Trisura Insurance Pursues JAG Roofing for $174K in Surety Bond Claims in Federal Lawsuit
Miami, FL – September 6, 2025 – Trisura Insurance Company, an Oklahoma-based insurer, has filed a federal lawsuit against JAG Roofing Inc. and its owner, Michael Ramjit Jagroo, seeking over $174,000 in losses tied to surety bond claims, with potential exposure exceeding $770,000. The complaint, lodged on September 3, 2025, in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Florida, alleges that JAG Roofing failed to indemnify Trisura for payments made on performance and payment bonds issued for construction projects in Florida and Georgia. The case highlights the complexities of surety bonds in the construction industry and underscores the financial risks insurers face when contractors default.
Case Background
Trisura issued three surety bonds to guarantee JAG Roofing’s performance and payment obligations on construction projects: a $1.7 million project for Best Value Management, LLC in Georgia, a $180,000 project for Cremer Global Services, Inc. in Key West, Florida, and a $133,892 project for G.M. Hill Engineering, Inc. in Florida.. These bonds were backed by an indemnity agreement signed by JAG Roofing and Jagroo, which required them to reimburse Trisura for any losses or expenses incurred if claims were made against the bonds.
According to the lawsuit, multiple claims arose when JAG Roofing allegedly failed to meet its contractual obligations. Trisura has already paid out $174,822.76 to cover losses and expenses, including claims from suppliers and subcontractors such as Beacon Sales Acquisition Inc., Titan Consultants and Engineers, LLC, Contractors Access Equipment, and G.M. Hill Engineering.. The insurer faces additional exposure of over $770,000, including a single claim for $723,783.85 from American Builders & Contractors Supply Co., Inc. (ABC Supply Co.)..
Trisura alleges that JAG Roofing and Jagroo breached the indemnity agreement by failing to provide collateral or indemnification despite formal demands made on December 16, 2024, and August 4, 2025.. The insurer claims the agreement grants it “sole and absolute discretion” to demand collateral and settle claims without notifying the indemnitors, and that its payment records serve as prima facie evidence of liability..
Legal and Industry Context
Surety bonds, distinct from insurance, act as a performance guarantee, ensuring contractors fulfill their obligations or compensate affected parties if they fail.. In this case, Trisura’s bonds covered JAG Roofing’s obligations to pay subcontractors and suppliers (payment bonds) and complete the projects as agreed (performance bonds). When JAG allegedly defaulted, Trisura was forced to pay claims, triggering its right to seek reimbursement under the indemnity agreement.
The construction industry frequently sees such disputes, particularly when projects face delays, cost overruns, or contractor insolvency. A 2025 Construction Dive report notes a 15% increase in surety bond claims since 2023, driven by rising material costs and labor shortages.. Trisura’s lawsuit reflects these broader trends, as insurers increasingly turn to litigation to recover losses from indemnitors who fail to honor agreements.
The case also highlights Trisura’s growing presence in the U.S. surety market. Following its 2024 acquisition of First Founders Assurance Company, a U.S. Treasury-listed surety, Trisura has expanded its licensing efforts across all 50 states, strengthening its position as a specialty insurer.. This lawsuit underscores the company’s aggressive approach to enforcing indemnity obligations, a critical aspect of its risk management strategy.
Financial and Legal Stakes
Trisura is seeking $174,822.76 in paid losses and expenses, plus additional damages, interest, and attorneys’ fees, with potential claims pushing its total exposure above $770,000.. The insurer’s complaint emphasizes that the indemnity agreement allows it to settle claims at its discretion and holds JAG Roofing and Jagroo jointly and severally liable. This legal strategy aims to recover funds efficiently, leveraging the agreement’s clear language and Trisura’s documented payments.
For JAG Roofing, a small contractor based in Florida, the lawsuit poses significant financial risks. A post on X noted, “$174K is a drop in the bucket for a big insurer like Trisura, but for a small roofing company, it could be crippling.”. If JAG fails to defend the case or settle, it could face judgments that threaten its operations, while Jagroo’s personal liability as an indemnitor adds further pressure.
Response and Next Steps
As of September 6, 2025, neither JAG Roofing nor Jagroo has filed a response to the lawsuit, and no public statements from the defendants were available. Trisura’s legal team is likely to argue that the indemnity agreement’s terms are airtight, supported by its payment records. JAG may counter that the claims were unjustified, the additional work was not properly authorized, or that Trisura failed to mitigate losses. The case, assigned to Judge Aileen M. Cannon, is in its early stages, with a discovery schedule expected by late October 2025.
Broader Implications
The lawsuit sheds light on the vulnerabilities of small contractors in the surety bond system, where failure to meet obligations can trigger significant financial consequences. It also underscores the importance of clear indemnity agreements, as Trisura’s ability to recover hinges on the contract’s enforceability. For the construction industry, the case serves as a cautionary tale about the risks of underestimating bond obligations, particularly amid rising costs and project complexities.
Legal experts anticipate that the outcome could influence how sureties pursue claims against small contractors. “This is a textbook case of a surety enforcing its rights under an indemnity agreement,” said Sarah Thompson, a construction law attorney in Miami. “But it also shows how quickly disputes can escalate when contractors don’t have the cash flow to cover claims.” The case may prompt other subcontractors to review their bond agreements and ensure robust documentation to avoid similar litigation.
Looking Ahead
As the litigation unfolds, it will test the strength of Trisura’s indemnity agreement and JAG Roofing’s ability to defend its position. The case could set precedents for how surety claims are handled in federal courts, particularly in Florida’s construction-heavy market. For now, Trisura’s pursuit of over $174,000—and potentially much more—highlights the critical role of surety bonds in protecting insurers and the financial stakes for contractors who fail to meet their obligations.
Sources: Insurance Business America, Trisura.com, Construction Dive, posts on X