Mike Silvers, CPRC, Owner, Silvers Systems Inc. and FRSA Technical Director - September 2026
I think we can agree that all roofs need to be replaced eventually. Exposure to the elements will make it necessary. I want to focus on when a new roof must be replaced, not because it isn’t performing or because it’s leaking, but because of a technical issue that has arisen and someone with the authority to do so, says it has to be replaced. It may be a building official, a judge, a manufacturer, your customer or your conscience. It is often a technical requirement such as a building code provision or manufacturers’ recommendations that weren’t met and have been discovered during or just after the installation, usually during an inspection by a building official or a potential expert witness. Often, it is not a condition the contractor purposely created but something they weren’t aware of and is clearly required.
Before we discuss some ways to hopefully avoid being faced with this very unpleasant circumstance, let’s look at the real cost of a mandated replacement. For this example, I will use a replacement cost of $10,000, which must be absorbed by the contractor. When a cost like this arises, it is usually paid for through earned or future profits. So how much work will need to be completed to earn that money back? Let’s assume that a company earns five percent net profit. This is after all expenses for the period: materials, labor, labor burden (matching social security and FICA and workers’ compensation) travel and all other overhead expenses (supervision, sales, all office personnel, physical location, vehicles, insurance, etc.). By the way, those costs all have to be applied to the replacement as well.
Based on this example, to earn $10,000 you will have to do $200,000 worth of future work. This is a daunting figure but remember, while you are doing that $200k worth of work and using the profit to pay for the replacement, you are not making profit from this work because it is already being absorbed. So, you must do future work to return those profits. As we can see, this can eat away at your bottom line for quite some time. This example will apply to small and big companies alike. Maybe a large company can more easily absorb this amount but bigger companies install bigger, more expensive roofs. The $10k example makes it easy to adjust this to a replacement of any amount.
Obviously being in this situation is something we know we want to avoid but looking at this example clearly indicates that avoiding it is critical to your company’s future success. Besides the monetary cost there is an untold loss to your reputation and possibly your future insurability if your insurer gets involved. Keep in mind that most liability coverages do not cover the actual cost of a roof replacement in these situations.
So how do we protect ourselves from this nightmare? It isn’t easy. Like so many things it comes down to knowledge. To consider how to avoid this situation, we will revisit and take a deeper dive into the two most common reasons for having to replace a new roof. Non-compliance with the building code or manufacturer’s
installation instructions, which, in many cases, is also noncompliance with the code. Where the code itself is the concern, it usually starts with unfamiliarity with its specific provisions. I sometimes hear a contractor say something along the lines of “I don’t worry about what’s in the code because I do more than it requires.” Not worrying about it indicates a lack of knowing its content and yet they somehow know that they exceed it: a good trick and a sure way to eventually end up in trouble.
Someone involved in your company’s project planning processes should not only be aware of the codes’ content about the roof systems that you install but, just as importantly, stay up to date with changes in the code and local interpretations. The license holder is expected to do so. In Florida, keeping up with these requirements can be difficult. We have two distinct roofing codes: one for two counties (Miami-Dade and Broward), referred to as the High Velocity Hurricane Zone (HVHZ), and the primary code sections for the other 65 counties. There are as many as 35 different municipal building departments in some counties, accounting for as many as 389 in Florida. Being aware of local interpretations in all 389 building departments is all but impossible.
Staying up on the code is difficult enough with the planned code revision process happening every three years but the legislature can also direct the Florida Building Commission to change the code during any of its sessions, typically once a year unless there are special sessions.
Working in an area where you are familiar with the requirements and expectations can definitely help but obviously it is not always possible. It is a good idea to make sure that your permit application explains the scope of the work clearly and concisely, whether the application form requires it or not. Include the correct product approval for the roof system. By providing this information at least you have a chance that a plans examiner or someone else reviewing your application might catch something that does not comply.
I suggest if your project isn’t located in Miami-Dade or Broward Counties that you do not use a Miami-Dade Notice of Acceptance (NOA), which brings in often confusing and complex Roofing Application Standards (RAS) and Testing Application Standards (TAS). These are so complex that they require a separate sub-code
volume that is almost 400 pages long. That is nearly half as large as the FBC Building volume’s 884 pages, which covers all non-residential construction, not just roofing. If you regularly work in the HVHZ, you should be familiar with these standards. For others, it may be perilous to voluntarily use them by selecting an NOA. I suggest that you use the state’s product approvals, indicating that they are for use outside the HVHZ. I would also strongly recommend that if you very seldom or have never done a project located in those two counties, you proceed with extreme caution. To say that the code there is different is a huge understatement. The same caution applies if you are not familiar with using and following NOAs.
With so many potential obstacles to overcome, surely if we lay out the project scope, bring the information to the building department in a permit application, have it accepted, a permit issued, arrange for inspections and possibly even receive a final inspection, you should be good, right? To answer that question, I point to the following code section, which in part states:
2023 Florida Building Code, Building, Eighth Edition
CHAPTER 1 SCOPE AND ADMINISTRATION
SECTION 105 PERMITS
105.4 Conditions of the permit.
105.4.1 Permit intent.
A permit issued shall be construed to be a license to proceed with the work and not as
authority to violate, cancel, alter or set aside any of the provisions of the technical codes,
nor shall issuance of a permit prevent the building official from thereafter requiring a
correction of errors in plans, construction or violations of this code.
Clearly, it is the contractor’s responsibility to comply with these technical requirements and, if you don’t, you may be forced to bring the work into compliance. Not every minor code deviation demands correction. To address which ones may, see the statute below that explains what is considered a material violation. If you look at the section that states: the term “ material violation” means a Florida Building Code violation that exists within a completed building, structure, or facility which may reasonably result, or has resulted, in physical harm to a person or significant damage to the performance of a building or its systems. Again, this leaves it open for interpretation as to what may result in physical harm or damage to the performance of the building or its systems. An issue like fire resistance could easily be seen as reasonably resulting in physical harm. A wind resistance requirement could reasonably be seen as damaging to the performance of a building. So, slight variations (nonmaterial violations) in these technical requirements may not rise to dictate a necessary replacement; many others certainly can.
To avoid this, you may want to limit the different types of roof coverings that you choose to install, allowing you to be more familiar with their specific requirements. You may also consider using product manufacturers you’ve become familiar with and those who provide strong technical support, including representatives
who are based near where the work is being performed or at least someone who is familiar with local requirements.
I know these are burdensome recommendations and you can apply them as you choose but considering the true cost of the replacement of a recently completed roof, it may be prudent to apply as many of
them as possible.
Mike Silvers, CPRC is Owner of Silvers Systems Inc. and is consulting with FRSA as Director of Technical Services. Mike is an FRSA Past President, Life Member and Campanella Award recipient and brings over 50 years of industry knowledge and experience to FRSA’s team.