Account snapshot
- Risk type
- Residential roofing contractor using employees and subcontractors
- Coverage placed
- General liability
The obstacle was the work, not the loss record
A retail agent approached Nomos about a contractor seeking general liability coverage for residential roofing work. The business performed roof replacements and repairs, using its own employees for part of the work and subcontractors for the remainder.
Loss history was not the central issue. The admitted insurers the agent approached would not offer a placement for this account’s combination of roofing operations, residential work and subcontracting.
There was an active business and a clear insurance need, but no workable option through the markets already approached. Recasting the operation as a general handyman or light-remodeling business was not an answer. Roofing was the work the client actually performed.
Describe the difficult exposure accurately
Nomos began by defining the roofing operations in detail. Working through the agent, we established the work mix, the types of properties involved, the division between employees and subcontractors, and the procedures used to protect properties during projects.
The purpose was not to describe a different business from the one seeking insurance. The submission needed to preserve the exposures that had caused difficulty and provide enough detail for an underwriter to decide whether to consider them.
We then approached E&S markets for the disclosed roofing operation. When an underwriter raised a question about the work or subcontracting, we coordinated a specific response with the agent rather than substituting a broader, less accurate class description.
Assess the usefulness of the proposed terms
A proposal was only part of the job. The agent needed to understand how the proposed policy treated the operations that had caused the earlier declinations.
Nomos helped the agent review the quoted terms, including restrictions relating to operations and subcontracting, alongside other material exclusions and requirements. We identified questions needing an underwriter’s answer before the client could make a decision.
The discussion acknowledged the trade-offs. An available E&S option was not automatically equivalent to the agent’s preferred admitted placement. A quote alone also did not establish that every project requirement had been met.
The client accepted an E&S general liability placement for the disclosed operation after reviewing the terms and completing the remaining requirements.
A different underwriting conversation
This account does not establish that all roofing contractors require E&S insurance. The difficulty was specific: the insurers available to this agent would not take this operation, and the client still needed an accurately described placement.
Nomos’s contribution was a different market conversation, followed by work on whether the resulting option made sense for the agent and client.
Have a similar contractor account?
Bring us the actual operations, loss history, coverage need and reasons for prior declinations. Explore construction and contractors or our roofing contractor specialty. For project-related questions, see our additional-insured and completed-operations guide.
