# Sub-Contractors Hate Signing Contracts



## Jaws (Dec 20, 2010)

QCCI said:


> This is called contracting isn't it?


I understand, and I think it is a good policy, just not one I have implemented, wanted or needed. Maybe I will someday feel the need.


----------



## Jaws (Dec 20, 2010)

QCCI said:


> This is called contracting isn't it?


I remember you being commercial. I would use contracts also if I did a lot of commercial. We generally just do local TIs.


----------



## pinwheel (Dec 7, 2009)

EricBrancard said:


> My core group of subs have never seen a contract from me and vice versa. Right or wrong that's the way it is.


I've never had a builder ask me to sign anything other than a lein waiver when they paid me.


----------



## QCCI (Jan 28, 2013)

480sparky said:


> Yep. But it's not called written contracting, either. Contracts CAN be verbal.


I have no problem with it and sign contracts quite regularly. I honestly don't see what the problem is, it offers protection to both sides and clearly defines the expectations and scope. I do have some subs that I do not have contracts with and have never had a problem. It's only paper. The people behind is what matters.

I am a GC, but also work as a sub with larger GC's, I don't do anything without a contract. It's pretty much standard operating procedure.

I do have a few customers that there is never a contract or even a bid for that matter.


----------



## QCCI (Jan 28, 2013)

Jaws said:
 

> I understand, and I think it is a good policy, just not one I have implemented, wanted or needed. Maybe I will someday feel the need.


I think it's a good idea, even in residential. It doesn't have to be anything too complicated or one sided. Just something to list your expectations, detailed scope of work and insurance requirements.


----------



## NDW (May 28, 2011)

Two things.

When a contract comes off an attorney's desk it is pretty heavily slanted in favor of the guy who hired the attorney. 

A lot of subs don't have a clue what they are actually liable for. You hear guys saying things like "you touch it you own it" all the time. Which is pure BS where I am from. I have dealt with some skiddish plumbers too, and it's mostly because they think that if they touch some pipes they are liable for any and all pre-existing plumbing that could be faulty, which is just not true.


----------



## QCCI (Jan 28, 2013)

Jaws said:


> I remember you being commercial. I would use contracts also if I did a lot of commercial. We generally just do local TIs.


Yes, 95% commercial/industrial. I'll occasionally do a residential project for a good customer, but those are business people who understand business. Commercial and residential are two different animals for sure.


----------



## QCCI (Jan 28, 2013)

NDW said:


> Two things. When a contract comes off an attorney's desk it is pretty heavily slanted in favor of the guy who hired the attorney. A lot of subs don't have a clue what they are actually liable for. You hear guys saying things like "you touch it you own it" all the time. Which is pure BS where I am from. I have dealt with some skiddish plumbers too, and it's mostly because they think that if they touch some pipes they are liable for any and all pre-existing plumbing that could be faulty, which is just not true.


When I see one of those contracts, all one sided, I send it back all marked up with paragraphs crossed out and initialed.

My contracts with my subs are very simple and fair. I have never had a sub not want to sign a contract. I am very fair, honest, loyal and pay quickly. But I do have high expectations as well, it has to work for both sides.


----------



## JBM (Mar 31, 2011)

Typically contracts are for wiping your ass with contractor to contractor.


Welcome to the forum.


----------



## TNTRenovate (Aug 19, 2010)

edict said:


> I'm sorry, anyone that does business "with a handshake" is a fool. Period. And I've told them if they disagree with any of the verbiage I'm happy to adjust it/etc.
> 
> I've done business "with a handshake" several times and 9 out of 10 times it bit me in the ass. If someone isn't willing to sign a contract, then they're shady - period. If you have good intentions and willing to take responsibility for your work then there's nothing to fear.
> 
> Ridiculous. Anyway, in the hours since I posted this, they agreed to sign the agreement with a few minor changes which I happily made.


You know who's an idiot? A guy who can't judge character and let's himself get burned 9 times out of 10.

The guys that are are calling fools and shady are some of the most stand up contractors you will ever find. It's too bad DB like you can't see that the way you do it isn't the only way to do it and it's not even the way that the vast majority of contractors do business.


----------



## Mrmac204 (Dec 27, 2006)

I don't use a lawyer type contract, but I do detail the whole job in an email to the client - legal address, scope of work, materials etc etc.

It's probably on the bubble though, I haven't been burned yet (other than for $50) 

on my list, go see a lawyer and get a boiler plate contract made up.

Most of the time you can trust your gut though.


----------



## PCI (Jun 8, 2012)

I seem to detect a small amount of offense to being ask to sign a contract between a gc and a sub. I don't understand this.

As a gc I must, by state law, have a contract with my customer. I then have my subs sign a contract with me as to their scope and price. The sub agreement also spells out what I expect from my subs ie be respectful of people and property, clean up etc.

It also spells out what they can expect from me ie, a porta potty, a dumpster, how to enter the property etc.

After we go through the agreement once it becomes sop to fill it out and sign it. The reason I like it is that I can spell out my expectations and if the sub doesn't agree we can clear it up prior to it becoming a problem or we can part ways.

I would think both side would want to know exactly what to expect.


----------



## brunothedog (Sep 8, 2013)

Here, You cannot have anyone on the job that is not accountable, which means All their papers have to be up to date, AND, their must be a contract, on the job site, for anyone to see when asked for.
In todays world you gotta kinda be a fool to have people on the job not accountable.
The contract must state what they are on the job for and the amount they are working for.
I see you's in 'MURICA are a little behind...


----------



## NYgutterguy (Mar 3, 2014)

Every trade in my county has to have a bumper sticker showing you're licensed and insured. Every year must provide certificate of comp, liability and disability or they will not renew You also have to have a notary proving you do not owe child support as well ( little too much government for me with this one )


----------



## Leo G (May 12, 2005)

Tom Struble said:


> you would get a knuckle sandwich from me if you tried talking to me like that nitwit..


I agree with the OP. A contract should be signed unless you are dealing with a trusted person. Clients tend to have amnesia when it comes to a lot of things. Especially when you discuss lots of different option and they finally choose one.

The only times I ever have problems is when I do business without a contract. 

I don't see how this can possibly offend anyone (including you thankers) for doing business this way. Good, fair contracts keep both parties honest.

The one with the AIA that throws all responsibility on the sub is not a fair contract so I wouldn't count that towards my statement.


----------



## Calidecks (Nov 19, 2011)

I always have the sub send me his scope of work with the price in an email on bigger like large remodels. I even tell them it's so that we both are on the same page as to what I'm paying for and what they are doing. This way it doesn't become a "he said, she said" situation. The key is have him send it. emails are great for records. I've been golfing with my plumbing and electrical subs for years. World policy has been made over a golf ball. Golfing can be very powerful. :laughing:


----------



## jproffer (Feb 19, 2005)

Leo G said:


> I agree with the OP. A contract should be signed unless you are dealing with a trusted person. Clients tend to have amnesia when it comes to a lot of things. Especially when you discuss lots of different option and they finally choose one.
> 
> The only times I ever have problems is when I do business without a contract.
> 
> ...


I don't think the problem is WHAT he's saying, it's HOW he's saying it.

You say yourself "unless it's a trusted person". A lot of people only work with subs they know and trust.

But then Mr. Architect comes along and says anyone who don't use a contract with a sub (that's what we're talking about, not Joe Shmo customer) is a fool, and that's just how it is ("Period") because HE said so.

Well that's not "just how it is". There is no across the board right and wrong way of doing business. If it works for you, then it works....good 'nuf.

If he don't like doing business without a contract, fine...good for him. It works for him, so it's no concern of mine (or anyone else).

Bottom line of it is, it's easy to sit behind your monitor and call everyone that don't agree with you a fool....do that chit in person, and you'll find yourself on the wrong end of someone's fist, in a lot of cases. "Period".

I think that's what Struble was getting at....I know that's what I was getting at.


----------



## DBBII (Aug 28, 2008)

What happens if you or your sub gets in, say a car accident? You are out of commission for even a couple of days? Who takes over? If there is some type of written agreement, then someone can step in and try to keep things going.


----------



## PCI (Jun 8, 2012)

Got it!


----------



## GCTony (Oct 26, 2012)

PCI said:


> I seem to detect a small amount of offense to being ask to sign a contract between a gc and a sub. I don't understand this.
> 
> As a gc I must, by state law, have a contract with my customer. I then have my subs sign a contract with me as to their scope and price. The sub agreement also spells out what I expect from my subs ie be respectful of people and property, clean up etc.
> 
> ...


This is exactly what I was going to type, Thanks for doing it for me. 

FWIW: I'm light commercial. I'm also old school and would much prefer a hand shake deal. However those days are long gone. We don't always use contracts with many of the subs I've been working with over the years, especially on smaller dollar jobs. However I feel it's foolish to work on any job without some sort of written agreement. What happens if I decide not to pay a sub for some reason? Other than my word against his, that sub has no recourse. All I would have to say (lie) in court is "I never authorized him to do the work" Or...The owner doesn't pay the contractor therefore the contractor doesn't pay the sub. Try liening a property without a written agreement. Someone gets hurt or damages property and the sub's insurance policy is expired, who pays? A lawsuit without a written agreement never makes it to court.


I don't understand why someone wouldn't want some type of a written agreement. (Agreement; agreeable to all parties involved)


----------



## Calidecks (Nov 19, 2011)

480sparky said:


> 'They' being the ones who are out to screw the subs from the git-go. Whether or not I am working with them or not is not relevant.


It's very relative, I'm glad your not talking about general contractors. and you are talking about electricians as well. "They" means anyone I assume.


----------



## wiley42 (Aug 3, 2010)

The reality of the issue is contracting is a business! That being said, business requires documentation and agreements being in writing. 

What happens if one of the person that shook hands and agreed on something was killed before a project was completed? Without documentation there would be a void and misunderstandings!

The contractors that treat their company as a business will be the builders of tomorrow! Sadly, that includes documenting and putting things in writing!


----------



## Tom Struble (Mar 2, 2007)

some just want to be the builders of today..or just the next few hours then go home..


----------



## jproffer (Feb 19, 2005)

wiley42 said:


> The reality of the issue is contracting is a business! That being said, business requires documentation and agreements being in writing.
> 
> What happens if one of the person that shook hands and agreed on something was killed before a project was completed? Without documentation there would be a void and misunderstandings!
> 
> The contractors that treat their company as a business will be the builders of tomorrow! Sadly, that includes documenting and putting things in writing!


It doesn't REQUIRE anything. Some like it, some don't....that's it.


----------



## TNTRenovate (Aug 19, 2010)

wiley42 said:


> The reality of the issue is contracting is a business! That being said, business requires documentation and agreements being in writing.
> 
> What happens if one of the person that shook hands and agreed on something was killed before a project was completed? Without documentation there would be a void and misunderstandings!
> 
> The contractors that treat their company as a business will be the builders of tomorrow! Sadly, that includes documenting and putting things in writing!


So you have a contract with a sub and they ditch you half way through the job...now what?

Better yet, they fold...then what?

Seriously, what is your plan with the contracts with your subs?


----------



## Calidecks (Nov 19, 2011)

Then you go after his bond


----------



## Warren (Feb 19, 2005)

Californiadecks said:


> Then you go after his bond


Very few bonds here. Only issued in a few select communities. I don't think I have ever had more than 1 bond in any year.


----------



## Calidecks (Nov 19, 2011)

Warren said:


> Very few bonds here. Only issued in a few select communities. I don't think I have ever had more than 1 bond in any year.


Is a law to have one in this state.


----------



## Calidecks (Nov 19, 2011)

Every contractor in Cali needs one to maintain his license


----------



## TNTRenovate (Aug 19, 2010)

Californiadecks said:


> Then you go after his bond



Right, but it's a whole lot easier to type than do. And you are still stuck with the problem. It doesn't solve it. My point is a contract is only worth the integrity of the individual that backs the contract.

Bonds are rare to non-existent in residential remodeling.


----------



## Warren (Feb 19, 2005)

Licensing here is not handled by the state. Each building department manages their own licensing/bonding requirements. Mostly the GC's are required, but some of the nicer ones require all subs to be licensed and bonded also.


----------



## Calidecks (Nov 19, 2011)

TNTSERVICES said:


> Right, but it's a whole lot easier to type than do. And you are still stuck with the problem. It doesn't solve it. My point is a contract is only worth the integrity of the individual that backs the contract.
> 
> Bonds are rare to non-existent in residential remodeling.


Not in this state everyone has one. It's the law. If a plumber doesn't pay his supplier and the HO gets leined by them it's not that hard to prove as long as you have a contract and his license number.


----------



## TNTRenovate (Aug 19, 2010)

Californiadecks said:


> Not in this state everyone has one. It's the law. If a plumber doesn't pay his supplier and the HO gets leined by them it's not that hard to prove as long as you have a contract and his license number.


Again, it's a lot easier to type than do. Any good lawyer can shred a great contract. Happens every day.


----------



## Calidecks (Nov 19, 2011)

TNTSERVICES said:


> Again, it's a lot easier to type than do. Any good lawyer can shred a great contract. Happens every day.


Is done quickly by an arbitrator here. Very easy to collect on a bond. Especially for not paying a supplier.


----------



## TNTRenovate (Aug 19, 2010)

Again, easy to type. But it's takes time and time is money. And we are not talking about suppliers but gc's and subs.


----------



## Calidecks (Nov 19, 2011)

TNTSERVICES said:


> Again, easy to type. But it's takes time and time is money. And we are not talking about suppliers but gc's and subs.


Dude you asked now what? I told you. It's better then no contract, which means no recourse whatsoever. Material supply houses get bond payouts all the time here, I've talked with my lumberyard about the details extensively. It's not that big a deal.


----------



## Calidecks (Nov 19, 2011)

This is why those with bad credit pay more for thier bond. They're considered a higher risk. Once someone has collected on your bond good luck getting bonded again.


----------



## TNTRenovate (Aug 19, 2010)

Californiadecks said:


> Dude you asked now what? I told you. It's better then no contract, which means no recourse whatsoever. Material supply houses get bond payouts all the time here, I've talked with my lumberyard about the details extensively. It's not that big a deal.


You gave the one line response. It's just not that easy for us here. Like I said, it takes time out of my day to go do that. And we are not talking about suppliers. It's great that it's easy for them, but we are not them.

And I am not arguing that the lack of a contract leaves you with nothing, but a contract doesn't give you much. It's a false sense of security in most cases.

Here's an example. Here you have to send the letter of intent to lien 90 days from the start date. That means if you have a 91 day job you have to send it out before the job is even complete. How in the hell do I send an intent when I am not even done?


----------



## Calidecks (Nov 19, 2011)

TNTSERVICES said:


> You gave the one line response. It's just not that easy for us here. Like I said, it takes time out of my day to go do that. And we are not talking about suppliers. It's great that it's easy for them, but we are not them.
> 
> And I am not arguing that the lack of a contract leaves you with nothing, but a contract doesn't give you much. It's a false sense of security in most cases.
> 
> Here's an example. Here you have to send the letter of intent to lien 90 days from the start date. That means if you have a 91 day job you have to send it out before the job is even complete. How in the hell do I send an intent when I am not even done?


I have the same Avenue to collect on a bond as a supplier. As long as I am a licensed General Contractor that has a legal right to hire subs. The bond is placed to pay damages caused by licensing laws that get broke. Abandoning a job is up there probably in the top three, if not the number one law that gets broke by contractors in this state.


----------



## Calidecks (Nov 19, 2011)

TNTSERVICES said:


> You gave the one line response. It's just not that easy for us here. Like I said, it takes time out of my day to go do that. And we are not talking about suppliers. It's great that it's easy for them, but we are not them.
> 
> And I am not arguing that the lack of a contract leaves you with nothing, but a contract doesn't give you much. It's a false sense of security in most cases.
> 
> Here's an example. Here you have to send the letter of intent to lien 90 days from the start date. That means if you have a 91 day job you have to send it out before the job is even complete. How in the hell do I send an intent when I am not even done?


without a contract there are no options, with a contract there are several. And no one's saying a contract guarantees you anything but in this state NO CONTRACT guarantees you NOTHING.


----------



## TNTRenovate (Aug 19, 2010)

Californiadecks said:


> I have the same Avenue to collect on a bond as a supplier. As long as I am a licensed General Contractor that has a legal right to hire subs. The bond is placed to pay damages caused by licensing laws that get broke. Abandoning a job is up there probably in the top three, if not the number one law that gets broke by contractors in this state.


SO then why did you bring them up specifically? Makes no sense. If you have the same ease that they do and suppliers were never part of the conversation, why mention them. It only confuses the conversation.

Circular here. California isn't like most other states. You HAVE to have a written contract when you perform work in California. We can operate off of a verbal here.

But it goes back to it still is a cost benefit. Even if I have a contract is it worth my time. You still have to fill out the paperwork and take the time to go to arbitration. And even under most arbitration they seek to resolve the issue before turning to monetary resolutions.

I could walk on a job but for good reason. Just because they walk doesn't mean that you would necessary walk away with their bond money. I still think that you are making the process sound a bit more simple than it really is.

Have you ever actually used the process on a contractor?


----------



## Calidecks (Nov 19, 2011)

TNTSERVICES said:


> SO then why did you bring them up specifically? Makes no sense. If you have the same ease that they do and suppliers were never part of the conversation, why mention them. It only confuses the conversation.
> 
> Circular here. California isn't like most other states. You HAVE to have a written contract when you perform work in California. We can operate off of a verbal here.
> 
> ...


Brought them up as an example. Ok I'm guilty of confusing you.


----------



## Calidecks (Nov 19, 2011)

TNTSERVICES said:


> SO then why did you bring them up specifically? Makes no sense. If you have the same ease that they do and suppliers were never part of the conversation, why mention them. It only confuses the conversation.
> 
> Circular here. California isn't like most other states. You HAVE to have a written contract when you perform work in California. We can operate off of a verbal here.
> 
> ...


The effort it takes could very well be worth it. At least I have the choice.


----------



## Calidecks (Nov 19, 2011)

No, you don't have to have a contract with other contractors here in Cali. However you are required by law to have a contract with a HO for all Home Improvements.


----------



## Calidecks (Nov 19, 2011)

TNTSERVICES said:


> SO then why did you bring them up specifically? Makes no sense. If you have the same ease that they do and suppliers were never part of the conversation, why mention them. It only confuses the conversation.
> 
> Circular here. California isn't like most other states. You HAVE to have a written contract when you perform work in California. We can operate off of a verbal here.
> 
> ...


I've never used it but I know someone who has. It was against my loser nephew. He hasn't had a license since. Here's what it says when you look up his license:

This license is suspended
The license will need to resolve an outstanding bond payout.


----------



## KennMacMoragh (Sep 16, 2008)

Leo G said:


> I agree with the OP. A contract should be signed unless you are dealing with a trusted person. they finally choose one.


I agree with the OP too. But I never understood what trust has to do with contracts. Contracts aren't about trust, it gets your eyes on the table so you know what to expect from each other. Even if you trust the person you still need a contract. 

As for the original question, I don't have a contract for my subs but I plan to start doing this at some point.


----------



## TNTRenovate (Aug 19, 2010)

Californiadecks said:


> No, you don't have to have a contract with other contractors here in Cali. However you are required by law to have a contract with a HO for all Home Improvements.


I just figured since you were all over the board I could be as well.


----------



## TNTRenovate (Aug 19, 2010)

KennMacMoragh said:


> I agree with the OP too. But I never understood what trust has to do with contracts. Contracts aren't about trust, it gets your eyes on the table so you know what to expect from each other. Even if you trust the person you still need a contract.
> 
> As for the original question, I don't have a contract for my subs but I plan to start doing this at some point.


A contract is worthless if the other party isn't trustworthy.

And I love the inconsistency. You say you should have a contract even with those that you trust yet you have none with your subs. Too funny.


----------



## TNTRenovate (Aug 19, 2010)

Californiadecks said:


> Is done quickly by an arbitrator here. Very easy to collect on a bond. Especially for not paying a supplier.


You didn't confuse me you misrepresented what you said. The word Especially separated it from other categories. It means that for suppliers it's even easier. But now you say it's the same.


----------



## CarpenterSFO (Dec 12, 2012)

General/sub contracts have become more common here, driven by folks on both sides, to get clarity about the scope of work, the price, and the schedule. They remain less common with the one-man shops, older guys, and plumbers and electricians.

I like contracts - they protect both sides from a variety of misunderstandings. In California the contract with the homeowner is a lengthy deal, but contracts between subs and generals can be simple.

On condo work or anywhere with an HOA, everyone gets a contract and provides proof of liability insurance and workers comp. I've stopped using subs who claim the one-man shop waiver on worker's comp - they all have helpers and they're putting me at risk.

Once you get accustomed to it, using contracts is quick and simple - most of the work consists of writing down the SOW. For a small job a contract with a sub can be as simple as one page. If the other party balks at a contract, when I've done the paperwork, it's a red flag, in my experience usually driven by reluctance to associate a specific SOW with a specific price.

I'm not worried about being "the builder of tomorrow", either, but I think it's a trend, and overall a healthy one.


----------

