Shingle Wind Claim with Discontinued Product and Age-Related Wear

Wind damage has a signature: creased mat, broken or transferred seal strips, missing tabs, and a pattern that follows the wind direction and concentrates at rakes, ridges, and corners. Age and wear look different: granule loss, wavy or uneven tabs, thermal cracking, and unsealed tabs whose sealant is still intact. On the north slope, the eight lifted tabs have intact seal strips and no creasing. That suggests they were never sealed or the sealant failed for reasons unrelated to wind, such as high nailing, contamination, or thermal movement. They may also be a pre-existing condition. On the east slope, the wavy tabs and granule wear down to the mat are end-of-life indicators, not wind damage. The west slope has the true wind signature: 30 missing tabs and creased shingles at the rake, consistent with westerly gusts. The three broken ridge caps could be wind or foot traffic; I would look for matching granule transfer and creasing to decide. The report should map each condition separately.

Creasing is the strongest field indicator of wind uplift. When a tab is lifted and flexed beyond the elastic limit of the mat, it leaves a crease or a linear fracture that does not relax. An unsealed tab with an intact seal strip tells a different story: the adhesive was never bonded, so wind did not have to break it. That condition is often installation-related, such as high nailing that holds the shingle off the sealant, or it is simply age. It is not evidence of wind damage on that slope. I would lift the tabs and check the seal strip for transfer, check nail placement and depth, and look for creasing at the hinge. A test square counts lifted tabs, missing tabs, creased tabs, and unsealed tabs separately. That distinction matters because an insurer should not pay to replace an entire slope for tabs that were never sealed. The west slope creases support the paid 12 squares; the north and east conditions do not.

The report should stay factual and avoid a coverage decision. I would state that the shingles are discontinued, that a repair with the closest available product may be visibly different, and that the west slope damage is consistent with wind. I would also state that the north and east slopes show age-related and unsealed-tab conditions, not wind damage, and that the ridge caps are indeterminate without further inspection. The matching issue is a coverage question for the insurer, not a damage finding. I would not write that the whole roof is wind damaged, because the evidence does not support it. I would note the roof's age and remaining service life and recommend repair of the wind-damaged areas as technically feasible. If the insurer's policy includes matching or undamaged-slope provisions, that is their determination. The inspector's role is to separate wind damage from wear and to give the adjuster a clear, mapped basis for whatever decision is made.