If Your Contractor Disappeared Tomorrow, How Screwed Are You?

If Your Contractor Disappeared Tomorrow, How Screwed Are You?

New to Real Estate · Miami, FL · Member since 2024 · 1k+ posts · 441 votes

I know of a contractor who was very respected in his business. Successful guy. Always busy. Construction, primarily. At any given time he had at least three large projects going. People depended on him.

One weekend he went to his country home, as he did almost every weekend. Except this time he hanged himself. And suddenly everybody discovered just how much of those projects existed inside one man's head.

Now what? The buildings didn't disappear with him. Neither did the deadlines, contracts, subcontractors, materials, buyers or future tenants. Somebody had to come in cold, figure out what had been done, what hadn't been done, what had been ordered, what had been promised, who was responsible for what, and somehow get three construction projects moving again. By the time it was sorted out, the additional cost worked out to around $200 per square meter - costs that ultimately had to be absorbed by the future tenants.

Two hundred dollars per square meter because one man was suddenly gone. That's a hell of an expensive way to discover that your contractor wasn't merely your contractor. He was part of your operating system.

Most of us discover this dependency in less dramatic ways. You finally find a good contractor. He answers the phone. His prices are fair. He knows your properties. He knows what kind of work you expect and what kind you don't. After a few years, conversations become wonderfully short.

“Same problem at Oak Street.”

“I know.”

“When?”

“Thursday.”

Beautiful.

He remembers which roof was patched three years ago. He knows what the previous plumber screwed up. He knows which supplier has the matching tile. He remembers what's behind a wall nobody has opened in ten years. Eventually, he knows things about your properties that you don't know.

And that's where a good relationship can quietly become a dangerous dependency. The obvious answer seems to be: never depend on one person. Have three plumbers. Three electricians. Three HVAC companies. Three general contractors. Spread everything around so everybody is replaceable.

Sounds smart. It may also be a great way to make sure you're nobody's important customer. The contractor who gets most of my work has a reason to answer my call on Friday evening. The guy I call twice a year doesn't. Relationships have value precisely because they're relationships. Trust, history and accumulated knowledge save enormous amounts of time and money. So I don't think dependency itself is necessarily the problem. Unrecognized dependency is.

There's another side to that contractor's story that bothers me, too. When everything pivots around one person, responsibilities have a tendency to accumulate. Another project. Another problem. Another phone call only he can answer. Another decision only he can make. Everybody says: “Ask him. He knows.” That may feel like indispensability from the outside. From the inside, it can become an unbearable burden.

I don't know what drove that particular man to take his life, and I wouldn't pretend that business pressure explains it. But his death made the business vulnerability brutally visible: too much knowledge, authority and responsibility had accumulated around one human being.

And contractors aren't the only example. Property manager. Bookkeeper. Insurance agent. Loan officer. Attorney. Employee. Partner. The dangerous sentence is: “Don't worry. Mike knows how that works.” Great. What happens when Mike isn't there tomorrow? Who has the keys? Who knows the vendors? Where are the warranties? Who has the drawings? Where are the invoices? What's been ordered? What was agreed verbally? What's the actual maintenance history? Could another competent person walk in tomorrow and figure it out?

I don't want to make everybody replaceable. That's a terrible way to think about good people. I want the business to be survivable without any one of us. Because people retire. They move. They get sick. They get overwhelmed. Relationships break down. And occasionally something happens that nobody imagined was even on the list of possibilities. The time to discover that one person is holding your entire operation together is not the morning that person is gone.

So here's my uncomfortable question: if your most important contractor disappeared tomorrow, would you lose a contractor - or would you lose part of your business?

0Reply
130 views

5 Replies

Jump to latestLatest
  • Vaibhav PuranikPro Member
    Member since 2025 · 43 posts · 16 votes
    20h

    I think this was the scenario with us a year or two ago, but tools like Thumbtack are changing things. It's become much easier to get contractors on Thumbtack. Generally, I try to experiment with few ones on Thumbtack and then once you get a good one - you start calling them for every task. But they have other work and they have life too. So it's better to keep 2 to 3 options. Once you have a lot of properties, you don't have a choice.

  • Investor · Pacific Northwest · Member since 2026 · 511 posts · 286 votes
    17h

    This is exactly the kind of dependency people misdiagnose as a “people problem” when it’s really an architecture problem.

    The contractor isn’t dangerous because he’s valuable. He’s dangerous because the business has allowed state, memory, authority and provenance to collapse into one human being.

    The goal should never be “make Mike replaceable.” The goal is: make Mike’s knowledge legible to the system.

    Every project should have a living record of what exists, what changed, what was promised, what was ordered, who owns the next action, what decisions were made, what evidence supports them, and what authority each person actually has. Drawings, photos, warranties, invoices, vendor history, verbal commitments, maintenance history, deadlines, exceptions — all attached to the work itself instead of trapped in somebody’s memory.

    Then Mike can still be exceptional. He can still be the person everyone wants to call. But the business no longer stops existing when Mike is unavailable.

    That distinction matters: redundancy of people is expensive; continuity of state is not.

    This is one of the core problems we’ve been designing around. Preserve the relationship. Preserve the expertise. Just stop making the human the database.

  • Drew SygitBusiness Member
    Property Manager · Royal Oak, MI · Member since 2012 · 12k+ posts · 9k+ votes
    11h

    A lot of owners would remember - just because they coordinated with the contractor to get things done.

    They would also have the SOWs and invoices.

  • JD MartinBusiness Member
    Moderator
    Rock Star Extraordinaire · Northeast, TN · Member since 2015 · 10k+ posts · 16k+ votes
    9h
    Quote from @Drago Stanimirovic:

    I know of a contractor who was very respected in his business. Successful guy. Always busy. Construction, primarily. At any given time he had at least three large projects going. People depended on him.

    One weekend he went to his country home, as he did almost every weekend. Except this time he hanged himself. And suddenly everybody discovered just how much of those projects existed inside one man's head.

    Now what? The buildings didn't disappear with him. Neither did the deadlines, contracts, subcontractors, materials, buyers or future tenants. Somebody had to come in cold, figure out what had been done, what hadn't been done, what had been ordered, what had been promised, who was responsible for what, and somehow get three construction projects moving again. By the time it was sorted out, the additional cost worked out to around $200 per square meter - costs that ultimately had to be absorbed by the future tenants.

    Two hundred dollars per square meter because one man was suddenly gone. That's a hell of an expensive way to discover that your contractor wasn't merely your contractor. He was part of your operating system.

    Most of us discover this dependency in less dramatic ways. You finally find a good contractor. He answers the phone. His prices are fair. He knows your properties. He knows what kind of work you expect and what kind you don't. After a few years, conversations become wonderfully short.

    “Same problem at Oak Street.”

    “I know.”

    “When?”

    “Thursday.”

    Beautiful.

    He remembers which roof was patched three years ago. He knows what the previous plumber screwed up. He knows which supplier has the matching tile. He remembers what's behind a wall nobody has opened in ten years. Eventually, he knows things about your properties that you don't know.

    And that's where a good relationship can quietly become a dangerous dependency. The obvious answer seems to be: never depend on one person. Have three plumbers. Three electricians. Three HVAC companies. Three general contractors. Spread everything around so everybody is replaceable.

    Sounds smart. It may also be a great way to make sure you're nobody's important customer. The contractor who gets most of my work has a reason to answer my call on Friday evening. The guy I call twice a year doesn't. Relationships have value precisely because they're relationships. Trust, history and accumulated knowledge save enormous amounts of time and money. So I don't think dependency itself is necessarily the problem. Unrecognized dependency is.

    There's another side to that contractor's story that bothers me, too. When everything pivots around one person, responsibilities have a tendency to accumulate. Another project. Another problem. Another phone call only he can answer. Another decision only he can make. Everybody says: “Ask him. He knows.” That may feel like indispensability from the outside. From the inside, it can become an unbearable burden.

    I don't know what drove that particular man to take his life, and I wouldn't pretend that business pressure explains it. But his death made the business vulnerability brutally visible: too much knowledge, authority and responsibility had accumulated around one human being.

    And contractors aren't the only example. Property manager. Bookkeeper. Insurance agent. Loan officer. Attorney. Employee. Partner. The dangerous sentence is: “Don't worry. Mike knows how that works.” Great. What happens when Mike isn't there tomorrow? Who has the keys? Who knows the vendors? Where are the warranties? Who has the drawings? Where are the invoices? What's been ordered? What was agreed verbally? What's the actual maintenance history? Could another competent person walk in tomorrow and figure it out?

    I don't want to make everybody replaceable. That's a terrible way to think about good people. I want the business to be survivable without any one of us. Because people retire. They move. They get sick. They get overwhelmed. Relationships break down. And occasionally something happens that nobody imagined was even on the list of possibilities. The time to discover that one person is holding your entire operation together is not the morning that person is gone.

    So here's my uncomfortable question: if your most important contractor disappeared tomorrow, would you lose a contractor - or would you lose part of your business?

    Well, first I'd have to find someone in the US that knew what the hell a square meter was. That would be pretty hard by itself. I could maybe find some Canadian but they probably couldn't get a work visa. So for starters I'd make sure my current contractor knew how to use the US measurement system.

    In all seriousness, it would suck but you would muddle through. Ideally no one guy has everything in his head, but anyone who's done this long enough has had a top guy - doesn't have to be the GC - bail on a project and someone else had to pick it up. Yeah, you might spend some extra money, but other than just having some basic guard rails (multiple people involved on a project) I wouldn't spend as much time thinking about that as I would making sure I was working with lots of people that I could trust to get a job done.

    Your problem is a good one to think about, though. Many years ago when I first took over my last organization all of the organization's information was in one guy's head. If he died, moved, got mad and quit or got hit by a meteor there was a lot of institutional knowledge gone. So I spent a lot of time mining that information, putting it into recordable systems (GIS, for example) and training other people to access it so that the organization could continue to function. Kind of a basic tenet of The E-Myth revisited.

    Skyline Properties
    View Page
  • Divin KanyamaBusiness Member
    Accountant · Seattle, WA · Member since 2025 · 149 posts · 39 votes
    8h

    @Drago Stanimirovic , This really highlights the difference between a strong relationship and a hidden dependency. There's tremendous value in having trusted contractors and advisors who know your properties inside and out. The problem isn't relying on good people. It's relying on systems that only exist in one person's head.

    As real estate investors, we often focus on protecting assets from external risks, but operational risk can be just as significant. If a key contractor, property manager, bookkeeper, or partner disappeared tomorrow, could someone else step in and keep things moving?

    The goal isn't to make people replaceable. It's to make the business resilient. The best relationships are supported by processes, documentation, and shared knowledge so that when life inevitably changes, the business can keep operating. That's not a lack of trust. It's good stewardship.

Join the conversationCreate a free account to reply, vote on answers and follow this thread.