have criteria which must be met of the 1st layer prior to allowing a 2nd layer to be aplied. If these conditions are not met, there can be no warranty. When the product fails, and they peel it off, and the 1st layer is marginal, will they admit their product failed in service?

This is of what I speak. Insectors who come upon a 2nd layer of new roof, with the Seller's agent bragging that there is a 30-year warranty.... what should you tell your client? Should you inform them of the realities/pittfalls?

You can do this without impugning the reputation of the Manufacturer's product with some simle information, framed around the caveats.

Now, Dan... you have been around the block more than a few times, and you likely know this. But, does everyone that comes to this board know this?

Raymond
Maybe Nick is just willing to forgive and forget... as long as you send him some forgive and forget money.

Joe it was nothing personnal.
Besides that, I always root for the underdog

All warranties have limitations and exclusions so don' t tell us its just a GAF thingy! Always read the fine print as its caveat emptor.


I particularly like when you wear that underdog outfit, Captain Underdog, purveyor of truth, justice, honesty, able to walk a double layer asphalt roof, champion of warranties and all round do gooder, able to talk out of one side of his mouth only, and who disguised as mild manner Dan Harris home inspector fights the ongoing battle to expose a bad Nacho dip when he eats one...

Let me see if I might sum up the manufacturers' warranties a bit:

"Install it like we tell you to or no warranty for you!"

This has nothing to do with layers - it's all about following directions. If they allow two layers or only one, you need to install them properly to obtain the warranty.

So where's the novelty here? Hasn't that always been true of just about every product?

I have not had to read the shingle package in a decade or more but most used to void the warranty if, in lieu of plywood, boards wider than 6 inches were used as decking. That describes more than half of the roofs around here where the longer established roofers still use sheathing grade 1X10.

I usually mention this construction detail and that it may void or preclude a warranty with some brands of shingles, either the originals or the next re-roof.

Anyone else reporting this situation?

1X10 number 3 grade with unsound knots (some knots loose or missing),checks, splits, twists etc. is what I meant.

My point was that it is defective in size and grade.

By the way, they rationalize using 1X instead of plywood because there is not so much worry about rafters running square to the walls. They can cut the board ends out- of- square to suit the rafter.

Originally Posted by ben jacks

Dear Moderator,

Ben,

There is no moderator.

If your posts are not making it through, I would suspect your server or Brian's server, or Internet traffic (but most likely one of the servers taking the day off or something).

Swear words are automatically filtred as per a define list and replaced with *

For example the pig wallowed in ****.

Merde! You mean we can't say **** or **** or *********** ************?That takes all the fun out of it.

It's obvious that Joe opened his mouth with wrong information. What is more puzzling is that he could have easily went for the venting issue that most commonly voids the warranty or the "California Valley" installation that may void the warranty but we as inspectors will never know unless we see the original package.
But more importantly, the manufacturers warranty only covers a defective product and any damage that occurs as a result of that defect. It does not cover poor installation, mis-installation, or any other mis-information.
There are many ways to void a warranty but it is not our job as inspectors to determine if a warranty is valid or void. That is between the client and the manufacture. We can only inform on visible defects, conditions, and servicability.
Thanks for the lesson Joe.

Michael,

I believe my information to be valid. You are correct in that the manufacturer will invalidate the warranty for any reason, which was what pretty much everyone agreed, even when we disagreed. So why do you believe that my information was wrong, yet thank me for the lesson?

Remember, even if I poke someone in the eye, and the insuing arguments and discussion brings out more information, even making folks think about what they hadn't thought of before, was the exercise not worth it?

Joseph,

Here's what you said, in part:

Originally Posted by Joseph Farsetta

If a new roof is installed on a dwelling, and it is NOT the first layer, it likely will not carry a manufacturer's warranty. Most manufacturers boast of a 20, 25, or 30-year warranty on the performance of their product. Unfortunately, this usually comes under the condition that the product is installed by a manufacturer-authorized company and that it be the primary layer.

You used terms like "it likely will not" and "most manufacturers." So the point of contention, then, is whether or not is it true that the 20, 25, 30 year warranties are not valid for "most" manufacturers unless the product is installed by a "manufacturer-authorized company" and that it is installed as "the primary layer."

Certainly for some of the largest manufacturers in North America (I checked GAF, Elk, CertainTeed, and IKO) this is not a true statement. While it is true that the warranty will not be honored if the product is installed incorrectly, that is true whether it is the first layer or the second. The question then is if you consider your statement to be true, which manufacturers void their warranties solely because their product is installed as a second layer?

Corn,

I absolutely believe that manufacturer's use some sort of statistical analysis or actuarial data when deciding why a product may have failed in service. Since the warranty for a 2nd layer is a bit different for that of a 1st, if I was the manufacturer and was faced with a claim of manufacturing defect, I'd first look at the batch of shingles and research if this batch failed on any other home. If the answer was no, then the next question would be what made the roof in question so special. If it was installed as a 2nd layer, I'd be thinking that how it was installed. What do you think the 1st layer of shingles looks like after 10 years under another? Think it should look defective?

Also consider this: if the home needed a roof, then what was wrong with the existing one. Since the initial layer can't have too much cracking, no adhesion issues, no missing shingles, no brittleness, or curling.... well you tell me if you honestly believe my statement to be untrue.

Originally Posted by Joseph Farsetta

Also consider this: if the home needed a roof, then what was wrong with the existing one. Since the initial layer can't have too much cracking, no adhesion issues, no missing shingles, no brittleness, or curling.... well you tell me if you honestly believe my statement to be untrue.

Um... you fail to address the question.

I've already pointed out where your original statement doesn't appear to be backed by any evidence.

If you had originally stated, "manufacturers will try to avoid honoring warranties in any way possible so it's best to ensure the roofing is installed correctly and to the letter of the manufacturer's instructions" then I'm sure that is a statement few would disagree with. But that's not what you originally wrote.

So if you're asking me if I believe your statement to be untrue, which statement are you referring to?