Wisconsin dispute over hail damage claim headed to court

JACKSON, Wis. - A dispute over a hail damage claim prompted one family to write to Contact 6. Months later, their case is headed to court.

Their attorney is arguing their damage should have been covered by insurance.

Even since the clouds rolled in and the hail beat down, Nicole Maziasz has been riding out the storm with State Farm Insurance.

"Every time I hear, "like a good neighbor," I think, I would not like neighbors like that," said Maziasz.

On April 19, 2023, a hailstorm blew through Washington County. In Jackson, Maziasz went out to survey the damage.

"We saw our back patio just peppered with granules," said Maziasz.

The granules were from her roof’s shingles. Her trusted contractor confirmed hail damage to her roof. A State Farm adjuster who visited the house agreed there was hail damage.

The State Farm adjuster didn’t walk the back half of the roof because he said it was too steep. State Farm sent out a second adjuster who came to a different conclusion about their roof.

"He came down and said there was no damage," said Maziasz.

SIGN UP TODAY: Get daily headlines, breaking news emails from FOX6 News

Contact first spoke with Masiasz and her husband in January. They said that State Farm was low-balling their roof damage claim. They have a $31,000 estimate for hail damage repair from one company. Maziasz says State Farm found just $700 in damage.

At the time, State Farm told Contact 6 it "seeks to provide our customers all benefits to which they are entitled within the terms of the insurance policy."

"They just dug in their heels," said Maziasz.

After Contact 6’s report aired, Maziasz heard from other people having similar experiences with State Farm. One of them had a lawyer. Maziasz called him.

"He said "you definitely have a case," said Maziasz.

Ryan Graff is a founding partner at MGW Law in Manitowoc. He’s also a former insurance defense lawyer.

"One of my biggest clients was, you guessed it, State Farm," Graff told Contact 6.

Graff says he left that job to represent policyholders. Graff says a disproportionate number of his cases are against State Far.

"Since 2020, I have sued State Farm over residential roof claims over 50 times. Probably closer to 75," said Graff. "All other carriers combined wouldn’t equal that number."

FREE DOWNLOAD: Get breaking news alerts in the FOX6 News app for iOS or Android

Graff filed a civil suit against State Farm in Washington County on behalf of the Maziasz family. It accuses State Farm of breach of contract and bad faith.

The suit argues a disconnect between what State Farm’s policy says it covers for hail damage and how it trains its staff to identify it. The suit says that State Farm is "wrongfully and improperly using a standard definition of hail damage to asphalt shingles that is not found anywhere in the policy."

"And, we’re not going to recognize pure granular loss as hail damage covered by the policy," said Graff. "Some carriers do it infrequently. State Farm does it constantly."

Graff says it’s an argument that’s helped him win cases before.

"There is this macro trend in insurance. They’re covering less," said Graff.

Graff is also representing Don and Donia Groves in a civil suit against State Farm. The Groves told Contact 6 in January that their roof was damaged by the same April 19 storm in Hartford. Multiple contractors gave the Groves damage estimates about $20,000 or higher. State Farm sent the Groves a check for $6,087, but later increased  the amount to $9,860.

In response to the Maziasz lawsuit, a State Farm spokesperson told Contact 6:

"State Farm is focused on being there for all our customers and is committed to paying what we owe. We’re prepared to share the facts and bring clarity and context to this matter. Since the matter is now in litigation, the appropriate place to do that is in a court of law."

The Maziasz family says it paid about $30,000 for a new roof. Then, they switched insurance providers. When Maziasz handed over her case to Graff, you could say, the clouds parted.

"It was a huge relief because I spent so much time over the course of that year. It was just like, "your turn," said Maziasz.

Maziasz’s case is still in the discovery phase. If a judge decides that granular loss was covered by her policy, her case would go to a jury to decide whether there was granular loss.

Graff says many of his cases result in settlements.