Question: When is free speech NOT REALLY free speech?
Answer: Whenever an International Corporation (like CertainTeed) does not like what is said...
and a U.S. Court PROHIBITS all publications. All free speech then becomes DEPENDENT
on attaining a court Order for the PRE-APPROVAL (censoring) of all statements.
Warning: The pre-approval (censorship) process PREVENTS expression of "free speech" indefinitely.
CERTAINTEED CORPORATION v. SEATTLE ROOFBROKERS (2:09-cv-00563-RAJ)
CertainTeed Corporation (CertainTeed) is the largest manufacturer of asphalt roofing in the world.
Seattle RoofBrokers (SRB) was a roofing business, with one employee, operating in the Seattle area.
Seattle RoofBrokers business model was to provide roofing consumers with unbiased information on
the pros and cons of different material and product options... just like the information in this blog.
CertainTeed sued SRB for "false advertising" under The Lanham Act and Washington Consumer Protection
Act. On June 28th, 2010, the Court found, within the specific context, there were certain "false" statements
in several direct mail advertisements and in a single (1) sentence on the website. The Court found that these
statements were "false" because, within the specific context, they conveyed the idea that "all" (100%) or the
"majority" of CertainTeed shingles have failed, or will fail, within 15 to 20 years.
The Court noted: There is no dispute that CertainTeed roofing shingles have failed within 15 or 20 years.
However, SRB did not prove that "all", or "the majority" of, CertainTeed shingles fail within that time period.
There is no question CertainTeed products, including Presidential shingles, have been
the subject of "claims" by their purchasers. There is no question on this subject because
CertainTeed has provided data on the "claims" it has received on its products... Dkt. #55
It's important to note that SRB (admittedly) never intended to imply that ALL of CertainTeed shingles
have/will fail within 15 or 20 years - and, because nobody (including CertainTeed) tracks the performance
of CertainTeed shingles, it's impossible for anyone to prove what percentage of shingles fail before 20 years.
Even if CertainTeed's "claims" showed 80% of reported failures occur before 15 years (not saying they do),
that does not prove anything because not all failures are reported, it's possible that most premature failures
are never reported and, therefore, nobody can prove what percentage do fail (or don't fail) before 15 years.
Rather than focus on a particular statement, the court will instead consider them collectively
by assessing the truth of any statement (SRB) makes contending that all or most CertainTeed
roofs will not last beyond a particular term of years... Dkt. #55
Based on finding that SRB did not prove that "all" or "most" CertainTeed products fail within 15 or 20 years,
the Court issued a permanent injunction against publishing any "advertising promoting (the) roofing business"
which stated that "the majority" of CertainTeed roofs fail within any particular period of time.
The court enters the following permanent injunction. Defendant (SRB) is permanently enjoined
from making the following false statements in any advertising promoting his roofing business...
that CertainTeed products will fail or will not pass a resale inspection after 15 - 20 years, or any
other statements in which (SRB) represents that the majority of CertainTeed roofs will fail or
will not pass an inspection after a particular term of years. Dkt. #55
There are Two Questions which now arise:
(1) Does the Court's Injunction prohibit ALL statements regarding CertainTeed shingle failures - or only
those statements which represent that "all" or "the majority" of shingles fail before some specified time?
(2) Does an injunction against certain statements while "advertising a roofing business" mean there is also
some restriction on non-commercial (free) speech made AFTER that roofing business was dissolved?
These questions will never be resolved in an actual court trial - because, after the Court issued the Summary
Judgment (judgment made before a trial), CertainTeed requested that the case be Dismissed, and the Court
granted the Dismissal. Therefore, the June 28th Summary Judgment Order is (supposedly) the end of this
case and Final Judgment on the issues... Unless the Court now ADDS something AFTER Dismissal.
Answering the first question (what statements are not prohibited) is simple - and I will answer that now...
Answering the second question (can free speech be censored) is a more complex, and important, issue and
I will consider the options, and address possible answers - But, without a trial, a lot depends on the Court.
We do know that Americans are SUPPOSED to have a right to free speech and we ASSUME any Court
will be inclined to preserve some semblance of those free speech rights... But, first things first:
#1) WHAT STATEMENTS DID THE COURT NOT PROHIBIT?
While the Court prohibited statements representing that "all" or "the majority" of CertainTeed asphalt shingles
fail within 15 years - the Court also made it very clear that the order DID NOT provide CertainTeed with
some sort of "blanket protection" against any future advertising statements.
While CertainTeed complains (constantly) that advertising statements are being made which "explicitly single
out CertainTeed" including "such damning and unsubstantiated terms as failure, premature failure, defective,
history, pattern, widespread and pervasive," the court did not prohibit truthful statements of fact or opinions.
(SRB) can continue to target CertainTeed and its products via truthful statements or
statements of opinion. The court's review of (SRB's) advertisements suggests that many
of his statements are either truthful or non-actionable opinion that will discourage some
people from using CertainTeed products. Dkt. #55
[n]othing prevents (SRB) from advertising his business without false statements. If he wishes
to discuss what he perceives to be the disadvantages of asphalt shingles, he is free to do so.
If he wishes to extol the virtues of other products, he is free to do so. If he wishes to point
out that CertainTeed has paid some warranty claims on its products, he is free to do so.
If he wishes to point out that the period of CertainTeed's product warranty is tenuously related
to the lifetime of its products, he is free to do so. If he wishes to criticize CertainTeed's
warranty coverage as inadequate, he is free to do so. Dkt. #55
Context matters, as both CertainTeed and (SRB) should realize. At the pretrial conference,
CertainTeed repeatedly asserted that the court had enjoined (SRB) from using the words
"premature failure." It is mistaken. (SRB) can use whatever words he wishes, so long as
the document in which he uses them puts those words in a context in which they are not false. Dkt. 72
So... Clearly the court order did not prohibit all "advertising" statements regarding CertainTeed shingles,
but only those statements that represent that "all" or "the majority" of shingles fail before some specific time.
Expression of truthful statements of fact are (supposedly) still allowed, as is expression of personal opinions.
We invite the reader, CertainTeed and the Court, to study the language of this blog, or the SRB website,
to find any statement or representation of "all" or "the majority" of shingles. In fact, the current CONTEXT
specifically defines that statements Do Not represent "all" or "the majority" of (any manufacturer's) shingles.
By "history" of failure we do not mean there is 100% failure rate or that "the majority" of products
fail prematurely. Due to the nature of the roofing industry, the limitations of warranties and the fact
that many Americans move every 5 to 7 years, many (or most) premature failures are NOT reported
as warranty claims and, therefore, it's impossible to track the exact percentage of premature failures.
A "pattern" of shingle failure establishes a history of shingle failures.
So it's very clear the Court did not prohibit all "advertising" statements regarding CertainTeed shingles...
but only certain statements made within a specific context. And, since the June 28th Order, there has not
been even one statement found to violate the Order. While CertainTeed has not shown any "advertising"
statement violates the Order - the Court still prevents all advertising by delaying the pre-approval process.
While it is clear the Court DID NOT prohibit all "commercial" statements regarding CertainTeed shingles...
the Court is preventing expression of ANY advertising - until it "pre-approves" (censors) all the language.
The Court is preventing expression of ANY "advertising to promote the roofing business" until pre-approval
of ALL the language within these advertisements... but, is a "pre-approval" of advertising even constitutional?
Can any Court PREVENT a business from advertising unless and until the advertising receives pre-approval?
And, if that is allowed, can the Court PREVENT advertising for several months while considering approval?
It doesn't matter if the Court's plan to "pre-approve" advertising statements is a constitutional Order because,
while SRB was waiting on the Court to "edit" its advertising, the roofing business closed, for lack of business.
Now the question is: Can expression of "non-commercial" speech (such as speech in a blog) be prevented?
Does an Order against "advertising to promote a roofing business" suddenly transform into a(nother) Order
against all roofing discussion AFTER the roofing business has been closed - for weeks or months or years?
Can an (American) Court prevent expression of free speech while it "pre-approves" (censors) the language?
CertainTeed now argues that this author is not permitted to make "non-commercial" statements on roofing
unless they are pre-approved by the Court... Imagine, CertainTeed wants pre-approval (censorship) of all
"non-commercial" speech related to roofing, presumably for years or decades after the business was closed.
According to CertainTeed, the Court would have to pre-approve (censor) all statements made on this blog!
#2) DOES A COURT NEED TO PRE-APPROVE (CENSOR) SPEECH ON THIS BLOG?
Can the Court (constitutionally) Order that all speech on this blog, or anywhere else, needs "pre-approval"
before publishing? Can the Court simply prevent all "non-commercial" speech on roofing - simply because
it found that certain specific "advertising" statements incorrectly represented a "majority" shingle failure rate?
That is an question currently before the Court - Noted on the Motion Calendar for September 3rd, 2010.
To be clear - the Court has NOT declared all "commercial" speech is prohibited (except for the discussed
statements about "all" or "the majority" failure rate), that would clearly be an unconstitutional order. However,
the Court HAS declared that all website "advertising" must be pre-approved and this "pre-approval process"
(censorship) requires several months to attain... so far, the Court has gone 7 weeks without an "approval."
Moreover, the Court never Ordered "non-commercial speech" be prohibited, or censored... BUT the Court
has Ordered the "non-commercial" speech, that was published on a website August 12th, must be removed.
Apparently the Court will now determine if it will prohibit the expression of "non-commercial" (free) speech
on various internet websites - and possibly statements made on this blog! It is entirely possible the Court
will determine all of SRB's "non-commercial" statements about roofing must be "pre-approved" (censored).
It is possible that the Court will soon Order the statements on this blog must be "pre-approved" (censored).
Can an (American) Court prevent expression of free speech while it "pre-approves" (censors) the language?
It is possible that the Court will soon Order the statements on this blog must be "pre-approved" (censored).
And how would that work? Would the Court dedicate time each day or week to censor non-commercial
speech on this blog (and elsewhere)? Or would the Court continue to take months to censor the language?
Can any (American) Court prevent the expression of non-commercial speech for months - while censoring?
AGAIN, the issue is NOT regarding an Injunction prohibiting statements about "the majority" failure rate,
that issue was resolved with the original order - those statements have already been permanently enjoined.
The current issue is whether an American Court can prevent the expression of truthful statements of fact and
expression of personal opinions - while (for months) those statements are being "pre-approved" (censored)?
It is one thing to find that a certain statement, because of its specific context, is a "false advertisement".
It's altogether different to require ALL subsequent "commercial" speech must be "pre-approved" (censored).
It is beyond reason that any U.S. Court order all "non-commercial" speech must "pre-approved" (censored).
Clearly, CertainTeed wants the expression of all speech by SRB to be prevented. If that is not possible,
CertainTeed hopes to have the practice of "pre-approving" all advertising (commercial speech) transferred
into an order the Court also "pre-approve" (censor) non-commercial speech - because CertainTeed knows
this process of Court censorship will take several months to attain, and it offers numerous opportunities to
prevent free speech without having a trial.
If CertainTeed's position wins the day, for the first time in America, a Federal Court will be responsible for
ongoing censoring and approval of non-commercial speech before it can be published - including this blog.
If CertainTeed has its way, the free speech rights of ALL BLOGGERS will be subject to "pre-approval."
CERTAINTEED ARGUES - FREE SPEECH MUST BE DENIED (OR CENSORED)
CertainTeed has a long history, in this case, of presenting numerous lies and deceptions to the Court. [1]
Unfortunately, the Court has often failed to recognize these lies - or it has simply chosen to ignore them.
The most profound impression left by this suit is the complete lack of regard for Truth, Honor and Integrity
by both the "professional" lawyers and the Court. If I were a Judge I would not tolerate such behaviour,
but that's just me.
But CertainTeed's real expertise is in misdirection. In its latest Motion, CertainTeed carries-on at length
about how SRB must be prevented from continuing to make false statements... but it never (ever) identifies
which statements are allegedly false. CertainTeed continues to claim "SRB is making false statements" BUT
never identifies a specific statement because, by speaking in generalities, CertainTeed continues manipulation
of the Court - and continues to avoid any burden of proof.
In fact, what is happening is that CertainTeed cannot identify any "false" statement (or it undoubtedly would)
it just wants ALL statements to be prohibited - or at least subject to the never ending pre-approval process.
In order to convince the Court that SRB should be prevented from expression of "non-commercial" speech,
CertainTeed now makes two different arguments. The first argument is the roofing business was not closed.
It does not offer any proof of the allegation, but absence of proof has never stopped CertainTeed before.
CertainTeed simply states it "is likely" the roofing business is still operating. Or that (SRB) has "the hope
of being paid by someone." Incredibly, this is the quality of "evidence" supporting CertainTeed's claims.
Hopefully the Court will require more than some mere speculation before even considering such nonsense...
but we will see what the Court does as it has often shown an undue preference to support CertainTeed.
The second argument CertainTeed offers is: Even if the roofing business was closed several months ago
all the previous Orders against "advertising to promote the roofing business" still apply to non-commercial
speech after the business is dissolved. In other words, because the Court ordered all "advertising" must be
pre-approved before publishing on the business website, after the business is dissolved, all non-advertising
STILL falls under the Order - therefore, non-commercial speech is subject to "pre-approval" (censorship).
This is an interesting argument which, depending on the Court, may set a legal precedent on expression of
free speech. Eventually we may need to establish a new agency to "pre-approve" (censor) all publications.
Can we call the agency "Pre-Approval of Speech Is Certain (teed)"... or PASIC for short?
The Court must now decide whether:
(A) It will simply prohibit the expression of ALL "non-commercial" free speech.
The Court might Order that ALL expression of speech by SRB be prohibited. It that case this blog,
and all other published statements, must be immediately deleted and all free speech will be prohibited.
(B) It will require all "non-commercial" free speech be censored before publishing.
The Court might Order that ALL expression of speech by SRB is subject to "pre-approval" before
publishing. In that case this blog, and all other published statements, would be prohibited for weeks,
or months, required for the censoring. In other words, The Order would prohibit ALL free speech ...
But only for the Indefinite Period of Time necessary for the Court's "pre-approval" (censorship).
(C) It will require CertainTeed find a "false" statement BEFORE complaining further.
And, if it finds a "false" statement (representing "the majority" of shingles fail before 15-20 years),
CertainTeed would then be able to file with the Court for action against the specific alleged violation.
However, expression of free speech is NOT prevented unless, and until, there is a specific violation.
What a novel solution - Protection of free speech until AFTER some proof of falsity... Imagine that.
(D) Or, the Court could just declare, like CertainTeed, that the roofing business was never closed.
In that case, the Court can prohibit expression of true statements and opinions for several months
(just as it does now) while it "pre-approves" (censors) the expression of "free speech."
So, when is the expression of free speech NOT free?
When CertainTeed does not like what is said - and the Court PROHIBITS expression of ALL SPEECH
while it supposedly searches through the statements and opinions to "pre-approve" (censor) the speech.
Warning: The "pre-approval" (censorship) process PREVENTS expression of free speech for a few months.
_________________________________________________________________________________
[1] CertainTeed has shown that it is more than willing to try to manipulate the Court with blatant lies and
deceptions on numerous occasions. In the latest case, Brian Esler is now trying to convince the Court
that SRB operated for several years (between 2000 and 2004) without using any Internet advertising.
Apparently, this is supposed to prove SRB did not dissolve the roofing business or support an idea the
Court did not impose an Undue Burden by preventing Internet advertising during weeks of censoring.
However, several weeks ago, Mr. Esler argued (at-length) that SRB's testimony must be ignored
because it only reflected the "biased" information received while employed at Statewide Systems
between 2000 and 2002. Moreover, several weeks ago, Mr. Esler argued (at-length) that SRB's
testimony about a photograph must be ignored since the photo was provided by a former employer,
DSK Home Improvement, (after being employed between 2002 to 2004) and that SRB had no
"personal knowledge" about the photo provided by this former employer.
So now Mr. Esler comes before the Court intentionally lying about certain facts regarding SRB's
previous employment - in order to further his current objectives. Obviously Mr. Esler will commit
whatever lie or deception is needed to advance his position, the question is: What will the Court do?
Will the Court continue to ignore or excuse Mr. Esler's latest attempts at manipulation through lies?
Will the Court (finally) hold Mr. Esler accountable for some basic level of truth, honor and integrity?
In this deception, as in many of his previous lies, Mr. Esler does not even present a convincing lie.
Mr. Esler demonstrates again, as he has demonstrated throughout the proceedings, his willingness
to lie with impunity - Because there is no danger that the Court will ever sanction his behaviour.
I suspect Mr. Esler, all CertainTeed's lawyers (and the Court), lecture their children and grandchildren
about the need for honesty, integrity, principles, honor and good moral character... while every day
they are committing (or allowing) blatant lies, deceit and deceptions in order to "win" the latest case.
What does it profit a man... ?
_________________________________________________________________________________
Friday, September 3, 2010
Tuesday, August 31, 2010
Presidential Shingles
THE TRUTH ABOUT CERTAINTEED PRESIDENTIAL SHINGLES
"Pumpkin-Tooth" Style Asphalt Shingles
Short-Term Roofing
This article provides unbiased information on the functional lifespan - and the aesthetic lifespan
of "pumpkin-tooth" style asphalt shingles. We will use the Presidential Shake and Presidential TL
for examples as they have the longest time on the market. Since the design of all pumpkin-tooth
products is similar, the concepts expressed below should apply to all the comparable products.
CertainTeed Presidential Shake & Presidential TL
PABCO Paramount & Paramount Advantage
Owens Corning Woodmore & Woodcrest
GAF Grand Sequoia & Grand Canyon
CERTAINTEED PRESIDENTIAL FAILURES
Many consumers have the incorrect perception that "pumpkin-tooth" style fiberglass shingles have lasted
(or will last) for 30, 40 or 50 years. This misconception on durability is understandable, there's no shortage
of manufacturers, and asphalt roofers, promoting the sale of these products and consumers notice the shingle
is much thicker (at the bottom edge) than conventional "3-Tab" or "architectural" style asphalt products.
Unfortunately, most asphalt roofers never disclose the history of premature failures with Presidential shingles
and they rarely show the back-side of the shingle. So consumers remain unaware that a significant part of the
shingle is one thin layer of cheap (3-Tab) material - Never expect unbiased information from roofers. [1]
The CertainTeed Presidential (and Presidential TL) are popular roofing shingles, marketed as alternatives
for traditional cedar shake roofing. The Presidential shingle is being promoted by CertainTeed, and roofers,
as a 50 year or "lifetime" roofing product. However, Presidential shingles have a history of premature failures
starting BEFORE 15 years old - But this documented history of failure is rarely disclosed to consumers. [2]
This article provides unbiased information on the functional lifespan - and aesthetic lifespan - of Presidential
shingles, the recent deceptive marketing strategy of providing "Inflated" warranties to increase market share
and other roofing "secrets" that asphalt manufacturers (and asphalt roofers) Don't Want You to Know. [3]
PRESIDENTIAL WARRANTY CLAIMS
The Presidential shingle was introduced to the roofing industry by Celotex in 1987 with a 30 year warranty.
Within 15 years these initial Presidential installations were already starting to experience premature failures.
In 2001, 2002 and 2003, CertainTeed paid warranty claims for the premature failure of Presidential shingles
due to excessive granular loss, brittleness, cracking and splitting. Despite all the premature failures occurring
BEFORE 15 years, in 2002, CertainTeed actually increased the Presidential warranty period to 50 years.
In 2004, 2005 and 2006, CertainTeed paid warranty claims for the premature failure of Presidential shingles
due to problems with granular loss, brittleness, cracking and splitting. Obviously Presidential shingles were
developing a consistent pattern of premature failure BEFORE 17 years old. However, in 2006, CertainTeed
increased the warranty period (again), this time from 50 years to the current "lifetime" warranty. [4]
In 2007, 2008 and 2009, CertainTeed paid warranty claims for the premature failure of Presidential shingles
due to continued problems with granular loss, brittleness, cracking and splitting. In addition to the clear and
consistent pattern of premature failures, it's important to note CertainTeed recently admitted it can provide
no examples - not even one - of Presidential installations lasting over 20 years in the Seattle area. [5]
SHOCKING BEHAVIOR
Consumers should NOT BE SHOCKED that major manufacturers (like CertainTeed) are currently selling
shingles with a history of premature failure - CertainTeed has been selling defective shingles for a long time.
They are currently negotiating settlement on the largest (600 million) class action lawsuit in roofing history
due to the premature failures resulting from the continued sales of defective shingles for almost 30 years. [6]
Never assume sales of defective asphalt shingles were limited to just a few years, or just a few products.
Sales of defective shingles have been widespread and pervasive - often it's been the norm, not the exception.
For information on the continued sales of products known to fail prematurely see Selling Defective Shingles.
And never expect full disclosure of information on sales of defective shingles from manufacturers and roofers.
Despite the long history of premature failure of Presidential shingles, and all the documented claim payments, CertainTeed admitted corporate, regional and legal personnel conspired with local roofers to prevent buyers
from receiving information about these failures - and even DENIED knowledge of any claim payments. [7]
Between myself, CertainTeed's Sales Manager for the Northwest Region, Greg Palandrani,
and other persons (not to mention our legal department and outside counsel), CertainTeed
has invested an extraordinary amount of time and effort in our attempts to repair the damage
done... Specifically, I explained that as CertainTeed's Territory Manager for that region,
I knew of no claims of Presidential or Presidential TL shingles failing prematurely.
Consumers should not be SHOCKED that manufacturers and asphalt roofers simply deny the existence of
documented claims and consumers should not be SHOCKED to learn they are currently selling shingles with
a history of claim payments. CertainTeed has admitted it expects Presidential shingles to fail prematurely [8]
and CertainTeed's "certified" roofers have admitted they expect Presidential shingles to fail prematurely. [9]
The only problem is... They rarely (if ever) admit these actual expectations to prospective customers.
PRESIDENTIAL DESIGN (Cheap 3-Tap Material)
While Certainteed, and many asphalt roofers, like to present the Presidential Shake and the Presidential TL
as "superior" roofing products, actually both shingles are made from some of the cheapest (3-Tab) material.
The Presidential and Presidential TL are both made from essentially the same material CertinTeed normally
uses to produce the very inexpensive XT25 shingle - Which is its bottom-of-the-line 3-Tab shingle. [10]
Apparently when the material is called "XT25" CertainTeed expects a 25 year lifespan, but when the same
material is called "Presidential" or "Presidential TL" CertainTeed suddenly expects 50+ years of durability.
Based on the shingle design, the historical performance and documented warranty claims, we "expect" the
XT25 to fail BEFORE 20 years - which may account for all the documented failures of Presidential shingles
BEFORE they were even 20 years old.
CertainTeed paid warranty claims for premature failure of XT25 shingles BEFORE they even started to
produce the Presidential line (from the defective XT25 material). For more than 15 years CertainTeed has
been paying warranty claims for the premature failure of XT25 shingles - And for 10 years CertainTeed has
been paying claims for the premature failure of Presidential shingles. [11]
At this point, the only question is:
Why is CertainTeed continuing to sell these defective products and why are asphalt roofers not disclosing
this very important information to unsuspecting consumers? And the answer may involve profitability.
PRESIDENTIAL DESIGN (Dual & Tri-Laminates)
Even with the long history of warranty claims for defective XT25 and Presidential shingles, CertainTeed
tells uninformed consumers the Presidential is "expected" to demonstrate superior performance, and last for
50+ years, because it's a "dual-laminate" design - meaning there are two layers of the XT25 material bonded
together. And the Presidential TL is a "tri-laminate" design consisting of three bonded layers of XT25.
By making such statements, CertainTeed must depend on the ignorance of inexperienced consumers because
approximately 20% of the exposed Presidential material is NOT the dual-laminate design - Its a single layer
of material. The same applies to the Presidential TL shingle, only part of the shingle is a tri-laminate design,
the rest consists of just a single layer of the cheap (XT25) 3-Tab material.
Since the weakest area of a shingle (not the strongest) determines product durability, there is no reason to
ever expect 50 years, or 40 years or even 30 years of durability from Presidential or Presidential TL shingles
when a significant portion of the product is just a single layer of bottom-of-the-line (XT25) 3-Tab material.
And there's no reason to expect problems of excessive granular loss to be solved by bonding another shingle
(or two more shingles) to the BOTTOM of the XT25 (3-tab) shingle. If past performance is any indication
of future durability, we must expect XT25 and Presidential shingles to continue to fail before 20 years.
PRESIDENTIAL RE-SALE WINDOW
It's not enough for buyers to only know the "functional life" of a roofing shingle. It's far more important they
understand the aesthetic life - The age BEFORE shingles start to show the obvious signs of imminent failure.
Potential buyers expect a Five Year Certification on roofing and normally require the replacement of roofing
or payment of a negotiated "Roofing Allowance" whenever shingles do not pass a Re-Sale inspection. [12]
This is the critical "Re-Sale Window" for roofing products. If the functional life of Presidential is 20 years,
that DOES NOT mean the shingles can actually pass a Re-sale inspection at that time. And determination
of "failed" roofing is always based on the WORST portion of the installation - never the strongest. It simply
does not matter if the north-side of the roof is still in decent condition - when shingles on the south-side have
already failed.
Buyers must understand this Re-Sale Window because eventually they become Sellers of the same roofing.
Trying to sell a home with 15 year old Presidential shingles will be a problem - if all your prospective buyers
want to negotiate replacement costs because areas of the roofing show obvious signs of imminent failure and,
because of the condition of the most worn areas, the roofing cannot pass a (5 year) Re-Sale inspection.
Paying $20,000 for Presidential shingles today may just be your initial down payment
When it requires replacement costs of over $40,000 (inflation) to Re-Sell in only 15 years.
And it may be little consolation to receive a (12%) claim payment of $4,800 from CertainTeed.
This is the problem of intentionally marketing roofing products with "Inflated" warranties. Whenever asphalt
manufacturers provide warranties of 30 years, 40 years and 50 years to "sell" products which have a history
of premature failure BEFORE 20 years - Many innocent families will suffer financial loss. [13]
THE PUBLIC PERCEPTION
Asphalt manufacturers can simply add the cost of projected claim payments to the initial product pricing to
offset all the claims associated with expected premature failures. This strategy allows the use of "Inflated"
warranty periods (to increase market share) while still maintaining their desired profit margins. This very
deceptive marketing strategy will be effective - for a period of time.
Eventually consumers will recognize the pattern of premature failures, the public awareness slowly increases,
Class Action Lawsuits are filed and (eventually) asphalt manufacturers must change product names (again)
so they can continue to claim the problem has been resolved - they are selling "new and improved" shingles.
Because most sales of Presidential (and Presidential TL), in the Seattle area, have occurred in the last few
years, the general perception of product performance and durability is still very good. However, since the
earliest installations are now failing and being replaced, this incorrect perception will quickly change.
Perception of Presidential (and Presidential TL) quality will evaporate as soon as the limited durability - and
the long history of documented premature failures and claim payments - becomes common knowledge.
This is an important consideration for all (current) buyers, coming into this scheme a little late... do not expect
the public to STILL have a favorable perception of Presidential shingles AFTER they start seeing all of these (premature) replacements of roofing installed only 15 or 20 years ago. In other words, consumers buying
shingles in 2010 should not expect the current perception about "50 year" Presidential shingles to continue...
and more informed buyers (and higher pricing) may be important factors when it's time to (re)sell the home.
_________________________________________________________________________________
[1] By "history" we do not mean 100% failure rate. Please see the Definitions.
[2] Declaration of Adam Hughes, CertainTeed Legal counsel, May 28, 2010.
[3] Roofing warranties are just marketing tools that don't indicate either the quality or the durability of
shingles and warranty payments are often a small fraction (8% to 15%) of actual replacement costs.
[4] The Presidential, and Presidential TL, has always been a "fiberglass" design and premature failures
of fiberglass shingles have typically been the result of excessive granular loss, brittleness, cracking
and splitting, blistering, curling or buckling, seals and weeping. See: History of Asphalt Shingles.
[5] Declaration of Robert Gardiner, Certainteed VP of marketing, April 26, 2010.
[6] Negotiations allow a maximum of $34 or $74 per square (prorated) for replacement of defective
shingles. However replacement costs in Seattle area are approximately $300 to $600 per square
for typical installations.
[7] Declaration of Mark Ivers, CertainTeed Northwest Territory Manager, March 3, 2010.
[8] Declaration of Mark Ivers, CertainTeed Northwest Territory Manager, April 23, 2010.
[9] Declaration of Michael Haight, CertainTeed "certified" roofer, April 26, 2010.
[10] Declaration of Husnu Kalkanoglu, CertainTeed VP of Research and Development, April 26, 2010.
[11] Claim payments are the result of premature failures. If a shingle is failing prematurely, there will be
claim payments. While it is true that many (maybe even most) premature failures are never reported,
when "25 year" and/or "50 year" shingles are failing within 15 years, there will be claim payments.
[12] Certification of (at least) five more years of functionality is normally required by the lender before
approval of the mortgage - unless a price reduction ("roofing allowance") is negotiated to provide
for roof replacement after closing on the mortgage.
[13] Please see the History of Asphalt shingles and Selling Defective Shingles in Seattle to understand
why this author believes CertainTeed was fully aware it was selling defective shingles, why it has
no (financial) reason to change business strategy now and how its current use of 50 year and
"lifetime" warranties provides clear indication that nothing has changed... and nothing will change.
_________________________________________________________________________________
"Pumpkin-Tooth" Style Asphalt Shingles
Short-Term Roofing
This article provides unbiased information on the functional lifespan - and the aesthetic lifespan
of "pumpkin-tooth" style asphalt shingles. We will use the Presidential Shake and Presidential TL
for examples as they have the longest time on the market. Since the design of all pumpkin-tooth
products is similar, the concepts expressed below should apply to all the comparable products.
CertainTeed Presidential Shake & Presidential TL
PABCO Paramount & Paramount Advantage
Owens Corning Woodmore & Woodcrest
GAF Grand Sequoia & Grand Canyon
CERTAINTEED PRESIDENTIAL FAILURES
Many consumers have the incorrect perception that "pumpkin-tooth" style fiberglass shingles have lasted
(or will last) for 30, 40 or 50 years. This misconception on durability is understandable, there's no shortage
of manufacturers, and asphalt roofers, promoting the sale of these products and consumers notice the shingle
is much thicker (at the bottom edge) than conventional "3-Tab" or "architectural" style asphalt products.
Unfortunately, most asphalt roofers never disclose the history of premature failures with Presidential shingles
and they rarely show the back-side of the shingle. So consumers remain unaware that a significant part of the
shingle is one thin layer of cheap (3-Tab) material - Never expect unbiased information from roofers. [1]
The CertainTeed Presidential (and Presidential TL) are popular roofing shingles, marketed as alternatives
for traditional cedar shake roofing. The Presidential shingle is being promoted by CertainTeed, and roofers,
as a 50 year or "lifetime" roofing product. However, Presidential shingles have a history of premature failures
starting BEFORE 15 years old - But this documented history of failure is rarely disclosed to consumers. [2]
This article provides unbiased information on the functional lifespan - and aesthetic lifespan - of Presidential
shingles, the recent deceptive marketing strategy of providing "Inflated" warranties to increase market share
and other roofing "secrets" that asphalt manufacturers (and asphalt roofers) Don't Want You to Know. [3]
PRESIDENTIAL WARRANTY CLAIMS
The Presidential shingle was introduced to the roofing industry by Celotex in 1987 with a 30 year warranty.
Within 15 years these initial Presidential installations were already starting to experience premature failures.
In 2001, 2002 and 2003, CertainTeed paid warranty claims for the premature failure of Presidential shingles
due to excessive granular loss, brittleness, cracking and splitting. Despite all the premature failures occurring
BEFORE 15 years, in 2002, CertainTeed actually increased the Presidential warranty period to 50 years.
In 2004, 2005 and 2006, CertainTeed paid warranty claims for the premature failure of Presidential shingles
due to problems with granular loss, brittleness, cracking and splitting. Obviously Presidential shingles were
developing a consistent pattern of premature failure BEFORE 17 years old. However, in 2006, CertainTeed
increased the warranty period (again), this time from 50 years to the current "lifetime" warranty. [4]
In 2007, 2008 and 2009, CertainTeed paid warranty claims for the premature failure of Presidential shingles
due to continued problems with granular loss, brittleness, cracking and splitting. In addition to the clear and
consistent pattern of premature failures, it's important to note CertainTeed recently admitted it can provide
no examples - not even one - of Presidential installations lasting over 20 years in the Seattle area. [5]
SHOCKING BEHAVIOR
Consumers should NOT BE SHOCKED that major manufacturers (like CertainTeed) are currently selling
shingles with a history of premature failure - CertainTeed has been selling defective shingles for a long time.
They are currently negotiating settlement on the largest (600 million) class action lawsuit in roofing history
due to the premature failures resulting from the continued sales of defective shingles for almost 30 years. [6]
Never assume sales of defective asphalt shingles were limited to just a few years, or just a few products.
Sales of defective shingles have been widespread and pervasive - often it's been the norm, not the exception.
For information on the continued sales of products known to fail prematurely see Selling Defective Shingles.
And never expect full disclosure of information on sales of defective shingles from manufacturers and roofers.
Despite the long history of premature failure of Presidential shingles, and all the documented claim payments, CertainTeed admitted corporate, regional and legal personnel conspired with local roofers to prevent buyers
from receiving information about these failures - and even DENIED knowledge of any claim payments. [7]
Between myself, CertainTeed's Sales Manager for the Northwest Region, Greg Palandrani,
and other persons (not to mention our legal department and outside counsel), CertainTeed
has invested an extraordinary amount of time and effort in our attempts to repair the damage
done... Specifically, I explained that as CertainTeed's Territory Manager for that region,
I knew of no claims of Presidential or Presidential TL shingles failing prematurely.
Consumers should not be SHOCKED that manufacturers and asphalt roofers simply deny the existence of
documented claims and consumers should not be SHOCKED to learn they are currently selling shingles with
a history of claim payments. CertainTeed has admitted it expects Presidential shingles to fail prematurely [8]
and CertainTeed's "certified" roofers have admitted they expect Presidential shingles to fail prematurely. [9]
The only problem is... They rarely (if ever) admit these actual expectations to prospective customers.
PRESIDENTIAL DESIGN (Cheap 3-Tap Material)
While Certainteed, and many asphalt roofers, like to present the Presidential Shake and the Presidential TL
as "superior" roofing products, actually both shingles are made from some of the cheapest (3-Tab) material.
The Presidential and Presidential TL are both made from essentially the same material CertinTeed normally
uses to produce the very inexpensive XT25 shingle - Which is its bottom-of-the-line 3-Tab shingle. [10]
Apparently when the material is called "XT25" CertainTeed expects a 25 year lifespan, but when the same
material is called "Presidential" or "Presidential TL" CertainTeed suddenly expects 50+ years of durability.
Based on the shingle design, the historical performance and documented warranty claims, we "expect" the
XT25 to fail BEFORE 20 years - which may account for all the documented failures of Presidential shingles
BEFORE they were even 20 years old.
CertainTeed paid warranty claims for premature failure of XT25 shingles BEFORE they even started to
produce the Presidential line (from the defective XT25 material). For more than 15 years CertainTeed has
been paying warranty claims for the premature failure of XT25 shingles - And for 10 years CertainTeed has
been paying claims for the premature failure of Presidential shingles. [11]
At this point, the only question is:
Why is CertainTeed continuing to sell these defective products and why are asphalt roofers not disclosing
this very important information to unsuspecting consumers? And the answer may involve profitability.
PRESIDENTIAL DESIGN (Dual & Tri-Laminates)
Even with the long history of warranty claims for defective XT25 and Presidential shingles, CertainTeed
tells uninformed consumers the Presidential is "expected" to demonstrate superior performance, and last for
50+ years, because it's a "dual-laminate" design - meaning there are two layers of the XT25 material bonded
together. And the Presidential TL is a "tri-laminate" design consisting of three bonded layers of XT25.
By making such statements, CertainTeed must depend on the ignorance of inexperienced consumers because
approximately 20% of the exposed Presidential material is NOT the dual-laminate design - Its a single layer
of material. The same applies to the Presidential TL shingle, only part of the shingle is a tri-laminate design,
the rest consists of just a single layer of the cheap (XT25) 3-Tab material.
Since the weakest area of a shingle (not the strongest) determines product durability, there is no reason to
ever expect 50 years, or 40 years or even 30 years of durability from Presidential or Presidential TL shingles
when a significant portion of the product is just a single layer of bottom-of-the-line (XT25) 3-Tab material.
And there's no reason to expect problems of excessive granular loss to be solved by bonding another shingle
(or two more shingles) to the BOTTOM of the XT25 (3-tab) shingle. If past performance is any indication
of future durability, we must expect XT25 and Presidential shingles to continue to fail before 20 years.
PRESIDENTIAL RE-SALE WINDOW
It's not enough for buyers to only know the "functional life" of a roofing shingle. It's far more important they
understand the aesthetic life - The age BEFORE shingles start to show the obvious signs of imminent failure.
Potential buyers expect a Five Year Certification on roofing and normally require the replacement of roofing
or payment of a negotiated "Roofing Allowance" whenever shingles do not pass a Re-Sale inspection. [12]
This is the critical "Re-Sale Window" for roofing products. If the functional life of Presidential is 20 years,
that DOES NOT mean the shingles can actually pass a Re-sale inspection at that time. And determination
of "failed" roofing is always based on the WORST portion of the installation - never the strongest. It simply
does not matter if the north-side of the roof is still in decent condition - when shingles on the south-side have
already failed.
Buyers must understand this Re-Sale Window because eventually they become Sellers of the same roofing.
Trying to sell a home with 15 year old Presidential shingles will be a problem - if all your prospective buyers
want to negotiate replacement costs because areas of the roofing show obvious signs of imminent failure and,
because of the condition of the most worn areas, the roofing cannot pass a (5 year) Re-Sale inspection.
Paying $20,000 for Presidential shingles today may just be your initial down payment
When it requires replacement costs of over $40,000 (inflation) to Re-Sell in only 15 years.
And it may be little consolation to receive a (12%) claim payment of $4,800 from CertainTeed.
This is the problem of intentionally marketing roofing products with "Inflated" warranties. Whenever asphalt
manufacturers provide warranties of 30 years, 40 years and 50 years to "sell" products which have a history
of premature failure BEFORE 20 years - Many innocent families will suffer financial loss. [13]
THE PUBLIC PERCEPTION
Asphalt manufacturers can simply add the cost of projected claim payments to the initial product pricing to
offset all the claims associated with expected premature failures. This strategy allows the use of "Inflated"
warranty periods (to increase market share) while still maintaining their desired profit margins. This very
deceptive marketing strategy will be effective - for a period of time.
Eventually consumers will recognize the pattern of premature failures, the public awareness slowly increases,
Class Action Lawsuits are filed and (eventually) asphalt manufacturers must change product names (again)
so they can continue to claim the problem has been resolved - they are selling "new and improved" shingles.
Because most sales of Presidential (and Presidential TL), in the Seattle area, have occurred in the last few
years, the general perception of product performance and durability is still very good. However, since the
earliest installations are now failing and being replaced, this incorrect perception will quickly change.
Perception of Presidential (and Presidential TL) quality will evaporate as soon as the limited durability - and
the long history of documented premature failures and claim payments - becomes common knowledge.
This is an important consideration for all (current) buyers, coming into this scheme a little late... do not expect
the public to STILL have a favorable perception of Presidential shingles AFTER they start seeing all of these (premature) replacements of roofing installed only 15 or 20 years ago. In other words, consumers buying
shingles in 2010 should not expect the current perception about "50 year" Presidential shingles to continue...
and more informed buyers (and higher pricing) may be important factors when it's time to (re)sell the home.
_________________________________________________________________________________
[1] By "history" we do not mean 100% failure rate. Please see the Definitions.
[2] Declaration of Adam Hughes, CertainTeed Legal counsel, May 28, 2010.
[3] Roofing warranties are just marketing tools that don't indicate either the quality or the durability of
shingles and warranty payments are often a small fraction (8% to 15%) of actual replacement costs.
[4] The Presidential, and Presidential TL, has always been a "fiberglass" design and premature failures
of fiberglass shingles have typically been the result of excessive granular loss, brittleness, cracking
and splitting, blistering, curling or buckling, seals and weeping. See: History of Asphalt Shingles.
[5] Declaration of Robert Gardiner, Certainteed VP of marketing, April 26, 2010.
[6] Negotiations allow a maximum of $34 or $74 per square (prorated) for replacement of defective
shingles. However replacement costs in Seattle area are approximately $300 to $600 per square
for typical installations.
[7] Declaration of Mark Ivers, CertainTeed Northwest Territory Manager, March 3, 2010.
[8] Declaration of Mark Ivers, CertainTeed Northwest Territory Manager, April 23, 2010.
[9] Declaration of Michael Haight, CertainTeed "certified" roofer, April 26, 2010.
[10] Declaration of Husnu Kalkanoglu, CertainTeed VP of Research and Development, April 26, 2010.
[11] Claim payments are the result of premature failures. If a shingle is failing prematurely, there will be
claim payments. While it is true that many (maybe even most) premature failures are never reported,
when "25 year" and/or "50 year" shingles are failing within 15 years, there will be claim payments.
[12] Certification of (at least) five more years of functionality is normally required by the lender before
approval of the mortgage - unless a price reduction ("roofing allowance") is negotiated to provide
for roof replacement after closing on the mortgage.
[13] Please see the History of Asphalt shingles and Selling Defective Shingles in Seattle to understand
why this author believes CertainTeed was fully aware it was selling defective shingles, why it has
no (financial) reason to change business strategy now and how its current use of 50 year and
"lifetime" warranties provides clear indication that nothing has changed... and nothing will change.
_________________________________________________________________________________
Shingle Durability
LIFESPAN OF CONVENTIONAL FIBERGLASS SHINGLES
It's important to understand that all roofs wear unevenly and the determination of "failed" (or "failing") roofing
is ALWAYS based on the worst, or weakest, protions of roofing - never the strongest. It does not matter
if the north-side of a roof is in relatively good condition when shingles on the south-side have already failed.
Prospective buyers expect the (worst areas of) roofing too be able to pass a 5 Year Certification Inspection.
When roofs "fail" this Re-Sale Inspection, the replacement of roofing - or payment of a roofing "allowance"
is normally required in order to sell the home. Therefore, determination of the Re-Sale Window of shingles
is always related to the condition of the worst area of roofing - even when the worst sections of the roof
are only a small percentage of the entire installation.
Paying $10,000 to re-roof with asphalt shingles today may just be your initial down payment
When it requires replacement costs of $20,000 (with inflation) to Re-Sell the home in only 15 years.
It may be very little consolation to receive a warranty claim of $2,400 (12%) from an asphalt manufacturer.
This is the problem of intentionally marketing roofing products with "Inflated" warranty periods. Whenever
manufacturers provide warranties of 30, 40 and 50 years in order to "sell" asphalt shingles with a history of
premature failures - innocent families will suffer financial loss.
Asphalt manufacturers can simply add the cost of projected claim payments to the initial product pricing
to offset all the claims associated with expected premature failures. This strategy allows the use of "Inflated"
warranty periods (to increase market share) while still maintaining their desired profit margins.
Consumers should NOT BE SHOCKED by the idea that asphalt manufacturers (and asphalt roofers) are
currently selling shingles with a history of premature failures - selling shingles they expect to be defective.
Asphalt manufacturers and asphalt roofers have been selling defective shingles for a very long time. The
sales of defective asphalt shingles has been widespread and pervasive - over a period of almost 30 years.
And consumers SHOULD NEVER EXPECT asphalt manufacturers, or asphalt roofers, to actually disclose
information on the history of premature failure (or the claims history) for shingles they are currently selling...
they could not sell defective shingles for the last 30 years by disclosing the actual history of premature failure
or the documented history of claims payments.
There is always an adversarial relationship between consumers and sellers (both manufacturers and roofers)
because their financial interests are diametrically opposed. Do not EVER expect sellers of roofing to provide
full disclosure about the history of premature failures - or the documented claims payments for shingles that
they are currently selling.
ASPHALT DURABILITY OF 5 TO 10 YEARS
Asphalt shingle manufacturers are notorious for not honoring their warranties,
they always have an excuse, and people do not file suit due to high legal costs... Our area,
near Chicago... We are tearing off more and more of the so-called "40 year" asphalt shingles that
are from 8 to 11 years old. If the homeowner is concerned with how the roof looks (and not just
being weather tight) they are usually unhappy at the 6 to 10 year point. [1]
ASPHALT DURABILITY OF 10 TO 15 YEARS
Most homeowners are lulled into thinking that, if a 30-year roof shingle is installed on their home
(as stated by the roof manufacturer), then that roof will last the suggested life expectancy.
Not so! Most roofs fail in 10 to 15 years. Very few roofs last past 15 years! [2]
We have found that most of our asphalt shingle re-roofing in the Seattle area
is replacement of fiberglass shingles that are only 10 years to 15 years old and that
very few fiberglass shingles have lasted past 15 years. Shingles reaching that age
tend to look pretty nasty and often could not pass a Re-Sale inspection. [3]
Today's asphalt shingles are not the asphalt shingles of 30 years ago.
Today, asphalt shingles are only 10 to 30 percent asphalt by weight - and less asphalt
means poorer performance... Today's asphalt shingles are so susceptible to damage from heat,
cold, thermo-shock, algae and mold that asphalt roofs today most often last only 10 - 15 years.
By that time a good deal of the shingle has washed into the rain gutters. [4]
Most of us have been programmed into thinking that asphalt roofing is the only real option
since its inexpensive and gets the job done, at least in the shor term. You get what you pay for...
the problem is asphalt doesn't hold up to the requirements that most homeowners have...
Asphalt usually protects your home for about 10 - 15 years... [5]
In Florida, an asphalt roof will last approximately 10 to 15 years,
so use that as a guideline. If you plan on another asphalt shingle roof,
you should expect to replace it again in 10 to 15 years. [6]
ASPHALT DURABILITY OF 15 TO 20 YEARS
Asphalt roof coverings havre a typical statistical life expectancy from fifteen to twenty years.
Beware of those saying that life expectancy of asphalt roofs are longer than 25 years.
You would be hard pressed to locate a roof still in useful condition that is
more than twenty years old. [7]
In fact, its layered construction allowed manufacturers to use a much thinner layer of asphalt,
which resulted in a baseline 30-year laminated shingle that had a realistic life expectancy
that was less than the 20-year and 25-year organich shingles they were designed to replace.
Realistic life expecctancy... 15 - 20 years. [8]
According to the asphalt roofing industry, the average shingle roof lasts 17 - 19 years.
The actual lifetime is dramatically lower than this in hot climates and extreme weather situations.
Unfortunately, the warranties on these products do not cover natural wear and tear from weather.
Damage resulting from high winds, hail, rain and extreme temperatures are also not covered. [9]
You can expect a metal roof to last at leat 2 to 3 times longer than a regular roof. In general terms,
count on a metal roof lasting 40 to 60 years and beyond. To put it in context, the average life span of
an asphalt roof is 12 to 20 years. That lifespan can be shorter depending on the pitch of your roof and
the climate in your area... asphalt begins to deteriorate as soon as you expose it to normal weather. [10]
When buyers are considering a home, they're always concerned about the condition of the roof...
With metal, they know they won't need to do anything to it for at least 50 years. With an asphalt roof
they'll need to replace it within 15 to 20 years. [11]
Asphalt can require re-roofing every 12 to 20 years, with the average age of roofing in the U.S.
being only 17 years. That's because asphalt roofing, being made of oil impregnated paper or fiberglass
begins to deteriorate as soon as you put it on your roof. [12]
ASPHALT DURABILITY OF 20 YEARS?
A recent study for the National Association of Home Builders (NAHB) determined that the average
life span for asphalt shingles is only 20 years. [13]
Even the Asphalt Roofing Manufacturers Association (ARMA) recommends the replacement of (their)
asphalt shingles every 20 years. [14]
Homeowners can be excused for considering an idea as ridiculous as 30, 40 or 50 year asphalt shingles...
they are unsuspecting consumers, not roofing experts. But what about roofing contractors? What about
asphalt manufacturers? Can they ever be excused for using deception to sell defetive products?
It's very easy to "sell" inexperienced and unsuspecting consumers the idea of a long-term lifespan for asphalt,
when the only examples shown are less than 10 years old. It's something altogether different when buyers
have the opportunity to acually see the condition of a 20 year fiberglass installation.
Fiberglass shingles have been on the market for over 30 years. Even "luxury" shingles like Presidential Shake
has been produced over 23 years. If a manufacturer or roofing contractor is unwilling (or unable) to let you
see what you can expect your roof to look like in 15 or 20 years... maybe you should look for a different
roofing material.
_________________________________________________________________________________
[1] 'Roofing - CertainTeed Shingles', en.allexperts.com
[2] 'What's in a roof Shingle Warranty', inspectionconcepts.com
[3] 'Fiberglass Shingle Durability', seattleroofbroker.com
[4] 'Problems with Today's Asphalt', chandlermetalroofing.com
[5] 'Compare Roofs', metalroosunlimited.com
[6] 'Residential Roof Replacement', solarshieldroofing.com
[7] 'Asphalt Roof Coverings', looksmarthomeinspections.com
[8] 'Composition', larryoweseverythingtojim.com
[9] 'Homeowners Guide to Roofing', classicroofing.com
[10] 'Frequently Asked Questions', metalroofing.com
[11] 'Excellent roofing', excellentroofinghomeimprovements.com
[12] 'Benefits of a Metal Roof', metalshingle.com
[13] 'Study of Life Expectancy', National Association of Home Builders
[14] 'All About Roofing', asphaltroofing.org
_________________________________________________________________________________
It's important to understand that all roofs wear unevenly and the determination of "failed" (or "failing") roofing
is ALWAYS based on the worst, or weakest, protions of roofing - never the strongest. It does not matter
if the north-side of a roof is in relatively good condition when shingles on the south-side have already failed.
Prospective buyers expect the (worst areas of) roofing too be able to pass a 5 Year Certification Inspection.
When roofs "fail" this Re-Sale Inspection, the replacement of roofing - or payment of a roofing "allowance"
is normally required in order to sell the home. Therefore, determination of the Re-Sale Window of shingles
is always related to the condition of the worst area of roofing - even when the worst sections of the roof
are only a small percentage of the entire installation.
Paying $10,000 to re-roof with asphalt shingles today may just be your initial down payment
When it requires replacement costs of $20,000 (with inflation) to Re-Sell the home in only 15 years.
It may be very little consolation to receive a warranty claim of $2,400 (12%) from an asphalt manufacturer.
This is the problem of intentionally marketing roofing products with "Inflated" warranty periods. Whenever
manufacturers provide warranties of 30, 40 and 50 years in order to "sell" asphalt shingles with a history of
premature failures - innocent families will suffer financial loss.
Asphalt manufacturers can simply add the cost of projected claim payments to the initial product pricing
to offset all the claims associated with expected premature failures. This strategy allows the use of "Inflated"
warranty periods (to increase market share) while still maintaining their desired profit margins.
Consumers should NOT BE SHOCKED by the idea that asphalt manufacturers (and asphalt roofers) are
currently selling shingles with a history of premature failures - selling shingles they expect to be defective.
Asphalt manufacturers and asphalt roofers have been selling defective shingles for a very long time. The
sales of defective asphalt shingles has been widespread and pervasive - over a period of almost 30 years.
And consumers SHOULD NEVER EXPECT asphalt manufacturers, or asphalt roofers, to actually disclose
information on the history of premature failure (or the claims history) for shingles they are currently selling...
they could not sell defective shingles for the last 30 years by disclosing the actual history of premature failure
or the documented history of claims payments.
There is always an adversarial relationship between consumers and sellers (both manufacturers and roofers)
because their financial interests are diametrically opposed. Do not EVER expect sellers of roofing to provide
full disclosure about the history of premature failures - or the documented claims payments for shingles that
they are currently selling.
ASPHALT DURABILITY OF 5 TO 10 YEARS
Asphalt shingle manufacturers are notorious for not honoring their warranties,
they always have an excuse, and people do not file suit due to high legal costs... Our area,
near Chicago... We are tearing off more and more of the so-called "40 year" asphalt shingles that
are from 8 to 11 years old. If the homeowner is concerned with how the roof looks (and not just
being weather tight) they are usually unhappy at the 6 to 10 year point. [1]
ASPHALT DURABILITY OF 10 TO 15 YEARS
Most homeowners are lulled into thinking that, if a 30-year roof shingle is installed on their home
(as stated by the roof manufacturer), then that roof will last the suggested life expectancy.
Not so! Most roofs fail in 10 to 15 years. Very few roofs last past 15 years! [2]
We have found that most of our asphalt shingle re-roofing in the Seattle area
is replacement of fiberglass shingles that are only 10 years to 15 years old and that
very few fiberglass shingles have lasted past 15 years. Shingles reaching that age
tend to look pretty nasty and often could not pass a Re-Sale inspection. [3]
Today's asphalt shingles are not the asphalt shingles of 30 years ago.
Today, asphalt shingles are only 10 to 30 percent asphalt by weight - and less asphalt
means poorer performance... Today's asphalt shingles are so susceptible to damage from heat,
cold, thermo-shock, algae and mold that asphalt roofs today most often last only 10 - 15 years.
By that time a good deal of the shingle has washed into the rain gutters. [4]
Most of us have been programmed into thinking that asphalt roofing is the only real option
since its inexpensive and gets the job done, at least in the shor term. You get what you pay for...
the problem is asphalt doesn't hold up to the requirements that most homeowners have...
Asphalt usually protects your home for about 10 - 15 years... [5]
In Florida, an asphalt roof will last approximately 10 to 15 years,
so use that as a guideline. If you plan on another asphalt shingle roof,
you should expect to replace it again in 10 to 15 years. [6]
ASPHALT DURABILITY OF 15 TO 20 YEARS
Asphalt roof coverings havre a typical statistical life expectancy from fifteen to twenty years.
Beware of those saying that life expectancy of asphalt roofs are longer than 25 years.
You would be hard pressed to locate a roof still in useful condition that is
more than twenty years old. [7]
In fact, its layered construction allowed manufacturers to use a much thinner layer of asphalt,
which resulted in a baseline 30-year laminated shingle that had a realistic life expectancy
that was less than the 20-year and 25-year organich shingles they were designed to replace.
Realistic life expecctancy... 15 - 20 years. [8]
According to the asphalt roofing industry, the average shingle roof lasts 17 - 19 years.
The actual lifetime is dramatically lower than this in hot climates and extreme weather situations.
Unfortunately, the warranties on these products do not cover natural wear and tear from weather.
Damage resulting from high winds, hail, rain and extreme temperatures are also not covered. [9]
You can expect a metal roof to last at leat 2 to 3 times longer than a regular roof. In general terms,
count on a metal roof lasting 40 to 60 years and beyond. To put it in context, the average life span of
an asphalt roof is 12 to 20 years. That lifespan can be shorter depending on the pitch of your roof and
the climate in your area... asphalt begins to deteriorate as soon as you expose it to normal weather. [10]
When buyers are considering a home, they're always concerned about the condition of the roof...
With metal, they know they won't need to do anything to it for at least 50 years. With an asphalt roof
they'll need to replace it within 15 to 20 years. [11]
Asphalt can require re-roofing every 12 to 20 years, with the average age of roofing in the U.S.
being only 17 years. That's because asphalt roofing, being made of oil impregnated paper or fiberglass
begins to deteriorate as soon as you put it on your roof. [12]
ASPHALT DURABILITY OF 20 YEARS?
A recent study for the National Association of Home Builders (NAHB) determined that the average
life span for asphalt shingles is only 20 years. [13]
Even the Asphalt Roofing Manufacturers Association (ARMA) recommends the replacement of (their)
asphalt shingles every 20 years. [14]
Homeowners can be excused for considering an idea as ridiculous as 30, 40 or 50 year asphalt shingles...
they are unsuspecting consumers, not roofing experts. But what about roofing contractors? What about
asphalt manufacturers? Can they ever be excused for using deception to sell defetive products?
It's very easy to "sell" inexperienced and unsuspecting consumers the idea of a long-term lifespan for asphalt,
when the only examples shown are less than 10 years old. It's something altogether different when buyers
have the opportunity to acually see the condition of a 20 year fiberglass installation.
Fiberglass shingles have been on the market for over 30 years. Even "luxury" shingles like Presidential Shake
has been produced over 23 years. If a manufacturer or roofing contractor is unwilling (or unable) to let you
see what you can expect your roof to look like in 15 or 20 years... maybe you should look for a different
roofing material.
_________________________________________________________________________________
[1] 'Roofing - CertainTeed Shingles', en.allexperts.com
[2] 'What's in a roof Shingle Warranty', inspectionconcepts.com
[3] 'Fiberglass Shingle Durability', seattleroofbroker.com
[4] 'Problems with Today's Asphalt', chandlermetalroofing.com
[5] 'Compare Roofs', metalroosunlimited.com
[6] 'Residential Roof Replacement', solarshieldroofing.com
[7] 'Asphalt Roof Coverings', looksmarthomeinspections.com
[8] 'Composition', larryoweseverythingtojim.com
[9] 'Homeowners Guide to Roofing', classicroofing.com
[10] 'Frequently Asked Questions', metalroofing.com
[11] 'Excellent roofing', excellentroofinghomeimprovements.com
[12] 'Benefits of a Metal Roof', metalshingle.com
[13] 'Study of Life Expectancy', National Association of Home Builders
[14] 'All About Roofing', asphaltroofing.org
_________________________________________________________________________________
Premature Failures are Exposed
PREMATURE FAILURES OF ASPHALT SHINGLES
BECOME COMMON KNOWLEDGE
Roofing contractor associations across the country became aware of the inferior quality of fiberglass shingles
when member contractors complained shingles didn't contain enough asphalt and were failing within 10 years.
Contractor associations presented these concerns to asphalt manufacturers and, in a short period of time,
the inferior quality of fiberglass shingles became common knowledge within the entire roofing industry.
The concerns regarding asphalt shingles began as a result of complaints received from
(Western States Roofing Contractors Association) WSRCA member contractors. Following
complaints, in 1991, the WSRCA circulated an Asphalt Shingle Problem questionnaire to its
members to determine if there was a problem with asphalt shingles. [1]
The results of the questionnaire showed that many of the 20-year guaranteed asphalt fiberglass shingles
were failing as early as six months and continuing to fail up to 12 years. The average failures were
occurring at about five years of age. The WSRCA determined that there was a problem. [2]
The failures and problems reported included: blow-offs, buckling, curling, loss of granules,
splitting and cracking and seal-down problems. [3]
While many asphalt manufacturers (and roofers) like to pretend that problems with premature failures
were limited to cheaper (post 1980) organic shingles, the fact is, premature asphalt failures have ALWAYS
been associated with the modern fiberglass design.
This fact is quickly confirmed with a cursory examination of the trade magazines in the early 1990's
which contained numerous articles on defective fiberglass shingles - and strategies for roofing contractors
to eliminate financial liability for selling fiberglass shingles that were expected to fail prematurely.
While the Western States Roofing Contractors Association (WSRCA) is credited with initial identification
of the defective fiberglass shingles, other contractor associations from across the country were also reporting
premature failure of fiberglass shingles and expressing similar concerns about potential financial liabilities
resulting from the continued sales of these defective shingles.
The Midwest Roofing Contractors Association (MRCA), another trade organization, has also received
reports from their members of early failure of fiberglass shingles from Connecticut to California...
According to Don Berg, of the National roofing Contractors Association (NRCA) technical department,
the cracking is not limited to one or two brands, or one or two types of qualities of shingles. It has
occurred in the commodity grade and the architect grade shingles. Berg has received reports
from generally around the country... [4]
As a result of complaints by contractor associations, in the early 1990's, asphalt manufacturers were forced
to admit they had been (and were) selling defective fiberglass shingles and the premature failure of fiberglass
shingles was not limited to any particular manufacturer, or any particular type of asphalt shingle.
Unfortunately, while asphalt manufacturers were finally forced to acknowledge the sale of defective shingles,
they did NOT initiate any product recalls and they did NOT alert consumers to the (well) known problem of
premature failures. They simply acknowledged they were aware of the defective shingles and they promised
to "study" the problem.
The Asphalt Roofing Manufacturers Association (ARMA) is also aware of the problem, and
responding in part to WSRCA test results, has recently formed a task force to study it and find
solutions... the cracking problem occurs in a number of different types of shingles, from a number
of different manufacturers, in many parts of the country. [5]
The premature failure of fiberglass shingles is simply historical fact. Reports of defective fiberglass shingles
were documented by contractor association and acknowledged by manufacturer associations. By the late
1990's, premature failure of "modern" asphalt shingles, both organic and fiberglass, was common knowledge
within the roofing industry - and had started to become more widely known by the general public...
Unfortunately, asphalt manufacturers were very reluctant to even admit shingles were failing prematurely.
They NEVER issued product recalls or warned unsuspecting consumers about defective shingles. They have
continued to deny liability - while providing (hundreds of) millions of dollars for Class Action Settlements.
And still, some consumers are SHOCKED by information that manufacturers (and roofers) are currently
selling fiberglass shingles with a documented history of premature failures. Consumers should not be shocked
that roofers are currently selling products KNOWN to be defective - because roofers have been selling
defective shingles for almost 30 years.
The asphalt roofing industry is NOT like the automotive industry
There are no "Recalls" when asphalt shingles are found to be Defective
Recent history has shown defective shingles continue to be sold for Decades
The asphalt industry does not NEED to demonstrate the same responsibility as the automotive industry
because most Americans move every 5 to 7 years - before the premature failures occur - so they are not
affected by sales of shingles known to be defective... the subsequent homeowners must deal with the
premature failures. Asphalt manufacturers have even admitted this Strategy of Planned Obsolescence
in major trade publications. [6]
_________________________________________________________________________________
[1] Charles Frost and Arlene Lawson, 'Seminare to Explore Asphalt Shingle Concerns'
Western Roofing Magazine, (Jan/Feb 1992)
[2] ibid
[3] ibid
[4] Ted Cushman, 'Choosing an Asphalt Shingle: Organic vs Fiberglass'
Journal of Light Construction Magazine, (May 1993)
[5] ibid
[6] Greg Malarkey, 'Cheap shingles: As with Everything Else in Life, You Get What You Pay For'
Western Roofing Magazine (Nov/Dec 1991)
_________________________________________________________________________________
BECOME COMMON KNOWLEDGE
Roofing contractor associations across the country became aware of the inferior quality of fiberglass shingles
when member contractors complained shingles didn't contain enough asphalt and were failing within 10 years.
Contractor associations presented these concerns to asphalt manufacturers and, in a short period of time,
the inferior quality of fiberglass shingles became common knowledge within the entire roofing industry.
The concerns regarding asphalt shingles began as a result of complaints received from
(Western States Roofing Contractors Association) WSRCA member contractors. Following
complaints, in 1991, the WSRCA circulated an Asphalt Shingle Problem questionnaire to its
members to determine if there was a problem with asphalt shingles. [1]
The results of the questionnaire showed that many of the 20-year guaranteed asphalt fiberglass shingles
were failing as early as six months and continuing to fail up to 12 years. The average failures were
occurring at about five years of age. The WSRCA determined that there was a problem. [2]
The failures and problems reported included: blow-offs, buckling, curling, loss of granules,
splitting and cracking and seal-down problems. [3]
While many asphalt manufacturers (and roofers) like to pretend that problems with premature failures
were limited to cheaper (post 1980) organic shingles, the fact is, premature asphalt failures have ALWAYS
been associated with the modern fiberglass design.
This fact is quickly confirmed with a cursory examination of the trade magazines in the early 1990's
which contained numerous articles on defective fiberglass shingles - and strategies for roofing contractors
to eliminate financial liability for selling fiberglass shingles that were expected to fail prematurely.
While the Western States Roofing Contractors Association (WSRCA) is credited with initial identification
of the defective fiberglass shingles, other contractor associations from across the country were also reporting
premature failure of fiberglass shingles and expressing similar concerns about potential financial liabilities
resulting from the continued sales of these defective shingles.
The Midwest Roofing Contractors Association (MRCA), another trade organization, has also received
reports from their members of early failure of fiberglass shingles from Connecticut to California...
According to Don Berg, of the National roofing Contractors Association (NRCA) technical department,
the cracking is not limited to one or two brands, or one or two types of qualities of shingles. It has
occurred in the commodity grade and the architect grade shingles. Berg has received reports
from generally around the country... [4]
As a result of complaints by contractor associations, in the early 1990's, asphalt manufacturers were forced
to admit they had been (and were) selling defective fiberglass shingles and the premature failure of fiberglass
shingles was not limited to any particular manufacturer, or any particular type of asphalt shingle.
Unfortunately, while asphalt manufacturers were finally forced to acknowledge the sale of defective shingles,
they did NOT initiate any product recalls and they did NOT alert consumers to the (well) known problem of
premature failures. They simply acknowledged they were aware of the defective shingles and they promised
to "study" the problem.
The Asphalt Roofing Manufacturers Association (ARMA) is also aware of the problem, and
responding in part to WSRCA test results, has recently formed a task force to study it and find
solutions... the cracking problem occurs in a number of different types of shingles, from a number
of different manufacturers, in many parts of the country. [5]
The premature failure of fiberglass shingles is simply historical fact. Reports of defective fiberglass shingles
were documented by contractor association and acknowledged by manufacturer associations. By the late
1990's, premature failure of "modern" asphalt shingles, both organic and fiberglass, was common knowledge
within the roofing industry - and had started to become more widely known by the general public...
finally resulting in several recent Class Action Lawsuits.
Unfortunately, asphalt manufacturers were very reluctant to even admit shingles were failing prematurely.
They NEVER issued product recalls or warned unsuspecting consumers about defective shingles. They have
continued to deny liability - while providing (hundreds of) millions of dollars for Class Action Settlements.
And still, some consumers are SHOCKED by information that manufacturers (and roofers) are currently
selling fiberglass shingles with a documented history of premature failures. Consumers should not be shocked
that roofers are currently selling products KNOWN to be defective - because roofers have been selling
defective shingles for almost 30 years.
The asphalt roofing industry is NOT like the automotive industry
There are no "Recalls" when asphalt shingles are found to be Defective
Recent history has shown defective shingles continue to be sold for Decades
The asphalt industry does not NEED to demonstrate the same responsibility as the automotive industry
because most Americans move every 5 to 7 years - before the premature failures occur - so they are not
affected by sales of shingles known to be defective... the subsequent homeowners must deal with the
premature failures. Asphalt manufacturers have even admitted this Strategy of Planned Obsolescence
in major trade publications. [6]
_________________________________________________________________________________
[1] Charles Frost and Arlene Lawson, 'Seminare to Explore Asphalt Shingle Concerns'
Western Roofing Magazine, (Jan/Feb 1992)
[2] ibid
[3] ibid
[4] Ted Cushman, 'Choosing an Asphalt Shingle: Organic vs Fiberglass'
Journal of Light Construction Magazine, (May 1993)
[5] ibid
[6] Greg Malarkey, 'Cheap shingles: As with Everything Else in Life, You Get What You Pay For'
Western Roofing Magazine (Nov/Dec 1991)
_________________________________________________________________________________
Defective Asphalt #2
PREMATURE FAILURE OF FIBERGLASS SHINGLES
As manufacturers sought to produce shingles with less asphalt, traditional organic shingles were replaced with
the modern "fiberglass" shingle - made of a paper thin LAYER (not saturation) of asphalt and stone coating.
The new design contained much less asphalt - and, therefore, was of lower quality than traditional organic.
Asphalt content was further reduced in the new fiberglass design by adding FILLER materials. These "fillers"
were usually sand and/or fine minerals (often Limestone) and were used primarily to lower production costs.
However, the addition of filler also resulted in production of even lower quality, and less durable, shingles.
The composition shingle industry has had difficulty with the performance of conventional fiberglass
shingles almost since their introduction in the late 1970's... Lack of Asphalt Content: Failed shingles
that we tested contain approximately 30% asphalt by weight. New shingles contain less than 25%
This asphalt is mixed with sand and fine mineral matter and then has granules embedded in it. [1]
There is no separate asphalt mat "coating", there is only asphalt as binder for the filler...
No wonder shingles "weep" water after only a few years! [2]
Historically, the premature failure of fiberglass shingles has involved granular loss and brittleness,
cracking and splitting, blistering, curling, buckling and "weeping" (water seeping through the shingle).
When a thorough inspection reveals ANY of these conditions the roof is beyond the "Re-Sale Window"
and normally requires either replacement or negotiation of a "Roofing Allowance" in order to sell the home.
While the common perception, promoted by asphalt manufacturers (and asphalt roofers) is that "fiberglass"
shingles are superior to the traditional "organic" design, the fact is - there has been a documented history
of premature failure of all asphalt shingles manufactured since 1980, both fiberglass and the newer organic.
Since only fiberglass are sold today - it's important to know the History of Defective Fiberglass Shingles.
Fiberglass mats are much thinner, and are not saturated with asphalt...
Several roofing contractor associations have heard complaints from their members
that fiberglass shingles are failing within ten years... [3]
Recently, our company had a roof fail in less than eight years.
When removing shingles in leaky areas, it became apparent that the water
was going right through the shingles, and had been for some time. [4]
In Central California we have seen shingles split on roofs in less than five years.
From what we have seen to date, the problem seems to occur to shingles with a thin
or nonexistent back coating... These shingles also seem to have a very high filler content
about 70% and limited tensile strength. [5]
Filler was not used to stabilize asphalt so much as it appeared it was used
to attempt to control profitability and/or market share... Buckling, cupping, splitting
and poor granular retention problems began to manifest in relatively short time frames. [6]
The premature failure of fiberglass shingles is simply Historical Fact. By the mid-1990's defective fiberglass
shingles were reported by consumers and contractors and documented in several major industry publications.
Fiberglass shingles were failing in less than 15 years but asphalt manufacturers did not initiate product recalls,
or even warn consumers about the known defects. Instead, asphalt manufacturers started to increase the
warranty periods in order to sell more (defective) shingles.
Asphalt manufacturers have continued to increase the warranty periods for fiberglass shingles so that now,
most conventional shingles come with 30, 40 50 year and "lifetime" warranties. However, with much less
asphalt content, these new fiberglass shingle have a documented History of Premature Failures - and,
very often, these defective shingles fail within 10 to 15 years.
Most inexperienced roof buyers ASSUME warranties provide an indication of shingle quality or durability...
they do NOT. roof warranties are designed to sell more shingles - and longer warranties sell more product.
That is why traditional 15 year and 20 year warranties were "Inflated" to the more marketable 30 year,
40 year, 50 year and (wait for it)... "Lifetime" warranty periods.
Bottom Line: Warranties are simply "marketing tools" and DO NOT indicate either product quality
or product durability. See: Warranties are Marketing Tools
There is an adversarial relationship between (roof) Buyers and (roof) Sellers because their Financial Interests
are diametrically opposed. Consumers should not EVER expect roofing sellers (manufacturers or installers)
to provide full disclosure on information on the documented history of premature failure of shingles
they are currently trying to sell.
_________________________________________________________________________________
[1] Richard Tippett, 'Fiberglass Shingles: More Than You Ever Wanted to Know About Shingle Failures'
Western Roofing Magazine, (May/June 1991)
[2] ibid.
[3] Ted Cushman, 'Choosing and Asphalt Shingle: Organic vs Fiberglass'
Journal of Light Construction Magazine, (May 1993)
[4] Ray Bolt, Shingle Problems: 20 Year Shingles are Posing Problems in the West'
Western Roofing Magazine, (Jan/Feb 1991)
[5] Richard Tippett, 'Fiberglass Shingles'
[6] Dwain Boulton, 'Return to Basics: Suggestions for Asphalt Shingles'
Western Roofing Magazine, Sept/Oct 1992)
_________________________________________________________________________________
As manufacturers sought to produce shingles with less asphalt, traditional organic shingles were replaced with
the modern "fiberglass" shingle - made of a paper thin LAYER (not saturation) of asphalt and stone coating.
The new design contained much less asphalt - and, therefore, was of lower quality than traditional organic.
Asphalt content was further reduced in the new fiberglass design by adding FILLER materials. These "fillers"
were usually sand and/or fine minerals (often Limestone) and were used primarily to lower production costs.
However, the addition of filler also resulted in production of even lower quality, and less durable, shingles.
The composition shingle industry has had difficulty with the performance of conventional fiberglass
shingles almost since their introduction in the late 1970's... Lack of Asphalt Content: Failed shingles
that we tested contain approximately 30% asphalt by weight. New shingles contain less than 25%
This asphalt is mixed with sand and fine mineral matter and then has granules embedded in it. [1]
There is no separate asphalt mat "coating", there is only asphalt as binder for the filler...
No wonder shingles "weep" water after only a few years! [2]
Historically, the premature failure of fiberglass shingles has involved granular loss and brittleness,
cracking and splitting, blistering, curling, buckling and "weeping" (water seeping through the shingle).
When a thorough inspection reveals ANY of these conditions the roof is beyond the "Re-Sale Window"
and normally requires either replacement or negotiation of a "Roofing Allowance" in order to sell the home.
While the common perception, promoted by asphalt manufacturers (and asphalt roofers) is that "fiberglass"
shingles are superior to the traditional "organic" design, the fact is - there has been a documented history
of premature failure of all asphalt shingles manufactured since 1980, both fiberglass and the newer organic.
Since only fiberglass are sold today - it's important to know the History of Defective Fiberglass Shingles.
Fiberglass mats are much thinner, and are not saturated with asphalt...
Several roofing contractor associations have heard complaints from their members
that fiberglass shingles are failing within ten years... [3]
Recently, our company had a roof fail in less than eight years.
When removing shingles in leaky areas, it became apparent that the water
was going right through the shingles, and had been for some time. [4]
In Central California we have seen shingles split on roofs in less than five years.
From what we have seen to date, the problem seems to occur to shingles with a thin
or nonexistent back coating... These shingles also seem to have a very high filler content
about 70% and limited tensile strength. [5]
Filler was not used to stabilize asphalt so much as it appeared it was used
to attempt to control profitability and/or market share... Buckling, cupping, splitting
and poor granular retention problems began to manifest in relatively short time frames. [6]
The premature failure of fiberglass shingles is simply Historical Fact. By the mid-1990's defective fiberglass
shingles were reported by consumers and contractors and documented in several major industry publications.
Fiberglass shingles were failing in less than 15 years but asphalt manufacturers did not initiate product recalls,
or even warn consumers about the known defects. Instead, asphalt manufacturers started to increase the
warranty periods in order to sell more (defective) shingles.
Asphalt manufacturers have continued to increase the warranty periods for fiberglass shingles so that now,
most conventional shingles come with 30, 40 50 year and "lifetime" warranties. However, with much less
asphalt content, these new fiberglass shingle have a documented History of Premature Failures - and,
very often, these defective shingles fail within 10 to 15 years.
Most inexperienced roof buyers ASSUME warranties provide an indication of shingle quality or durability...
they do NOT. roof warranties are designed to sell more shingles - and longer warranties sell more product.
That is why traditional 15 year and 20 year warranties were "Inflated" to the more marketable 30 year,
40 year, 50 year and (wait for it)... "Lifetime" warranty periods.
Bottom Line: Warranties are simply "marketing tools" and DO NOT indicate either product quality
or product durability. See: Warranties are Marketing Tools
There is an adversarial relationship between (roof) Buyers and (roof) Sellers because their Financial Interests
are diametrically opposed. Consumers should not EVER expect roofing sellers (manufacturers or installers)
to provide full disclosure on information on the documented history of premature failure of shingles
they are currently trying to sell.
_________________________________________________________________________________
[1] Richard Tippett, 'Fiberglass Shingles: More Than You Ever Wanted to Know About Shingle Failures'
Western Roofing Magazine, (May/June 1991)
[2] ibid.
[3] Ted Cushman, 'Choosing and Asphalt Shingle: Organic vs Fiberglass'
Journal of Light Construction Magazine, (May 1993)
[4] Ray Bolt, Shingle Problems: 20 Year Shingles are Posing Problems in the West'
Western Roofing Magazine, (Jan/Feb 1991)
[5] Richard Tippett, 'Fiberglass Shingles'
[6] Dwain Boulton, 'Return to Basics: Suggestions for Asphalt Shingles'
Western Roofing Magazine, Sept/Oct 1992)
_________________________________________________________________________________
Defective Asphalt #1
MAKING CHEAPER ASPHALT SHINGLES
A common perception, promoted by asphalt manufacturers (and asphalt roofers) is that modern "fiberglass"
roofing shingles on the market today are vastly superior to the traditional "organic" asphalt shingle design.
These new shingles MUST be better - they come with 50 year warranties... In fact, the opposite is true.
From the late 1880's until the 1970's, roofing shingles were manufactured by Saturating a thick organic mat
(cotton, waste paper and wood fiber) with asphalt then covering the shingle with a protective stone coating.
These "organic" shingles normally came with 15 year or 20 year warranties, but often lasted over 30 years.
In past years, warranties weren't much of a concern because the organic felt shingles
usually lasted longer than the 15 or 20 years for which they were guaranteed.
Some organic shingles on roofs today have seen 30 years and are still hanging on.
Many roofs with fiberglass shingles, however, aren't fairing as well... [1]
Our company applied a 15-year warranted organic asphalt shingle on one local residence...
Upon a recent inspection, that 27-year old roof still looked great. Why are today's shingles inferior?
In an attempt to keep prices lower than the other guys, shingle manufacturers sacrificed quality.
The quality of asphalt shingles has declined... Roofers and consumers are being deceived. [2]
The asphalt industry made a dramatic transformation during the 1970's with the conversion from organic
to "fiberglass" mats in the manufacture of shingles. Initially it appeared technological advancements would
facilitate product improvements. However, with a 1974 oil embargo and economic recessions in the 1980's,
asphalt manufacturers focused primarily on lowering production costs... they designed cheaper shingles.
The result of lowering material costs was production of shingles of much lower quality - as was demonstrated
by the immediate onset of premature failures. The decision by asphalt manufacturers to lower material costs
marked the end of traditional organic shingles, and the beginning of a new era of premature shingle failures.
The pressures placed on large public companies to maintain profitability
brought forward good old American ingenuity, reduce fiberglass mats (fibers were expensive)
and increase filler content (asphalt was also expensive)... Filler was not used to stabilize asphalt
so much as it appeared it was used to attempt to control profitability and market share. [3]
It's a huge market, and it's also incentive for a manufacturer to turn out the lowest priced
product possible... and this market will not go away. Welcome to the real world. [4]
The information provided on this blog does, generally speaking, apply to all asphalt shingles manufactured
after 1980, both fiberglass and the newer organic. However, since only fiberglass shingles are sold today,
we will focus on providing information on how the sales of these shingles impacts uninformed consumers.
Because, unfortunately, when asphalt manufacturers started making cheaper (and less durable) shingles,
they also increased product warranty periods.
Because these cheaper and less durable asphalt shingles are now being sold with "Inflated" warranty periods
of 30, 40 50 years and "lifetimes", there is no question Consumers are Being (intentionally) Deceived.
_________________________________________________________________________________
[1] Ted Cushman, 'Choosing an Asphalt Shingle: Organic vs Fiberglass'
Journal of Light Construction Magazine, (May 1993)
[2] Ray Bolt, 'Shingle Problems: 20 Year Asphalt Shingles are Posing Problems in the West'
Western Roofing Magazine, (Jan/Feb 1991)
[3] Dwain Bouton, 'Return to Basics: Suggestions for Asphalt Shingles'
Western Roofing Magazine, (Sept/Oct 1992)
[4] Marc Dodson, 'Classifying Asphalt Shingles may be the Solution the Industry is Looking For'
Western Roofing Magazine, (July/Aug 1992)
_________________________________________________________________________________
A common perception, promoted by asphalt manufacturers (and asphalt roofers) is that modern "fiberglass"
roofing shingles on the market today are vastly superior to the traditional "organic" asphalt shingle design.
These new shingles MUST be better - they come with 50 year warranties... In fact, the opposite is true.
From the late 1880's until the 1970's, roofing shingles were manufactured by Saturating a thick organic mat
(cotton, waste paper and wood fiber) with asphalt then covering the shingle with a protective stone coating.
These "organic" shingles normally came with 15 year or 20 year warranties, but often lasted over 30 years.
In past years, warranties weren't much of a concern because the organic felt shingles
usually lasted longer than the 15 or 20 years for which they were guaranteed.
Some organic shingles on roofs today have seen 30 years and are still hanging on.
Many roofs with fiberglass shingles, however, aren't fairing as well... [1]
Our company applied a 15-year warranted organic asphalt shingle on one local residence...
Upon a recent inspection, that 27-year old roof still looked great. Why are today's shingles inferior?
In an attempt to keep prices lower than the other guys, shingle manufacturers sacrificed quality.
The quality of asphalt shingles has declined... Roofers and consumers are being deceived. [2]
The asphalt industry made a dramatic transformation during the 1970's with the conversion from organic
to "fiberglass" mats in the manufacture of shingles. Initially it appeared technological advancements would
facilitate product improvements. However, with a 1974 oil embargo and economic recessions in the 1980's,
asphalt manufacturers focused primarily on lowering production costs... they designed cheaper shingles.
The result of lowering material costs was production of shingles of much lower quality - as was demonstrated
by the immediate onset of premature failures. The decision by asphalt manufacturers to lower material costs
marked the end of traditional organic shingles, and the beginning of a new era of premature shingle failures.
The pressures placed on large public companies to maintain profitability
brought forward good old American ingenuity, reduce fiberglass mats (fibers were expensive)
and increase filler content (asphalt was also expensive)... Filler was not used to stabilize asphalt
so much as it appeared it was used to attempt to control profitability and market share. [3]
It's a huge market, and it's also incentive for a manufacturer to turn out the lowest priced
product possible... and this market will not go away. Welcome to the real world. [4]
The information provided on this blog does, generally speaking, apply to all asphalt shingles manufactured
after 1980, both fiberglass and the newer organic. However, since only fiberglass shingles are sold today,
we will focus on providing information on how the sales of these shingles impacts uninformed consumers.
Because, unfortunately, when asphalt manufacturers started making cheaper (and less durable) shingles,
they also increased product warranty periods.
Because these cheaper and less durable asphalt shingles are now being sold with "Inflated" warranty periods
of 30, 40 50 years and "lifetimes", there is no question Consumers are Being (intentionally) Deceived.
_________________________________________________________________________________
[1] Ted Cushman, 'Choosing an Asphalt Shingle: Organic vs Fiberglass'
Journal of Light Construction Magazine, (May 1993)
[2] Ray Bolt, 'Shingle Problems: 20 Year Asphalt Shingles are Posing Problems in the West'
Western Roofing Magazine, (Jan/Feb 1991)
[3] Dwain Bouton, 'Return to Basics: Suggestions for Asphalt Shingles'
Western Roofing Magazine, (Sept/Oct 1992)
[4] Marc Dodson, 'Classifying Asphalt Shingles may be the Solution the Industry is Looking For'
Western Roofing Magazine, (July/Aug 1992)
_________________________________________________________________________________
Roofing Definitions
DEFINITION OF ROOFING TERMS
Throughout this Blog:
By "failure" we mean the inability of a roofing product to pass a Re-sale Inspection with 5 year Certification
By "premature failure" we mean the occurrence of failure BEFORE the end of the warranty period.
By "defective" we mean roofing materials, products or designs that have a history of failing prematurely.
By "history" of failure we do not mean a 100% failure rate or that the majority of products fail prematurely.
Due to the nature of the roofing industry, the limitations of warranties and the fact that many Americans move
every 5 to 7 years, many (or most) premature failures are NOT reported as warranty claims and, therefore,
it's impossible for anyone to track the exact percentage of premature failures. [1]
A "pattern" of failure establishes a "history" of failure for a roofing shingle.
By "pattern" of failure we mean repeated occurrence of certain conditions that have result in product failure.
In asphalt shingles, conditions that typically result in a "pattern" of failure include (but are not limited to)
excessive granular lass, brittleness, cracking and splitting, blistering, curling, weeping, sealing, fungus, etc.
By "widespread" we mean premature failures occurring over large geographic areas or across the country.
By "pervasive" we mean premature failures occurring throughout many different types or brands of shingles.
By "documented failure" or "documented claims" we mean the existance of reports which record the failure
of a shingle or the request for warranty compensation for a shingle failure. The "document" recording the
shingle failure is most often, although not necessarily, in written form and could be maintained by the shingle
manufacturer and homeowner (as in a warranty claim) or it could be maintained by a roofing contractor and
homeowner (as in records of roof replacement). Documented records does not mean "confidential" records.
By "confidential" records we mean records that were disclosed, under seal, during a legal proceeding and
are not a matter of public record. SRB will not disclose "confidential" records or "confidential" information.
_________________________________________________________________________________
[1] At least one asphalt manufacturer (CertainTeed) has admitted it does NOT track shingle performance.
In fact, CertainTeed cannot provide even one example of asphalt shingles lasting 30 years in the Seattle area.
We're not aware of ANY shingle manufacturer that monitors actual performance of it's products. Amazing.
Without tracking performance there's no way to determine the percentage of shingles failing before 15 years,
it could be 75% or higher and there would be no record (see: Expected Lifespan of Conventional Shingles).
Even if a manufacturer identified that 80% of warranty claims for premature failures were filed before shingles
are 15 years old, that still would not establish the actual percentage of defective shingles sold - because we
don't know the number of failures which are never claimed.
_________________________________________________________________________________
Disclaimer: This is not an advertisement or solicitation and information is provided only as a public service.
Information on this blog is presented for educational purposes only. All commentary and content reflects
the professional opinions and experiences of the author and are subject to error or change without notice.
The presence of a link to a website does not indicate approval or endorsement of that site or any product,
service or opinion offered by them.
Throughout this Blog:
By "failure" we mean the inability of a roofing product to pass a Re-sale Inspection with 5 year Certification
By "premature failure" we mean the occurrence of failure BEFORE the end of the warranty period.
By "defective" we mean roofing materials, products or designs that have a history of failing prematurely.
By "history" of failure we do not mean a 100% failure rate or that the majority of products fail prematurely.
Due to the nature of the roofing industry, the limitations of warranties and the fact that many Americans move
every 5 to 7 years, many (or most) premature failures are NOT reported as warranty claims and, therefore,
it's impossible for anyone to track the exact percentage of premature failures. [1]
A "pattern" of failure establishes a "history" of failure for a roofing shingle.
By "pattern" of failure we mean repeated occurrence of certain conditions that have result in product failure.
In asphalt shingles, conditions that typically result in a "pattern" of failure include (but are not limited to)
excessive granular lass, brittleness, cracking and splitting, blistering, curling, weeping, sealing, fungus, etc.
By "widespread" we mean premature failures occurring over large geographic areas or across the country.
By "pervasive" we mean premature failures occurring throughout many different types or brands of shingles.
By "documented failure" or "documented claims" we mean the existance of reports which record the failure
of a shingle or the request for warranty compensation for a shingle failure. The "document" recording the
shingle failure is most often, although not necessarily, in written form and could be maintained by the shingle
manufacturer and homeowner (as in a warranty claim) or it could be maintained by a roofing contractor and
homeowner (as in records of roof replacement). Documented records does not mean "confidential" records.
By "confidential" records we mean records that were disclosed, under seal, during a legal proceeding and
are not a matter of public record. SRB will not disclose "confidential" records or "confidential" information.
_________________________________________________________________________________
[1] At least one asphalt manufacturer (CertainTeed) has admitted it does NOT track shingle performance.
In fact, CertainTeed cannot provide even one example of asphalt shingles lasting 30 years in the Seattle area.
We're not aware of ANY shingle manufacturer that monitors actual performance of it's products. Amazing.
Without tracking performance there's no way to determine the percentage of shingles failing before 15 years,
it could be 75% or higher and there would be no record (see: Expected Lifespan of Conventional Shingles).
Even if a manufacturer identified that 80% of warranty claims for premature failures were filed before shingles
are 15 years old, that still would not establish the actual percentage of defective shingles sold - because we
don't know the number of failures which are never claimed.
_________________________________________________________________________________
Disclaimer: This is not an advertisement or solicitation and information is provided only as a public service.
Information on this blog is presented for educational purposes only. All commentary and content reflects
the professional opinions and experiences of the author and are subject to error or change without notice.
The presence of a link to a website does not indicate approval or endorsement of that site or any product,
service or opinion offered by them.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)