The general contractor was offended. Then we found the armed robber.

This was a major residential project for an affluent client. Beautiful home, serious money, and a long list of people who would be on the property before the family ever moved in: contractors, subcontractors, vendors, delivery drivers, painters, installers, landscapers, supervisors, security technicians, and everyone else who somehow becomes part of the project.

Most people look at that and see construction. We look at it as access.

Anyone working inside a home learns things the family never intended to share. Floor plans. Bedroom locations. Alarm panels. Camera placement. Gates. Routines. Who is home. Who is not. Who pays attention. Who doesn’t.

Our client, needing to know who he was really dealing with, wanted the people on the project professionally vetted. The general contractor wasn’t happy about it, and I could understand why. He had chosen his people, vouched for them, and probably felt that scrutinizing them meant questioning his judgment.

But then we found that one of the people with a supervisory role had recently been released from prison after serving time for armed robbery. At a residence. That certainly changed the conversation.

The point isn’t that construction workers or tradespeople should be viewed with suspicion, but rather significant access deserves significant diligence.

Removing him was inconvenient. It caused delay, cost, friction, and some very awkward conversations. But compared to giving a convicted armed robber intimate knowledge of the home and the family’s routines, it was cheap.

Risk doesn’t always kick the door in.
Sometimes it walks in wearing work boots.