A union representing plumbers in New York is suing Philadelphia Indemnity Insurance Company for nearly $175,000. The lawsuit, filed on August 12, 2025, claims that the insurance company has not paid contributions owed for work done on a courthouse project in Nassau County.
The trustees for the benefit funds of Plumbers Local Union No. 200 allege that ARA Plumbing Corp., a subcontractor on the project, owes them at least $174,492.46. This amount is meant to cover various benefits, including welfare, pension, and training funds, which were supposed to be paid as part of a collective bargaining agreement. ARA Plumbing worked on the Nassau County Family and Matrimonial Court – Phase II Project from December 2022 until November 2024.
According to the union, ARA Plumbing became defunct and insolvent around December 1, 2024, and failed to pay the necessary contributions for its employees during that time. The lawsuit names Philadelphia Indemnity as the surety on a labor and material payment bond for the project. The union argues that under New York law, this bond was designed to ensure payment for labor and materials, including the union’s benefit funds.
Despite the union’s efforts to notify Philadelphia Indemnity about the unpaid amounts, they claim they have not received any payment. The trustees are now seeking a court judgment for the owed contributions, along with interest, attorney fees, and costs.
It’s important to note that these claims are still unproven in court, as the case is just beginning. Philadelphia Indemnity has not yet responded to the allegations. This situation raises significant questions about the responsibilities of surety companies when subcontractors fail to meet their financial obligations. The outcome of this case could influence how similar disputes are resolved in the future.
For those in the insurance and construction industries, this lawsuit highlights the risks involved in guaranteeing payments for large public projects. Observers will be watching closely to see how the court interprets the obligations of surety companies under New York law and whether Philadelphia Indemnity will ultimately be held responsible for the union’s claims.