Individual roofer with only medical coverage - do I hire or not?

Question

Hello,

I have a rental property (sfh) that needs some roof maintenance.  I got a couple recommendations and a couple quotes, both offering the same scope of work and warranty.  One is an individual with only personal medical coverage asking $700 the other is a small company with general liability and worker's comp asking $1050.

If the individual is working alone and would be covered medically if he were to get injured is it reasonable to go with him?  Could I go with him and mitigate liability by having him sign off on some kind of waiver?

Thanks

Bjorn Ahlblad · Answer

The guy with only medical is not licensed, if he damages anything of yours you can't sue him; if he pours tar on your neighbor's car you will be sued because he is not covered. I would go with the contractor who has liability insurance every time.

Scott Hawks · Answer

I personally would not hire anyone that did not have general liability insurance and workers comp.  It's just a CYA for you.

Travis Turner · Answer

@Bill C.

Liability insurance is a must for any work done as others have stated.  It may be your only recourse if they damage something of yours or a neighbors amd they arent willing to fix it or make it right.

Workman's comp (in my state) only applies if that person has employees.  It isn't required in my state) as an owner operated company.

I wasn't required to have it until I hired my first employee.

Isaac S. · Answer

Roofing is statistically more dangerous/deadly than being a police officer, body guard, security guard in a dangerous neighborhood, and just about every profession. According the Bureau of Labor Statistics, it's the 4th most dangerous job in the country, behind aircraft pilot/mechanic, deep sea fisherman, and logger.

But your resistance to take the good advice above, is a sure sign of youth or inexperience, and if you don't learn it here, the easy way, you will learn it the hard-way

Charles Carillo · Answer

I personally would only use a company with liability and worker's comp. I am also not sure how much validity is in a warranty from a company that does not have proper insurance. Are they both licensed? Make sure you are added to their policy as an additional insured.

Account Closed · Answer

@Bjorn Ahlblad Agree here with Bjorn. I would go with the contractor who has liability insurance every time.

Jonathan R McLaughlin · Answer

@Nick Brubaker a few things:

1) You are very likely to find that $700 turns into more as the work goes on. Low bid to win the job, discover extras is a common strategy

2) without dismissing 300 as negligible, think about cost vs. importance of asset...a roof is up there among your most expensive capital assets. A 300 difference is one thing on a 1000 asset but on a 5, 10 or 20K?

Daryl Henry · Answer

@Nick Brubaker use the one with workers compensation. State laws vary by state as to whether the contractor is required to carry workers compensation, but in any situation, if the uninsured roofer gets hurt on the job site, he’ll be more likely to try to come after you.

Danielle Gray · Answer

Having the proper insurance in place is not just about the medical coverage. This is a red flag to me as if he doesn't even have general and workers comp insurance, I would not trust that he would go through the proper process of pulling permits and anything else that is required to do the job within the legal scope. You want to make sure that not only the possibility of injury is covered, but also if they make the problem with your roof worse than what it is, or even damage something on the neighboring property, the correct insurance is in place to cover it. By not having all of the proper insurance you are at risk of picking up the tab for many things that can go wrong. Better to pay the extra $300 now and not $30,000 later!

Individual roofer with only medical coverage - do I hire or not?

Most Popular Reply