Posted: Sep 17, 2025 / 12:47 PM EDT
Updated: Sep 17, 2025 / 08:16 PM EDT
TAMPA, Fla. (WFLA) — A Jacksonville-based roofing company at the center of a Better Call Behnken investigation has been sued by the Florida Attorney General’s Office over a “scheme” that involves “frivolous” liens and lawsuits it filed against its customers in multiple Tampa Bay counties.
The lawsuit seeks restitution and to terminate “illegal construction liens” and to permanently prohibit the company from doing any of the things it takes to sell and install roofs in the state of Florida.
The AG has been investigating Florida Roof Specialists since at least September 2024 and has 137 consumer complaints. The lawsuit also named the company’s president, Jeremy S. Rogero, as a defendant.
Calls to the Florida Roof Specialists and its attorney, seeking comment for this story, have not been returned.
A growing number of customers have called Better Call Behnken for help after Florida Roof Specialists filed liens against their homes or sued them for foreclosure, attempting to collect money the company claimed the homeowners’ insurance companies did not pay them for roofs that were already completed. Most homeowners have settled cases to avoid foreclosure.
Customers said they were misled and were charged questionable fees after their insurance companies paid the roofing company. In some cases, customers were charged nearly the same amount their insurance companies already paid.
The lawsuit claims the “scheme” was in violation of Florida’s Deceptive and Unfair Trade Practices Act and seeks “more than $50,000” in damages and attorney’s fees.
According to the lawsuit, sales representatives targeted specific neighborhoods for door-to-door solicitation, often after a storm.
Sales representatives “falsely told many consumers that if they retain defendant’s services, the roofing company would personally handle their roofing claims with their respective insurance companies and that their only out of pocket cost would be their insurance deductible.”
“Consumers were specifically misled to believe that they would not be responsible for paying defendants any amounts in excess of their insurance deductible for the repair or replacement of their roofs,” the lawsuit stated.
The lawsuit claimed that weeks after the roofs were installed, customers were presented with a bill for additional charges.
It also claimed liens filed against homeowners are “baseless” and do not contain a price for roofing services.
Some customers never received an estimate, the lawsuit said, and one customer advised that the defendant sales representative told him the company does not provide estimates, “because the customer doesn’t understand them and it confuses them.”
According to the lawsuit, the defendants pattern of inducing consumers to enter into invalid and enforceable assignment of benefit agreements, in order to retain their roofing services, is deceptive, unfair, and unconscionable.”