L
ynne Schueler, a Massachusetts homeowner, was shocked to receive an email from her insurance company containing an aerial photo of her home and a warning that she had six weeks to trim back tree branches or risk losing coverage. The photo was taken by a drone without her knowledge, leaving her feeling "very invasive."

    Schueler, who had been a loyal customer for 12 years with no claims, felt trapped: removing the branches cost $1,200, but losing coverage could have jeopardized her mortgage. Industry critics say Schueler's experience is increasingly common as insurers adopt aerial imaging to assess risk.

    "It's becoming very, very common," said Amy Bach, executive director of consumer group United Policyholders. Insurers are now dropping customers based on images that show "mold on your roof," "damaged roof tiles," or "trees touching your house."

    Similar cases have been reported in Florida and California, where long-term policyholders were dropped after insurers flagged "hazardous" conditions from above. Consumer advocates warn that this kind of aerial monitoring is becoming increasingly common, with insurers citing mold, roof damage, or overgrown trees as grounds for non-renewal.

    Lawmakers are pushing back against the practice, introducing legislation to require companies to provide homeowners with copies of any photos taken and more time to dispute or correct findings. However, groups like United Policyholders argue that these proposals don't go far enough.

    While insurers defend the practice as less intrusive than in-person inspections, critics say it's fueling mistrust at a time when many households already face soaring premiums and coverage cancellations. For Schueler, whose branches were cut just in time to keep her policy, the experience has left a lasting unease: "I wasn't home because my car wasn't in the driveway. It ended up costing $1,200. I had no choice."