Date: February 26, 2013
Regarding: Texas Questionable Roofing Claims
Prepared By: Yvonne Navarrette, Field Information Analyst, Southwest Region SECTION 1: Introduction
A Questionable Insurance Claim is one that does not appear in all respects to meet the requirements for a valid insurance claim. It may contain outright falsehoods, elements of exaggeration, or include one or more indications of possible insurance fraud. Questionable Claims are submitted to NICB by Member Companies. This report analyzes the Questionable Roofing Claim Referrals (Roofing QCs) in Texas (TX). A QC was associated with TX if the Loss State field contained “TX” and the referral text included the word “roof” or “shingle”. The data included in this report is for QCs submitted in the years 2010, 2011, and 2012 and was retrieved from the NICB Questionable Claim referrals data.
Section 2 of this report analyzes the Texas Roofing QCs as they compare to the Texas QCs as a whole. Section 3 analyzes the Texas Roofing QCs by loss city, policy type, loss type, and referral reasons. Section 4 is the conclusion. Section 5 details the methodology used in the analysis of the Texas Roofing QCs.
SECTION 2: Roofing QCs compared to Total QCs
In 2010, the total QCs in Texas was 7,520. Of those, 370 were Roofing QCs which represents 4.92% of the total QCs. In 2011, the total QCs in Texas was 8,016. Of those, 381 were Roofing QCs which represents 4.75% of the total QCs. In 2012, the total QCs in Texas was 10,368. Of those, 557 were Roofing QCs which represents 5.37% of the total QCs. The total QCs for the three years was 25,904; of those 1,308 were Roofing QCs which represents 5.05% of the total QCs.
The increase of Roofing QCs from 2010 to 2011 was 3% and from 2011 to 2012 was 46%. The following table and graph illustrate the percentage of Total QCs.
Texas QCs and Roofing QCs
Year Roofing QCs Total QCs Percentage of Total QCs that are Roofing QCs
2010 370 7520 4.92%
2011 381 8016 4.75%
2012 557 10368 5.37%
Page 2 of 8
Texas QCs and Roofing QCs
Section 3: Loss City, Policy Type, Loss Type, Referral Reasons Loss City
The tables and graph below illustrate the Top 10 cities for 2012 along with the number of Roofing QCs those same cities had in 2011 and 2010. El Paso was ranked 1st in all three years. Dallas was ranked 2nd in 2012, 5th in 2011, and 6th in 2010. Arlington was ranked 3rd in 2012 and 2nd in 2010 and 2011. All three years
showed a significant amount of Roofing QCs where the loss city was left blank; 85 blanks in 2012, 63 blanks in 2011, and 57 blanks in 2010.
Top Ten Cities in 2012
Rank Loss City 2012 Roofing QCs 2011 Roofing QCs 2010 Roofing QCs
1 EL PASO 64 64 72 2 DALLAS 43 16 9 3 ARLINGTON 35 24 33 4 FORT WORTH 26 19 7 5 GARLAND 24 4 2 6 HOUSTON 20 23 30 7 PLANO 18 3 1 8 SAN ANTONIO 17 15 19 9 GRAND PRAIRIE 15 4 2 10 MCKINNEY 13 2 0 0 5000 10000 15000 20000 25000 30000 2010 2011 2012 Totals Roofing QCs Total QCs Percentage
Page 3 of 8
Top Ten Cities in 2012 – Roofing QCs
Top Ten Cities in 2011
Rank Loss City 2011 Roofing QCs
1 EL PASO 64 2 ARLINGTON 24 3 HOUSTON 23 4 FORT WORTH 19 5 DALLAS 16 6 SAN ANTONIO 15 7 IRVING 7 7 KATY 7 7 SUGAR LAND 7 10 BURLESON 5 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 2012 2011 2010
Page 4 of 8
Top Ten Cities in 2010
Rank Loss City 2010 Roofing QCs
1 EL PASO 72 2 ARLINGTON 33 3 HOUSTON 30 4 SAN ANTONIO 19 5 KATY 12 6 DALLAS 9 7 THE WOODLANDS 8 8 FORT WORTH 7 8 SPRING 7 10 AUSTIN 6 Policy Type
The tables and graph below illustrate all Policy Types in descending order for 2012 along with the number of Roofing QCs those same Policy Types had in 2011 and 2010. “Homeowners” was the policy type that had the most Roofing QCs in all three years.
Policy Type 2012 Roofing QCs 2011 Roofing QCs 2010 Roofing QCs
Homeowners 518 319 340
Fire - Personal 13 15 14
Commercial Multi Peril 12 9 5
Commercial Property Other 6 4 1
Other 6 23 1
Business Owners 1 2 3
Fire - Commercial 1 2 2
General Liability 0 2 1
Mobile Home 0 2 3
Page 5 of 8
Loss Type
The tables and graph below illustrate all Loss Types in descending order for 2012 along with the number of Roofing QCs that those same Loss Types had in 2011 and 2010. “Hail” was the loss type that had the most Roofing QCs in 2012 and 2011. “Wind” was the loss type that had the most Roofing QCs in 2010.
Loss Type 2012 Roofing QCs 2011 Roofing QCs 2010 Roofing QCs
HAIL 300 172 161
WIND 198 169 167
OTHER PERILS 28 15 12
WATER 13 9 7
VANDALISM & MALICIOUS MISCHIEF 9 3 17
FIRE 4 5 3 LIGHTNING 1 1 1 COLLAPSE 1 0 1 FLOOD 1 0 0 FALLING OBJECTS 1 0 0 SMOKE 1 0 0 LIABILITY 0 3 0 INDEMNITY 0 3 0 OTHER 0 1 1 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 2012 2011 2010
Page 6 of 8
Referral Reasons
The table and graph below illustrate Referral Reasons shown in the referral text in descending order for 2012 along with the number of Roofing QCs that those same Referral Reasons were shown in for 2011 and 2010. “Hail Damage” was the number one referral reason in all three years. Each referral had one or more referral reasons.
Referral Reasons 2012 Roofing QCs 2011 Roofing QCs 2010 Roofing QCs
Hail Damage 153 99 112 Mechanical Damage 138 84 86 Wind Damage 106 79 96 Prior Damage 55 19 37 Water Damage 27 16 15 No Weather 25 22 22 Misrepresentation 17 12 5 Manufactured Damage 15 21 16
Damage not Consistent 12 17 9
Man-made Damage 12 6 22 Hurricane 4 4 15 Inflated Damage 1 2 1 0 50 100 150 200 250 300 2012 2011 2010
Page 7 of 8
Section 4: Conclusion
The number of Roofing QCs increased from 370 in 2010 to 381 in 2011 which is a 3% increase. They increased from 381 in 2011 to 557 in 2012 which is a 46% increase. Also the percentage of Roofing QCs to Total QCs decreased from 4.92% in 2010 to 4.75% in 2011 but then it increased back up 5.27% in 2012. El Paso was the city with the most Roofing QCs in all three years. Dallas was ranked 6th in 2010 to 5th in 2011 and finally 2nd in 2012. Arlington was in the top 3 all three years, ranking 2nd in 2010 and 2011 and third in 2012. The Policy Type of “Homeowners” ranked first in all three years. The Loss Type of “Hail” ranked first in 2011 and 2012 and came in a close second in 2010. The most common Referral Reason was “Hail Damage” in all three years. “Mechanical Damage” was the next most common Referral Reason in 2012 and 2011, “Wind Damage” was the next most common Referral Reason in 2010.
Section 5: Methodology
Obtain the Data
The analysis of the Texas Roofing QCs began with a SQL Query to obtain all Texas QCs
submitted in 2010, 2011, and 2012 from the NICB Questionable Claim referrals data. A QC was associated with TX if the Loss State field contained “TX” and the referral text included the word “roof” or “shingle”.
Clean the Data
The data was reviewed and cleaned by correcting spelling errors and reducing duplicate referral numbers.
Sort the Data
The data was reviewed and different spelling or word combinations were used when analyzing referral reason text.
0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 2012 2011 2010
Page 8 of 8
Analyze the Data
