Homeowners all across Northeast Ohio are getting letters from their insurance companies letting them know inspectors will be assessing the exterior of their homes.
If home improvements aren't made, they risk getting dropped from their policy.
"We had our home built 23 years ago and we've been with them ever since we've had our home," says Vera Barile. Not once has she filed a claim with Allstate, her insurance company.
So, imagine her surprise when she got a letter.
"We may not be able to renew your homeowner policy if they find unacceptable conditions or hazards."
They are going to send an inspector to make sure her home is in tip-top shape.
"And I don't remember such a thorough inspection when we became policy holders 20 years ago."
Vera suspects the company is trying to cover losses from earlier this summer.
This year, Ohio's had the most disaster-related claims ever. The Ohio Insurance Institute says the number of 2011 disaster-related claims for Ohio have surpassed all other years that they've tracked them.
So, is it a coincidence that all of the major insurance companies we've contacted said they're sending letters and inspectors out? When asked, they all denied any connection.
"If we haven't seen the house for years, we have to make sure we still have the correct value on the home," says Ellen Scheer, with American Family Insurance.
She describes the inspections as a pre-emptive critical eye, that is meant to save both families and companies money.
"It will eventually cut down on claims. And when there are fewer claims, there are fewer raises in premiums."
But your premiums could also rise if you don't make the recommended improvements.
Allstate, Vera's company, says homeowners have 5 months.
"If customers do not repair the conditions that are outlined, then they will not be offered a renewal of their homeowner policy," says Jeff Ormond, with Allstate's regional office.
If you're a Pennsylvania resident with Allstate Property & Casualty homeowners insurance, you may face an unpleasant surprise this fall: a sizable boost in your insurance premium. You can just suck it up - as Allstate undoubtedly expects

"We've been hearing of many total losses," said Jerry Davies, a spokesman with Farmers Insurance. "The first concern is helping customers find a place to live, food and clothing. Then we begin the process of the claims." Farmers, State Farm, Allstate
If home improvements aren't made, they risk getting dropped from their policy. "We had our home built 23 years ago and we've been with them ever since we've had our home," says Vera Barile. Not once has she filed a claim with Allstate, her insurance

The company's catastrophe claims work is in addition to the 11 million to 12 million other auto, home and business claims reported to the company in a typical year. Earlier this month, Allstate Corp (ALL.N) said it had lost $500 million on Hurricane

On September 25, State Farm Insurance said that it had paid out $5 billion in insured catastrophe losses, in addition to standard property, auto and home insurance claims. The insurer also reported on the number of claims it's received.
The Insured, Sam Belsito, suffered a fire to his home that constituted a total loss. Mr. Belsito filed a claim with his homeowner’s insurance carrier, Allstate Property and Casualty Insurance Company (“Allstate”). Because he paid a premium for insurance coverage, Mr. Belsito expected Allstate to honor the contract and provide coverage for his covered loss. Although Allstate paid Mr. Belsito a $5,000 advance and some funds for living expenses, Allstate ultimately denied the claim. Allstate claimed that Mr. Belsito made material misrepresentations regarding the fire and submitted a fraudulent property damage insurance claim.
Mr. Belsito sued Allstate for breach of contract and bad faith. Allstate filed a partial motion for summary judgment on the bad faith count. The District Court of Ohio denied Allstate’s motion on the following grounds:
The court was not persuaded, based on the record before it, that there was no genuine issue of material fact that Allstate denied Belsito’s claim in good faith, as Allstate had not provided sufficient evidence of any material misrepresentations or fraud. Furthermore, Allstate had not pointed out or offered any evidence that Belsito lacked sufficient evidence to prevail on his bad faith claim. Therefore, Allstate had failed to meet its initial burden on summary judgment.
This case serves as a reminder that policyholders and their attorneys should always carefully evaluate a motion for summary judgment – or any dispositive motion - filed by a carrier. Whether the carrier’s motion has any teeth, can only be determined by exercising due diligence in carefully evaluating whether there are arguments and evidence that can persuade the court to deny the motion.
Please keep in mind that the decision above is specific to the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Ohio. Other jurisdictions may hold either similarly or very differently.