To amend sections 4722.01, 4722.03, 4722.06, 4722.07, and 4722.08 and to enact sections 4722.20, 4722.21, 4722.22, 4722.23, 4722.24, 4722.25, and 4722.26 of the Revised Code to regulate the practices of roofing contractors and the terms of their contracts.
HB769 would create a new set of state standards for roofing contractors and roofing service contracts, while also making targeted changes to Ohio’s existing home-construction-service consumer protection law. The bill defines key terms such as “contractor,” “roofing services,” and “consumer,” and applies to roofing contracts over $750. It requires written contracts with detailed disclosures, including the contractor’s identity and contact information, insurance coverage, itemized work and material costs, total price, payment options, and a prominent three-business-day cancellation notice. For insurance-related roofing jobs, the consumer would also get an additional cancellation right after notice that the insurer denied the claim in whole.
The bill also imposes operational and conduct rules on roofing contractors. Contractors would have to maintain workers’ compensation coverage and at least $500,000 in liability insurance, keep a three-year list of subcontractors, and avoid practices such as waiving or rebating insurance deductibles, requiring deposits over half the contract price, misrepresenting claims or work, taking powers of attorney, or seeking assignments of insurance benefits. It also bars contractors from acting as public insurance adjusters on the same claim and limits certain claim-related activities, while preserving the ability to provide information or professional opinions to consumers and insurers.
In addition to the roofing-specific provisions, the bill amends the existing home construction service chapter to clarify and strengthen consumer protections for larger home construction contracts over $25,000. Those changes expand disclosure requirements, prohibit deceptive practices, and preserve Attorney General enforcement authority, including investigations, injunctions, civil penalties, and consumer restitution. The bill also gives individual owners a private right of action for rescission, actual economic damages, and limited noneconomic damages for certain violations. Failure to comply with the roofing provisions would be treated as a deceptive act or practice under Ohio consumer law.
The overall sentiment reflected in the bill text is consumer-protection oriented: the legislation is framed as establishing minimum standards and promoting fair and honest practices in the roofing business. Because there are no committee transcripts or votes available, there is no recorded public debate in the provided materials, but the structure of the bill suggests a strong regulatory approach aimed at curbing abusive or misleading roofing and insurance-claim practices. The main likely points of contention are the added compliance burden on contractors, the restrictions on deductible-related incentives and insurance-claim involvement, and the potential effect on how roofing work tied to property insurance claims is marketed and negotiated.
HB769 would add a new statutory framework in the Revised Code governing roofing contractors, roofing contracts, and related consumer remedies, while also revising portions of the existing home-construction-service law in Chapter 4722. It would create enforceable contract-form, disclosure, insurance, cancellation, and conduct requirements for roofing jobs over $750, and make violations deceptive acts under Ohio consumer protection law. The bill would also expand Attorney General enforcement tools and preserve private consumer remedies, affecting roofing contractors, subcontractors, insurers, consumers, and public insurance adjusters.
The bill’s stated purpose and structure indicate a generally pro-consumer and anti-fraud sentiment. It is designed to curb deceptive sales tactics, improve transparency, and protect homeowners in roofing and insurance-claim transactions. No committee testimony or recorded votes were provided, so there is no documented opposition or support in the supplied materials, but the measure appears to be framed as a consumer-protection bill rather than a deregulatory one.
The likely areas of contention are the bill’s new compliance obligations and restrictions on roofing-industry practices. Contractors may object to the mandatory written-contract terms, insurance minimums, recordkeeping duties, cancellation rights, limits on deposits, and prohibitions on deductible rebates, claim assignments, powers of attorney, and public-adjuster-style conduct. Consumer advocates would likely support those provisions as anti-abuse safeguards, while roofing contractors and insurance-related service providers may view them as limiting business practices and increasing administrative and insurance costs.