DX
Download Download Now
Metroplex

Collin County Judgment Hits Rubinsky Roofing With $1.52 Million Penalty

Dallas Express | Oct 9, 2026
Unfinished roofing job | Image by Canva

Rubinsky Roofing LLC and owner Gilad Rubinsky must fund $500,626.64 in consumer restitution under a North Texas court judgment that also imposes $1.52 million in civil penalties.

Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton announced the judgment October 8, following his office’s May lawsuit against the Dallas-Fort Worth-area roofing business.

The 429th District Court in Collin County entered a default judgment after both defendants failed to answer the lawsuit. The order, which the court signed on October 5, found 27 violations of the Texas Deceptive Trade Practices Act, including five involving consumers 65 or older.

The ruling moves the case from allegations to court-ordered relief. The state previously sought restitution, civil penalties, and an injunction, as The Dallas Express reported in May.

Customers accused the company of collecting money, including insurance proceeds, and then repeatedly postponing or abandoning roofing projects, the attorney general’s office said in its May 19 announcement. One customer allegedly paid more than $24,000 for a replacement roof that the company never installed.

“This legal victory will help repay victims of Rubinsky Roofing’s lies and predatory sales tactics,” Paxton said in the October 8 release.

The judgment requires the defendants to deposit the restitution money into a separate account within 30 days of its entry. They remain responsible for documented consumer losses even if restitution exceeds that amount.

The defendants must provide the court and attorney general’s office with a customer list by the 35th day after entry. The Consumer Protection Division must notify potentially affected consumers within 15 days after receiving it.

Consumers seeking repayment must submit documentation establishing their payment and loss within 90 days after the notice goes out.

The permanent injunction prohibits deceptive roofing practices, including false claims about needed repairs and accepting payment without the ability or intent to perform promised work. The order also requires future Texas customer contracts to specify project start and completion dates.

Previous Article
Incoming DART CEO Faces Scrutiny In Florida Spending Investigation Incoming DART CEO Faces Scrutiny In Florida Spending Investigation