Shingle Warranties
Many property owners are lured by the promise of long-lasting shingle warranties, only to find themselves entangled in scams.
SHINGLES
The first on our list is GAF Timberline shingles. GAF is the largest shingle manufacturer in North America. Timberline is its flagship line. Walk through any subdivision built after 1998 and you'll see them on roof after roof. You'll also see the cracking. The class action history on Timberline goes back over two decades. Lawsuits filed in Pennsylvania, Virginia, Alabama, and South Carolina all alleging the same defect: premature cracking, splitting, failure to meet ASTM standards for fiberglass shingles. GAF settled and they did not admit fault. They never recalled the product. What homeowners discovered after the settlement was the second trap. The warranty. A homeowner filed a Timberline warranty claim 11 years into a 50 year warranty. GAF agreed the shingles were defective. They sent a check for $47.40! That's what a lifetime warranty looks like once you read the proration formula after year 10 the manufacturer drops labor entirely then they reduce the material payout 1/600th per month against the age of the roof by year 15 your collecting pennies on a problem that takes thousands to fix. That is not a warranty. That is a math problem that the homeowner loses.
When it comes to roofing, understanding shingle warranties can be a daunting task. With a multitude of brands and styles available, each with their own stipulations and promises, it's easy to feel overwhelmed. At Goad Construction, we've conducted thousands of inspections and have observed patterns that repeat across various brands. In this article, we'll guide you through six roofing brands that we wouldn't recommend putting on your own home, based on our extensive experience.
BBB Report here
GAF Architectural Shingle Failure Investigation Learn more here
The complaints allege that GAF designed, manufactured, advertised, warranted and sold defective fiberglass shingles that were not in compliance with applicable testing standards, and without taking any steps to cure the problem(s) or honor its warranties. Defective shingles not only must be replaced, but can cause damage to the structure of the house. Learn more here
CertainTeed agreed to a class action lawsuit settlement to resolve claims that its Horizon-brand roofing shingles are defective and can cause property damage; the deadline to file a claim is March 2, 2030. Learn more here
Read BBB report here
Next is Certain Teed. Certain Teed has had multiple class actions and they keep coming the organic Independence shingles, the Horizon fiberglass line, the Landmark line, the same pattern across two decades. Cracking, curling, fish mouthing, granules washing into the gutter long before the warranty period ends. Certain Teed has settled some, denied others and quietly discontinued the worst offenders. Here is the part that matters more than the lawsuits, Certainteed's lifetime warranty has the same trap. A sure start period of 10 years where labor and materials are both covered. That part the salesman shows you, what he doesn't show you is what happens at year 11 labor coverage drops to zero, material coverage starts losing 1/600th of its value every month dropping toward a 20% floor by year 40. I read Certain Teed warranty documents on every Landmark roof I inspect, the homeowner has rarely read past the cover page. The salesman never mentioned the poration table, after 35 plus years walking through homes you learn to read what isn't being said. The decision happens at the engineering meeting, the consequence happens in your basement when the roof leaks at year 14.
We were co lead counsel in this class action lawsuit, which settled for almost $700 million. The suit alleged that CertainTeed’s organic shingles failed to perform as marketed and that CertainTeed knowingly and intentionally concealed defects. The suit also alleged that CertainTeed had no intention of providing the services set forth in their warranties for their roofing shingles. Learn more here
Two class-action lawsuits were filed against Atlas Roofing Corporation alleging that the company misleadingly advertises the Atlas Chalet Shingles in various marketing materials. Specifically, both complaints allege that the company expressly represents the roofing shingles will last 30 years when, according to the plaintiffs, they will blister and crack before 30 years have passed. Learn more here
Atlas discontinued the line in 2000 and that alone tells you most of what you need to know. Chalet was a 30 year product priced like a 30 year product. They blistered, cracked, and lost their granules within 12 months of installation. The damage came from a manufacturing flaw. Moisture entered the shingle and created gas bubbles. The bubbles pushed up under the surface, the granules came off and the protective coating failed. The class action was consolidated into a multi-district litigation in federal court in Atlanta. Lawsuits alleged Atlas had received complaints about Chalet quality going back to 1999 and continued selling them anyway. Some warranty claims, the suits alleged, were quietly miscoded as weight issues rather than defect issues. A paperwork choice that made the failure pattern look smaller than what it was. If your roof is from 2000 to 2010 especially in the Southeast, find your warranty paperwork. If it says Atlas Chalet, the matching shingle no longer exists. You cannot patch this roof. You can only replace it. That is the kind of failure that follows a homeowner for a decade after the brand stops being sold.
IKO’s warranty process is designed to discourage people from exercising their warranty.
Number four is IKO Cambridge. IKO is a Canadian manufacturer with a long history of class actions that mirror the Atlas pattern almost exactly. Cambridge is their flagship laminated line. The complaints are familiar. Premature blistering, cracking, granules in the gutter on year three, sealant strips that never seal in the first place. Homeowners report shingles lifting off in 30 mph wind events that should have been a non-event. But the part the brochure never shows you is the warranty kit IKO sends out when you file a claim. IKO calls it a goodwill release of warranty. A documented case has a homeowner with a 35 year cambridge roof failing at year eight, curling, granule loss, gaps you can see from the driveway. After months of paperwork, IKO offered him $3,117.00 to purchase new shingles. The actual replacement cost was $22,350.00. The release he had to sign waived all future warranty rights. So the homeowner pays the $19,000.00 gap himself, signs away the remaining 27 years of coverage, and IKO closes the file. That is what lifetime warranty means in the fine print. Read that sentence twice.
The 28-page lawsuit claims the defendants marketed and advertised the shingles as, among other pros, durable, reliable, and compliant with regulations set by the American Society for Testing and Materials. Learn more here
BBB report here
Four Pennsylvania couples have joined together in a product liability class action lawsuit against IKO Manufacturing, alleging the company’s roofing shingles are defective. Learn more here
Contractors defend IKO Dynasty Shingles like it as good as fresh sliced bread, when in fact on their website is another story. After 15 years into the roof warranty, maximum liability dollar amount per square is $40.00. I want you to think about that. The going rate for Dynasty is anywhere from $350-$400 dollars per square depending on where you are in the country right now. That's what you're going to pay, it's not gonna even cover half of the material cost alone. So your biggest cost in roofing is labor to tear off and labor to install permits, dumpster stuff like that. It's not even the product. Product is only 30% of your job and with the IKO brand you're only getting $40.00 of it. Learn more here
According to the shingles lawsuit, instead of addressing the problem, IKO instead tries to bury warranty complaints in bureaucracy.
“IKO will not consider a warranty claim until the claimant submits all of the following information to the company: (a) proof of purchase of an IKO product indicating the type of shingle and quantity; (b) proof that the claimant is the owner of the home; (c) the date the shingle was applied; (d) the number shingles applies; (f) the number of shingles involved in the claim; (g) the type of roof deck; (h) the number of layers of shingles on the roof deck; (i) the slope of the roof deck; (j) the number of vents on the roof; (k) photographs of the roof not taken with a digital camera; and (l) two full shingle samples (which require a roofing professional to carefully remove in-service shingles from the claimant’s roof)."
Even if a person manages to fulfill the terms of the warranty, they are required to sign a “Goodwill Release” in exchange for cash compensation. The complaint holds that the “Goodwill Release” is phrased as a legal compromise and that IKO treats every warranty claim as a settled dispute rather than a warranty claim proper.
Number 5 is Owens Corning Supreme and Duration. Owens Corning is a household name. Pink Panther mascot, lifetime warranty, SureNail technology. The marketing is everywhere. The complaints are, too. The Supreme line, so a three-tab shingle still being sold today, has a documented blistering problem in shingles manufactured between 2003 and 2006. Owens Corning admitted the defect for Florida installed roofs, but offered prorated parts-only settlements for installations elsewhere. A Jacksonville homeowner with an 80% failure rate at year 6 was offered $1,259.00 against a $7,800.00 replacement. The defect was acknowledged. The compensation was not. The Duration Line, their flagship architectural, is now under active class action investigation as of 2025. The complaints describe blistering, curling, and granule loss in shingles in 3-7 years old. Homeowners with shingles installed between 2013 and 2025 are reporting the same pattern. We have personally re-roofed homes where the Owens Corning Duration shingles looked older than the original 25 year asphalt they replaced. Same brand, three model generations apart, same engineering problem. The lab tests inside Owens Corning and are run by employees of Owens Corning. There is no independent appeal once they tell you the failure is natural weathering.
Owens Corning Duration Shingles Investigation
We are co-lead counsel in a nationwide class action against Owens Corning. The case alleges that Owens Corning designed, manufactured, advertised, sold and warranted defective fiberglass shingles without taking any steps to cure the problem(s) or honor its warranties. Defective shingles not only must be replaced, but can cause damage to the structure of the house. Learn more here
Migliaccio & Rathod LLP is investigating reports of premature failure in Owens Corning Duration asphalt shingles, which have been sold nationwide between 2013 and 2025. These shingles, widely used in residential roofing projects, are now the subject of consumer complaints involving blistering, curling, and granule loss, often within just a few years of installation. Learn more here
BBB Report here
The sixth one on the skip list is TAMKO Heritage. This last one is the most shocking. Not because the shingle is the worst, though Heritage has its own class action history of curling, cracking, and blow-offs, but what Tamco quietly added to the wrapper. Look at any bundle of TAMKO shingles manufactured after 2004. Printed on the wrapping in capital letters, buried among installation and color specs, it says every dispute between you and TAMKO, regardless of legal theory, must be resolved through binding arbitration. No jury, no court, no class action. You waive these rights the moment your contractor opens the bundle to install your roof. The homeowner never signed anything. The homeowner never saw the wrapper. The contractor opened the package on a ladder 30 feet up. Multiple Federal courts have ruled this is enough to bind the homeowner by the act of accepting shingles they never personally handled. Once your shingles fail, you can't sue. You can't join a class action. You file an individual arbitration in Cherokee County, Kansas against a company with full-time legal staff. The arbitration clause was designed exactly to make that math impossible for any individual homeowner. I have never seen another manufacturer be this open about how it intends to win warranty disputes. That is not a coincidence. That is the choice.
The suits allege that the shingles are “plagued by design flaws” that result in cracking, curling, deterioration, blistering, degranulation and other problems that can result in property damage. Although TAMKO established warranty periods of up to 50 years for the shingles, the suits claim that the roofing company never tested how long the shingles would last and has failed to cover the cost of labor when handling warranty claims. Learn more here
Class action lawsuits have been filed against TAMKO over the company’s “Heritage” fiberglass roofing shingles.
BBB Report here
When it comes to roofing, not all shingles are created equal. While some products may be popular, they don't always meet the high standards of quality, durability, and aesthetics that we at Goad Construction hold dear. If you're considering a new roof, here's what we would recommend. Learn more here
© 2026 Goad Construction, LLC . All Rights Reserved
Corporate Office
393 Cummings Rd
Caledonia, IL 61011
