The court held that the insurer was not required to pay for the entire roof replacement, per the terms of the policy, even though the insured’s homeowners’ association had forced the insured to replace the entire roof.

In this property damage case, the roof of the insured’s home was damaged in a storm. The homeowners’ association forced them to replace the entire roof, as required by the association’s design standards. The insurer paid the insured the cost to repair the roof, but not to replace it. As a result, the insured filed suit. The court held that there was no misrepresentation regarding the actual scope of the policy’s coverage because the policy unambiguously did not cover roof replacement. Moreover, the Ohio Administrative Code did not require the insurer to cover the replacement of the roof because the insureds presented scant evidence that the damaged wood shakes could not have been replaced with shakes that would result in a reasonably comparable appearance. The court also held that the insureds had at least a minimal duty to educate themselves regarding their homeowners’ association’s rules and the contents of their insurance policy.

Case Law Alerts, 3rd Quarter, July 2014