Does Minnesota Require Roofing Contractors to Disclose Warranty Terms?

Key Takeaways

• Minnesota has no statute requiring roofing contractors to disclose warranty terms. Warranty coverage on roofing work is set by contract, not by mandated disclosure.
• Because the law will not force disclosure, homeowners should insist that every warranty term appears in the written contract before work begins.
• The statute that actually governs residential roofing work, Minn. Stat. § 325E.66, regulates insurance-claim practices, not warranty disclosure.
• Minnesota’s statutory home warranties under Minn. Stat. § 327A.02 arise by operation of law for new dwellings and home improvement work, but they impose no disclosure duty and are not specific to roofing.
• The consumer written-warranty statute, Minn. Stat. § 325G.17 and the sections that follow it, applies to consumer goods, not roofing services.

No Minnesota Statute Requires Roofing Warranty Disclosure

There is no Minnesota statute, rule, or licensing provision that requires a roofing contractor to disclose warranty terms to a homeowner. The premise behind the “roofing warranty disclosure law” idea, that the state dictates what a roofer must tell you about the warranty and penalizes a roofer who stays silent, does not describe Minnesota law.

What the law leaves to the parties, the parties must settle for themselves. A roofing warranty exists because the contractor promised it in the contract, and it means exactly what the contract says. If the agreement is silent on duration, coverage, exclusions, or transferability, no statute fills the gap with a mandated disclosure. That is why the single most protective step a homeowner can take is to require the warranty terms in writing before signing. The absence of a disclosure statute is not a loophole to be fixed by regulation; it is the ordinary rule that warranty coverage on a service is a contract term the homeowner should negotiate and document.

What Minnesota Law Actually Regulates for Residential Roofing

Minnesota does regulate residential roofing work, but the subject is insurance-claim conduct, not warranty disclosure. Minn. Stat. § 325E.66 governs insurance claims for residential contracting goods and services, and it defines the “residential contractor” it covers to include a residential roofer. When roofing work is to be paid from the proceeds of a property or casualty insurance policy, the statute prohibits the contractor from doing three things.

First, the contractor may not, as an inducement to the sale, “advertise or promise to pay, directly or indirectly, all or part of any applicable insurance deductible.” That prohibition also covers offering to compensate the homeowner in exchange for allowing an inspection, making an insurance claim, or referring the contractor to others when insurance proceeds are payable.

Second, the contractor may not “provide an insured with an agreement authorizing repairs without also providing a good faith estimate of the itemized and detailed cost of services and materials.” A repair-authorization agreement must be accompanied by an honest, itemized estimate.

Third, the contractor may not “interpret policy provisions or advise an insured regarding coverages or duties under the insured’s policy, or adjust a property insurance claim on behalf of the insured, unless the contractor has a license as a public adjuster.” In other words, a roofer cannot act as the homeowner’s insurance adjuster without the license that role requires.

The statute backs these rules two ways. Under its private remedy, if a residential contractor violates the section, “the insured or the applicable insurer may bring an action against the residential contractor in a court of competent jurisdiction for damages.” And it directs the commissioner of labor and industry to enforce the section. Notably, none of this concerns warranty disclosure. Section 325E.66 is the closest thing Minnesota has to a roofing-specific statute, and it says nothing about requiring a contractor to disclose warranty terms.

Statutory Home Warranties That Arise by Operation of Law

Minnesota does impose certain home warranties by operation of law, but they are general construction warranties, not roofing warranties, and they carry no disclosure requirement. Under Minn. Stat. § 327A.02, in every sale of a completed dwelling, the vendor warrants to the buyer that the dwelling will be free from defects caused by faulty workmanship and defective materials due to noncompliance with building standards for one year; free from defects caused by faulty installation of plumbing, electrical, heating, and cooling systems for two years; and free from “major construction defects due to noncompliance with building standards” for ten years.

The statute extends a parallel set of warranties to home improvement work. A home improvement contractor warrants that the work will be free from faulty workmanship and defective materials for one year, that installed plumbing, electrical, heating, or cooling systems will be free from faulty-installation defects for two years, and that qualifying work will be free from major construction defects for ten years. These warranties are not specific to roofing, but roofing work performed as a home improvement can fall within them.

Two features matter for a homeowner’s expectations. These warranties arise automatically. The statute says the vendor or contractor “shall warrant” the work, so coverage does not depend on any written disclosure, and the warranties survive the passing of title. At the same time, chapter 327A sets out a notice, inspection, and right-to-repair process the homeowner and contractor must follow before a warranty claim proceeds. The contractor is entitled to inspect the claimed defect and to make a written offer to repair, and the homeowner generally cannot rush the dispute straight to court. What the chapter does not do is require anyone to disclose warranty terms in advance. The coverage is created by statute, not by a mandated warranty statement.

The Consumer Warranty Statute Does Not Reach Roofing Services

Homeowners sometimes point to Minnesota’s consumer written-warranty law, expecting it to govern roofing warranties. It does not. That law, beginning at Minn. Stat. § 325G.17, applies to a “consumer sale,” which it defines as “a sale of new goods, or as regards an express warranty, any goods, purchased primarily for personal, family, or household purposes.” Its subject is goods, and its definition of an express warranty is a written statement made by a manufacturer, distributor, or retailer about goods.

A roof installation is a service, and the labor a roofer sells is not “goods” within that statute. The roofing materials a manufacturer sells may carry their own written product warranty, and that manufacturer warranty can be a consumer product warranty. But the consumer written-warranty statute does not impose a duty on a roofing contractor to disclose the terms of a workmanship warranty on the installation. Once again, the protection for the homeowner is the written contract with the roofer, not a disclosure statute.

Getting the Warranty in Writing

Since no statute forces disclosure, a homeowner should treat the warranty as a contract term to negotiate and record, the same way price and timeline are recorded. A few practical distinctions make the written terms far more useful.

A manufacturer warranty and a workmanship warranty are different promises from different parties. The manufacturer warranty covers defects in the roofing materials themselves and is backed by the product maker. The workmanship warranty covers the quality of the installation and is backed by the contractor. A homeowner who has only one of the two has a real gap, because a leak can come from a defective shingle or from a poorly installed one, and only the matching warranty responds. Ask for both in writing, and ask what each one excludes.

Duration, coverage, and transferability are the terms most worth pinning down. Get the length of each warranty in writing, get a plain description of what is and is not covered, and ask whether the warranty transfers to a future buyer, since a transferable warranty can add value at resale. None of this is required by statute, which is exactly why a careful homeowner should require it by contract.

Practical Guidance

• Require the warranty terms in the written contract. Do not rely on a verbal assurance or a brochure. If it is not in the signed agreement, it may be difficult to enforce.
• Separate the manufacturer warranty from the workmanship warranty. Confirm you have both, understand who stands behind each, and read the exclusions.
• Ask about duration and transferability. Have the contractor state the length of coverage and whether it passes to a later owner.
• Watch the insurance-claim rules on storm and repair work. Under Minn. Stat. § 325E.66, a contractor doing insurance-funded work cannot offer to absorb your deductible, must give you an itemized good-faith estimate with any repair authorization, and cannot act as your insurance adjuster without the proper license.
• Keep your documents. Retain the contract, both warranties, the itemized estimate, and your records of any claim, so you can enforce the terms if a dispute arises.

Frequently Asked Questions

Does Minnesota law require a roofing contractor to disclose warranty terms?

No. Minnesota has no statute or rule requiring a roofing contractor to disclose the duration, coverage, or exclusions of a warranty, and no agency imposes fines for a missing warranty disclosure. Warranty coverage on roofing work is a matter of contract, so the way to secure clear terms is to require them in the written agreement before the work begins.

What Minnesota law actually applies to residential roofing work?

The most directly applicable statute is Minn. Stat. § 325E.66, which governs insurance claims for residential contracting work and defines the covered contractors to include residential roofers. It bars a contractor on insurance-funded work from promising to pay the homeowner’s deductible, requires a good-faith itemized estimate with any repair-authorization agreement, and prohibits the contractor from adjusting the insurance claim without a public adjuster license. It does not address warranty disclosure.

Does Minnesota give me any roofing warranty by operation of law?

Minnesota’s statutory home warranties under Minn. Stat. § 327A.02 arise automatically for new dwellings and for home improvement work, generally running one year for workmanship and materials, two years for plumbing, electrical, heating, and cooling systems, and ten years for major construction defects. These warranties are not specific to roofing, and they impose no disclosure duty. They also come with a required notice, inspection, and right-to-repair process before a claim can go to court.

Are roofing warranties covered by Minnesota’s consumer warranty law?

No. The consumer written-warranty law beginning at Minn. Stat. § 325G.17 applies to consumer goods, not services. A roofing installation is a service, so that statute does not require a roofer to disclose the terms of a workmanship warranty, although roofing materials may carry their own manufacturer product warranty.

What should a homeowner do to protect roofing warranty rights?

Get every warranty term in writing before signing. Confirm you have both a manufacturer warranty on the materials and a workmanship warranty on the installation, read what each excludes, and ask about duration and transferability. Because no statute forces disclosure, a clear written contract is the homeowner’s real protection.