Adjuster said my hail damage was 'pre-existing' - I proved otherwise and got a full roof replacement

We had a big hailstorm come through our area back in early March. Golf-ball sized hail, lasted maybe 20 minutes, and I could see dents in my gutters from the ground. Filed a claim with my homeowners insurer the next day. The adjuster came out, spent about 40 minutes up on the roof, came down and told me most of the damage was "pre-existing granule loss consistent with normal aging" and that the storm damage was minimal. His estimate: $1,900. I knew that wasn't right - we had the roof inspected when we bought the house three years ago and there was nothing flagged.

I requested the full written report and his photos, which took them two weeks to send. When I got them I could immediately see the problem - his photos were all angled in a way that minimized the impact marks. He photographed the north slope which took less direct hit. The south and west slopes facing the storm direction had obvious bruising on shingles that he basically ignored in his report. I called a local public adjuster who came out for free and documented 47 bruised shingles on the back slope alone, plus 11 feet of gutter damage the original adjuster didn't even mention.

Filed a formal dispute and submitted the public adjuster's report alongside my original inspection documents showing the roof was in good condition when purchased. Three weeks later they agreed to a full replacement - final payment was $14,200 after my $2,500 deductible. The PA charged 10% but honestly his work made the difference. Anyone in this situation: get that initial adjuster report in writing, and don't accept "pre-existing" as a reason without making them prove it.