IS IT WORTH PAYING MORE FOR A FULLY INSURED CONTRACTOR OR JUST GOING WITH THE CHEAPER UNINSURED GUY?
Honestly, I’m always tempted by the lower price tag, but every time I try to cut corners, it bites me later. Had a buddy who saved a few hundred on an uninsured plumber—fast forward a month, and he’s got water damage and no one to call. I get wanting to save, but if it’s anything major, I’d rather pay up front than gamble with my wallet down the line. Sometimes “cheap” just means “expensive later.”
IS IT WORTH PAYING MORE FOR A FULLY INSURED CONTRACTOR OR JUST GOING WITH THE CHEAPER UNINSURED GUY?
I hear what you're saying, but I don’t think it’s always black and white. In some cases, especially for smaller jobs, I’ve seen really skilled tradespeople who just don’t carry insurance because of the overhead. They can do great work, sometimes better than the big companies. Of course, there’s a risk involved, but if you know the person’s reputation and it’s not a huge project, sometimes the savings actually make sense. It really comes down to how much risk you’re comfortable with and how well you know who you’re hiring.
It really comes down to how much risk you’re comfortable with and how well you know who you’re hiring.
That’s fair, but I’d push back a bit—insurance isn’t just about the contractor’s skills. It’s about what happens if something goes sideways. Even the best folks can have an accident or hit a pipe they didn’t know was there. If they’re not insured and someone gets hurt, or there’s property damage, you could be on the hook for way more than you saved.
I’ve seen homeowners get burned because a “small job” turned into a bigger mess. Sure, for patching drywall or swapping out a light fixture, maybe you roll the dice. But as soon as it’s anything structural or involves plumbing/electrical, I’d want that insurance in place.
Reputation counts for a lot, but it won’t pay your bills if things go wrong. Just my two cents—sometimes the peace of mind is worth the extra cost.