Aaron Delgado believed that he had found constant work when he started to acquire jobs for American roof and siding in Minneapolis. The subcontractor of New Brighton, Minn., Brought a business for the company for two years until the payments no longer came. When he went away at the beginning of this year, Delgado was owed to more than 200,000 US dollars of unpaid commissions – money that he may never recover.
The Ministry of Labor and Industry in Minnesota has drawn the company's license and imposed a fine of $ 15,000. However, Delgado announced Fox 9 that state officials could not help him to regain his losses because the contractor had no insurance cover.
Two lawsuits underline the company's legal problems: submitting the contractor in September has taken up almost 6,000 US dollars for roof work work that was never completed, while the ABC offer sued unpaid debts in March due to 280,000 US dollars. A court ultimately instructed the contractor to pay the full amount plus attorney fees.
The downfall of American roof and siding is a warning story about the financial risks that are suspended if payment protection is not clearly presented in agreements. While the experience of Delgado is a particularly severe case, disputes about unpaid work in the attic are too common.
Challenges such as slow and unpredictable payments and the resulting cash flow instability continue to plague the industry – the solution to these problems can consistently fall on subcontractors. According to the national market report of Billd 2025 2025, which believes that subcontractors receive payments within 30 days, the actual average is 56 days – twice as high as the expected time frame. This gap forced the subcontractors to shoulder enormous preliminary payments, with 64% of chronic slow payment problems, 75% had to finance materials from their own pocket, and 86% for labor costs before they receive compensation.
How to guarantee timely payments
Contractors who do not adapt their credit and collecting practices to today's tougher economic reality risk become victims in an increasingly irreconcilable market.
Credit expert Thea Dudley emphasizes that contractors and subcontractors have to give up their traditionally trustworthy approach and have to implement strict credit tests, proper documentation procedures and aggressive receivables management. If she confronts with problems with the collection, she is committed to direct, personal confrontations with delinquent customers, including clear ultimatums about continued work and the willingness to escalate the corporate hierarchy if necessary.
“Don't be the nice guy,” she said. “Now is not the time. The interest rates are high. The money costs are the highest time. Someone has in this little game of music chairs. Someone will have no chair. Don't let it be.”
RC The legal insights expert Trent Cotney warns that Prime contractors and owners are becoming increasingly demanding to use contractual terms to avoid or delay payments, creating new challenges for construction companies.
“I see more legally demanding opportunities that owners and Prime officers do not pay for a job for a job,” said Cotney. “So be very attentive that you also have to improve your game, right? If you become legal to your customers and really immerse yourself in the contractual terms, you have to be ready to speak apples with apples in relation to that.”
This includes the examination of contracts for minor technical inconsistencies, such as guarantees that do not match the manufacturing specifications, and the use of these small differences to justify the payment of the payment.
In order to counteract these tactics, contractors must improve their understanding of the contractual terms and develop stronger skills for contract management. This includes the thorough review of all contractual conditions before signing to ensure that you meet each specification exactly as written and tackle all the ambiguities or potential memory problems in advance instead of discovering them later when you become payment disputes.
The shift represents a more controversial contractual landscape in which legal technology is increasingly armed to delay the payments, which forces contractors to become more eligible in their business practices.