RulesofCivilProcedure.com Civil Procedure · Every State

§ 145.004.Presumption of No Negligence for Persons Utilizing a Residential Delivery Company or in-Home Service Company

Title 6. Miscellaneous Provisions · Chapter 145. Liability for Negligent Hiring by in-Home Service Companies and Residential Delivery Companies · Last amended 2003 · Last verified August 29, 2026

In one sentenceSection 145.004 extends a presumption of no negligence to the customer who hired the company, either through the company’s compliance or by requesting a check in writing.

Full Text of § 145.004

Text size

A person who contracts with a residential delivery company to deliver an item or who contracts with an in-home service company to place, assemble, repair, or install an item referred to in Section 145.001(1), is rebuttably presumed to have not acted negligently in doing so if:
(1)the residential delivery company or in-home service company is in compliance with Section 145.003(b); or
(2)the person who contracts with the residential delivery company or in-home service company requests that the company obtain a criminal history background check described by Section 145.002 on any employee of the company being sent to deliver, place, assemble, repair, or install an item and the person's request is in writing and is delivered to the company prior to the company's employee being sent. A copy of any such request shall be maintained for at least two years.
End

Plain-English Summary

The provision protecting the person who engaged the company rather than the company itself.

A person who contracts with a residential delivery company to deliver an item, or with an in-home service company to place, assemble, repair or install one, is rebuttably presumed to have not acted negligently in doing so if either condition is met.

(1) The company is in compliance with the presumption provision — so the customer inherits the benefit of the company’s own background checking.

(2) The customer requested a check in writing, delivered to the company before the employee was sent, and keeps a copy for at least two years.

The second route is the important one, because it does not depend on the company. A customer who asked in writing is protected whether or not the company ran the check at all — the request is what earns the presumption.

The timing and record-keeping are conditions, not formalities. A request made after the employee was sent does not qualify, and a customer who cannot produce the copy has nothing to rely on.

Who needs this protection is worth naming. A landlord arranging repairs in a tenant’s home, a property manager, a retailer arranging installation, an employer arranging service at an employee’s residence — each has engaged someone else’s employee to enter a home they do not occupy.

The presumption is rebuttable, like the company’s, so it shifts the burden without deciding the case.

Frequently Asked Questions

Am I protected if I hire a service company that sends someone into a home?

You are rebuttably presumed not to have acted negligently if the company complied with Section 145.003(b), or if you requested a check in writing before the employee was sent.

What if the company never ran the check?

The written-request route still protects you, provided the request was delivered before the employee was sent and you kept a copy for two years.

Who is this for?

Landlords, property managers, retailers arranging installation, and anyone else engaging a company to send an employee into a residence.

Amendment History

  • Added by Acts 2003, 78th Leg., ch. 228, Sec. 1, eff. Sept. 1, 2003.
Source & verification. Section text is reproduced verbatim from Texas Legislature Online (statutes.capitol.texas.gov). Enacted by the Texas Legislature. Current through May 14, 2026. Last verified August 29, 2026. · Official source