As a property owner, contractor, or subcontractor, you insure your project with the expectation that when a problem arises, your claim will be covered. However, construction liability insurance and construction defect coverage claims are convoluted.
Difficulties commonly arise identifying whether an “occurrence” is covered under the applicable policy and/or whether an uninsured event still resulted in a covered loss.
Construction insurance coverage claims can also involve multiple layers of coverage overlap, resulting in disputes among general contractors, subcontractors, and their insurance carriers, which can delay claim resolution. Because obtaining coverage for construction defect claims can be critical for resolving your dispute favorably, it is important to engage legal counsel experienced with navigating construction insurance coverage.
The construction attorneys at Montgomery Purdue have the experience necessary to assist owner, contractor, and subcontractor clients in successfully obtaining coverage under their builder’s risk, commercial general liability (CGL), and excess insurance policies
- Obtained insurance defense for general contractor for claims alleging defective excavation and pool installation work
- Assisted owner in recovering water intrusion defect damages from the general contractor and subcontractors’ insurance carriers
- Secured over $2 million in insurance coverage on behalf of a general contractor under its commercial general liability policy and its subcontractors’ policies for alleged construction defects on a high-end residence
- Assisted owner of large apartment complex in recovering against project engineer’s insurance carrier for lost profits resulting from delay caused by defective electrical engineering
- Obtained insurance coverage under commercial pollution policy for claims against general contractor alleging defective work on high-end, custom home with unique environmental design factors
- Recovered construction defect damages for homeowner from contractor and its insurer
- Overcame argument by insurance carrier that general contractor failed to satisfy conditions precedent under commercial general liability policy (voiding coverage) and successfully encouraged carrier to settle water intrusion construction defect claim