Path-Q Solar
How should a landlord compare installers when one provides a single point of responsibility for roof and solar defects?
Answer
Value single-point responsibility as a risk-reduction feature, but compare the actual written scope, warranty, exclusions, financial capacity, response process, and subcontractor obligations rather than relying on the label alone.
Key points
- Confirm whether one party is contractually responsible for leaks, attachment failures, equipment defects, and resulting damage.
- Check warranty duration, claim procedure, response times, exclusions, and whether coverage survives installer failure.
- Compare roof qualifications, solar qualifications, insurance, bonding, and subcontractor control.
- Require coordinated inspection, commissioning, and dispute-resolution procedures.
What it depends on
- Contract allocation of defect responsibility
- Roof and equipment warranty terms
- Installer qualifications and insurance
- Nature and condition of the existing roof
Risks and trade-offs
- A single provider may simplify claims but could cost more or offer less specialized roofing expertise.
- Broad marketing promises may not match exclusions in the contract.
- A single responsible party does not eliminate performance, insolvency, or workmanship risk.
Information you may need
- Side-by-side contracts and warranties
- Installer and subcontractor qualifications
- Insurance and financial-strength information
- References for comparable roof-and-solar projects
Your next step
What to do next
Use a written responsibility matrix and have the preferred agreement reviewed for gaps between roof, solar, and consequential-damage coverage.
Path-Q
Find the right next step
Answer a few questions and we’ll narrow your options.
Loading…
SQ03159