Icon Roofing and Construction LLC v. Allen G. Carter, Jr.
What's This Case About?
Let’s get one thing straight: you don’t sue someone for $11,331.06 unless feelings are deeply hurt—and by feelings, we mean bank accounts. In what can only be described as a modern-day Oklahoma Roofing Tragedy, a contractor is now dragging a homeowner through the District Court of Comanche County because, despite getting a brand-new roof, skylights, windows, and possibly a renewed sense of shelter-in-place confidence, the homeowner apparently decided that “full payment” was more of a suggestion than a requirement. Icon Roofing and Construction LLC didn’t just show up with shingles and ambition—they showed up with a spreadsheet, a signed contract, and the cold, hard fury of a business that got stiffed. And now, they want every penny, plus interest, attorney fees, and the sweet, sweet vindication of a judge saying, “Yes, sir, you do owe them.”
So who are these people? On one side, we’ve got Icon Roofing and Construction LLC, a full-service Oklahoma-based contractor with a website, a fleet (probably), and a team of lawyers from the firm BALL | MORSE | LOWE PLLC—yes, that’s really the name, and no, we don’t know if they play drums in a garage band on weekends. They’re the kind of company that sends invoices with subtotals, discounts, and line items for windows like they’re selling software, not storm damage repairs. On the other side is Allen G. Carter, Jr., a resident of Lawton, Oklahoma, who goes by “MSG Allen Carter” on the contract—possibly a military title, possibly a typo, possibly a cry for respect. He owns a house at 340 SW Boatsman Ave, which, as of July 2023, had a roof in need of serious intervention. How serious? So serious that his insurance company agreed to cover most of the cost to replace it, leaving Mr. Carter on the hook only for his deductible and any upgrades. A perfect setup, really—insurance pays the lion’s share, contractor does the work, homeowner gets a new roof without draining their savings. Everyone wins. Except, of course, when someone doesn’t pay. Then it’s war.
Here’s how it all went down. On July 29, 2023, Mr. Carter signed a Residential Roofing Contract with Icon. The scope? A full roof replacement, skylight replacement, window repairs, soffit, siding, and anything else the insurance company said “yes” to. The total price tag? $37,366.85—though part of that was contingent on insurance supplements, which, in insurance-speak, means “we’ll see what the adjuster coughs up.” The contract was clear: the only money Mr. Carter had to pay out of pocket was his $4,000 deductible and any upgrades. The rest? Covered by insurance. Icon even laid out the payment plan: first chunk when the actual cash value (ACV) check hit, second when recoverable depreciation (REC) came through, and so on. It was like a roofing installment plan, but instead of “buy now, pay later,” it was “insurance pays, we build, you don’t ghost us.”
Work began around August 26, 2023. Icon did their thing—delivered materials, swung hammers, replaced skylights (which, let’s be honest, is the VIP section of any roof job). By September 22, 2023, they’d completed the work in what they describe as a “good and workmanlike manner,” which is legalese for “we didn’t cut corners, we didn’t use duct tape, and the roof doesn’t leak when it rains.” That same day, they sent Mr. Carter an invoice—Invoice 741-1—for the remaining balance: $11,331.06. Now, let’s break that down. Icon says they received two payments: $17,448.65 on August 30, 2023, and—wait for it—$8,587.14 on February 26, 2024 (the filing says 2025, but that’s almost certainly a typo). Add those up, and you get $26,035.79. Subtract that from the total contract price of $37,366.85, and yep—$11,331.06 still owed. Icon says they’ve made “multiple demands” for payment. Mr. Carter, according to the filing, has made zero additional payments and hasn’t even attempted to explain himself. No calls. No emails. No “my dog ate the check.” Just silence. Radio silence. The kind of silence that makes a contractor start Googling “how to sue a homeowner in Oklahoma.”
So why are they in court? Two reasons, both wrapped in legal packaging but simple enough for the rest of us to understand. First: Breach of Contract. That’s a fancy way of saying, “You signed a deal, we held up our end, and you didn’t pay. That’s not how this works.” Icon says they did everything they promised—replaced the roof, fixed the windows, followed the insurance scope—and Mr. Carter agreed to pay. He didn’t. That’s a breach. Second: Unjust Enrichment. Even if the contract somehow fell apart (it didn’t), the argument goes, Mr. Carter still got a brand-new roof. He’s living under it. He’s benefiting from it. It’s keeping him dry during Oklahoma thunderstorms. It would be unjust, the filing argues, for him to enjoy all that value without paying for it. You can’t eat the cake and keep the money, Mr. Carter. Not in civil court, anyway.
Now, what does Icon want? $11,331.06 in actual damages—plus interest, attorney fees, and court costs. Is that a lot? In roofing terms? Not really. A full roof replacement in Oklahoma can easily run $20K–$40K, depending on size, materials, and whether you want your skylight to double as a stargazing portal. $11K is less than a third of the total job. But to a small contractor? That’s payroll. That’s materials. That’s the difference between turning a profit and eating ramen for a month. And let’s not forget—the attorney team at BALL | MORSE | LOWE isn’t working for free. They’ve already filed a lien claim, which means if Mr. Carter sells the house, Icon gets paid first. This isn’t just about the money. It’s about principle. It’s about sending a message: We showed up. We worked. You don’t get to vanish.
Our take? The most absurd part isn’t the amount. It’s the audacity. Mr. Carter got a full roof overhaul—windows, skylights, siding—all covered mostly by insurance, and he still couldn’t cough up the remaining balance? Did he spend it on a boat? A timeshare? A lifetime supply of Oklahoma wind chimes? We don’t know. But here’s what we do know: if you sign a contract, you honor it. If you benefit from $37,000 worth of construction work, you don’t play dumb when the bill comes. Icon didn’t overcharge. They didn’t half-ass the job. They sent invoices, they waited, they followed up. And now they’re in court, not because they’re greedy, but because they’re tired of being treated like a suggestion.
We’re rooting for the roofers. Not because they’re flawless, but because they did what they promised. And in a world where people ghost contractors like bad dates, sometimes justice is just a judge saying, “Pay the man.” Or, in this case, pay the LLC.
Case Overview
-
Icon Roofing and Construction LLC
business
Rep: Jordan M. LePage, Patrick H. Lane, Jordan M. LePage, Shayla B. Powers, Ariel Y. Mathis
- Allen G. Carter, Jr. individual
| # | Cause of Action | Description |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | Breach of Contract | Failure to pay for goods and services provided |
| 2 | Unjust Enrichment | Retention of benefits received from goods and services |