Without seeing the entire contract it's unclear as to what insurance it is refering to. Is it your homeowner's insurance, builder's risk, etc? From the wording it sounds like the roofer is asking you to allow him to act as your agent in submitting and dealing with an insurance claim if there is a loss. Examples of losses would be damage to your roof rafters during installation, water damage to your house due to a leak in the new roof, etc. I think this provision is overreaching on the roofer's part. If it's your insurance policy (you are paying for it) then you should retain the sole right to make a claim on it. If part of the loss is his, you can always decide later to allow him to jointly submit the claim. Does this help?

Sounds more like a clause to get the roofer listed on the insurance check (AKA draft) to make sure he gets paid.
If this is not an insurqance repair it is probably not operative.

Thanks for the insight. Now that you mention it, this roofer does do a lot of insurance claims. Maybe the insurance companies require that wording to simplify the claims process.

Sometimes on contracts like that I draw a line through the parts I don't like and initial and date it, prior to signing and returning it. Sometimes the other party doesn't notice, and sometimes they don't object, but sometimes they do both and we have to start over or quit.

Anybody have an opinion on whether this is legally effective in removing those specific provisions from the contractual agreement? I've never actually tested it.

rbanks: What you are actually doing by lining through language is rejecting their contract offer and making a counter offer. If they then notice and accept the changes (by initialling them next to your initials) you have a binding contract incorporating the changes. If you have not brought the changes to their attention and they sign without noticing them (as evidenced by their initals), there is no written contract in effect! If the work goes forward, it is done under an oral contract and if there is a dispute a court will use the terms of the written contract as evidence of the party's intentions. You can bet that the court will favor the other party where it can reasonably do so in light of your trying to "sneak" the changes by them!