Tag Archives: risk avoidance

Insurance Physical: worth the check up!

Posted on by
check up

An insurance “check up” can keep your business fit & healthy

Recently I was contacted by a blog reader– let’s call him Mark–  who suggested that I write a post on reviewing insurance policies. “Mark” shared a personal story in which, even though he had incorporated his business, he was sued personally under a “piercing the corporate veil” theory.  Essentially, the plaintiff was trying to get at his personal assets.  After reporting the claim to his insurance agent, he discovered he may not have had sufficient insurance coverage.  He did not have a D&O policy, which can provide protection for a corporation’s directors and officers.

Contrary to insurance being just another item to scratch off your list, take some time to review your insurance policies and see if you have the coverage you think you have, and if there are other coverages which you might need but have not yet obtained.  In addition to D&O policies, there are E&O (errors & omissions) policies for design professionals, CGL (commercial general liability) policies, builders’ risk policies, workers’ compensation policies, and umbrella policies, to name a few.  The language and endorsements in your particular policy are important, and it is worth taking time (perhaps annually) for an overall insurance-health checkup.

You should make sure that your insurance agent knows your business and the possible risks.  An insurance agent that specializes in your type of business is your best bet to ensure that you obtain and maintain full coverage.  In addition, it is a good idea to have your policies reviewed by your construction attorney, so you can learn exactly what is—and what is not—covered.

Next week (on Wednesday), we will have a guest post on how indemnity language in your contracts can limit (or eliminate) your insurance coverage.  Stay tuned.

In the meantime, questions or comments about insurance for construction and design professionals?  Join the conversation in the comment section, below. 

Photo Courtesy of U.S. Army. 

Contractor working in neighboring state? Read these blogs! (Tues Tip)

Posted on by

glassesWant more construction law?  Want to read about case and statutory developments in other southeastern states?

Check out the Blogroll  for blogs written specifically by construction attorneys practicing in Virginia (Chris Hill) and Tennessee (Matt DeVries).

While you’re there, check out all of the other fine bloggers too.  There is a lot of good information being volunteered by folks across the nation to help you as you encounter legal issues in your construction business.

Am I missing somebody that I should include on the blogroll?  If so, let me know!

———————-

Photo “366 * 139 * Taking off my glasses” by Pragmagraphr via Flickr/Creative Commons License.

Should I stay or should I go now? (Court vs. Arbitration)- Updated

Posted on by

gavelShould I stay or should I go now?
If I go there will be trouble
And if I stay it will be double
So come on and let me know!

Are you wondering whether Court or Arbitration should be made a standard part of your construction contracts?  With apologies in advance to The Clash, there is “trouble” to be found in either venue.

Some companies, and their lawyers, insist that American Aribtration Association (AAA) Arbitration is the only way to go.  Others prefer to take their chances in a local state court.  Who is right?  Neither, and both.  As with anything, there is a cost-benefit analysis that you should go through prior to making either a standard part of your construction contract.

Pluses and Minuses of Going to Court

If a dispute is brought in court, there is a standard, fully vetted set of statutes, case law, court rules, and procedures already in place.  A judge, unlike the typical arbitration panel, is generally more willing to consider defenses based on statue, such as the statute of limitations or the statute of repose.  Summary Judgment, in which a judge will (on occasion) grant a judgment for or against  a party without the necessity of the full blown jury trial, is possible.  Such dispositive, procedural rulings are extremely unlikely to be granted by an arbitration panel.

On the other hand, a court trial means a jury verdict.  Unless the parties agree to waive their right to a jury trial, your case will be decided by true laymen who may have never set foot on a construction site before, and who will not understand the RFI, change order, and pay app process.  Terms like “substantial completion,” “critical path,” and “standard of care” will be foreign to them.

I’ve seen some juries get it right, and I’ve seen some get it wrong.  Most jurors take their responsibilities extremely seriously and will try to apply the law as the judge instructs them.  But at the end of the day, you have people unfamiliar with industry standards determining your case.

Pluses and Minuses of Arbitration

Many standard construction contracts contain arbitration provisions, generally AAA Arbitration.  The typical arbitration includes a three member panel of experts (construction professionals, designers, construction attorneys) who hear the evidence and make a ruling.  That ruling has the full force of law.The reasoning behind such arbitration clauses is that industry professionals better understand the construction process, standards of care, and interrelationships on a complex construction project.  Theoretically, therefore, they are better able to determine the true root cause of damages or delay.

Arbitration is sometimes considered to be less expensive and less time consuming than a court trial.  The arbitration panel generally sets fairly loose procedural and evidentiary boundaries, and tends to allow into evidence things that might not meet the strict Rules of Evidence that a court would apply.  Some of these generalities, however, have not proven to be true in practice.  AAA Arbitration can be costly– the filing of a claim alone is costlier than typical court fees.  Case managers add a layer of bureaucracy to the process.   Arbitration panels also generally are more prone to “split the baby” in a close case.

Which is Better?

The answer to that question is a clear and concise, “it depends.”  It depends on the facts of your particular case, the jurisdiction you are in, the type of panel you may get, and numerous other things completely out of your control.  Consult with a lawyer in your jurisdiction to discuss the pros and cons of each, and which may be right for your particular situation.

Do you have experience with court or arbitration?  Personal preference?  I’d love to hear your thoughts on the subject in the comment section below.

UPDATE 10/13/2010:  The AAA responded to this article citing their internal studies showing arbitration panels do not often “split the baby”.  See more here. 

_______________

Photo “Courtroom One Gavel” by Joe Gratz via Flickr/Creative Commons license.

Review your Deed Before you Build (Tue Tip)

Posted on by

(Or, Reason # 529 why you need a lawyer)

A recent North Carolina case shows why you really need to consult with a lawyer before you build.  Deed of TrustIn the swanky Myers Park section of Charlotte, setback requirements were contained within property deeds, a hold over from the pre-zoning days of the early 20th century.   A $500,000 addition to a residence was built that violated the setback, and the Court of Appeals held that the neighbors were not enjoined from suing to force compliance even though they waited over two months (during which construction was substantially completed) to bring suit.

 The case is Irby v. Freese.  Of note, the homeowners built the addition without benefit of an attorney or architect, so the deed restriction was not noticed.

The Court of Appeals was only addressing the issue of undue delay in bringing the lawsuit, because a two month delay occurred during which significant sums were spent by the homeowners to dry in the building.  The Court held that, under the specific facts of the case, a two month delay was not fatal to the claim.  Stay tuned for further details, as the case is far from over.  It has been remanded to the trial court for a full trial.

And, be glad that this isn’t you.  This could prove to be a very costly mistake, in which the entire addition may have to be demolished because of the violation of the setback requirement contained in the property deed.

Read your deed.  Read your covenants. When in doubt, hire real estate counsel before you pick up the shovel.

————————————–

Photo “February 5, 2010- Paperwork” via Caitlin Childs via Flickr- Creative Commons license.

NC surety bonds- what they are; how they work (Guest Post)

Posted on by

checking the bondToday, another guest post– this time from Danielle Rodabaugh, a principal for Surety Bonds.com, an agency that issues surety bonds to individuals and businesses throughout the nation. She aims to clarify bonding rules & regulations, and has recently been focusing on construction/contract bonds. Danielle will be discussing bonding issues within the North Carolina construction industry.

————————————–

Reliable professionals working in the construction industry want to guarantee the quality of their work to their clients, and that’s where surety bonds come in. In construction, contract (or construction) bonds are a type of surety bond utilized to ensure that professionals follow regulations and make appropriate decisions while working on a project. Construction bonds typically protect the client and work similarly to insurance—although they offer a different kind of protection.

What’s a surety bond?
In the construction industry a surety bond is essentially a legal agreement between three parties to help ensure the fulfillment of a contract:

  1. Obligee–typically the developer or worker who receives the protection of the bond, guaranteeing that the contractor fully completes the project
  2. Principal–the contractor who gets the bond, guaranteeing that they will fulfill various aspects of the project as outlined in the contract
  3. Surety–the agency who issues the bond to the principal, thus backing the contractor’s work and acting as an intermediary between the contractor and obligee

There are three main types of construction bonds that are utilized in North Carolina:

  • bid bonds
  • performance bonds
  • payment bonds

Each of these bonds plays a different role in guaranteeing the work of a contractor throughout a project’s duration. North Carolina surety bond agencies have the ability to issue construction bonds to qualifying professionals who want to take advantage of their benefits. Unfortunately, many working in the construction industry are still unaware of the legal financial protection offered by construction bonds.

 

Bid Bond Issues in North Carolina
Bid bonds guarantee a developer that—if selected—a contractor will agree to work on a project for the amount proposed in the original bid. This guards against contractors who might try to increase their bid on a project after being contracted by the developer. With a bid bond in place, the developer may collect appropriate reparation if the contractor breaks the bond’s terms. If such a situation arises, the resulting compensation is typically calculated by how much more the developer has to pay to contract the next-lowest bidder for the project. If the contractor does not have the ability to adequately compensate the developer the surety becomes responsible for paying reparation up to the bond’s full value.

Although North Carolina state law does not require the use of bid bonds on either private or public construction projects, a developer may still choose to require them as an added form of protection. According to N.C. Gen. Stat. s. 143-129, which outlines the procedure for letting of public contracts, North Carolina contractors must provide an upfront deposit in the amount of 5% of the total bid when submitting their bid. The language explains that a contractor may choose to provide a bid bond in lieu of making the required cash deposit. Bid bonds can be especially helpful for new contractors who may not have the necessary cash on hand for the collateral, as the surety would financially back the contractor’s bid.

 

Performance Bond Issues in North Carolina
Contractors secure performance bonds to guarantee that they will perform all aspects of a project as outlined in the contract. Should the contractor fail to complete the project satisfactorily, the performance bond allows the developer to regain appropriate compensation. If the contractor cannot pay the reparation then the performance bond instructs the surety to step in. Depending on the situation, the surety might be responsible for paying retribution up to the bond’s full face value for any extra fees incurred as a result of the contractor’s incomplete work.

Performance bonds are not required for private projects in North Carolina, however some regulations mandate their use for certain public ones. For example, the use of performance bonds is required when any government entity enters into a construction contract in an amount more than $100,000. Furthermore, they are also required for any other public construction project that exceeds $15,000, no matter the developer or specific contract. Additionally, any developer has the right to require a selected contractor to get a performance bond prior to a project, which especially benefits the developers of private projects or smaller projects that cost less than $15,000. All state-mandated performance bonds must be issued for 100% of the project’s contracted cost.

 

Payment Bond Issues in North Carolina
Payment bonds are put in place to make sure that contractors will pay all labor and material costs as outlined in the contract. Because mechanic’s liens—which ensure payment of outstanding debts upon sale of a property—can only be used on private property projects, payment bonds are essential to making sure that all bills are paid in full. Subcontractors (or other workers) can make a claim on the bond if a contractor does not make the appropriate payments, allowing them to recover deserved compensation.

Simply put, payment bonds are required on all projects that mandate the use of performance bonds. North Carolina General Statute 44A-27 explains that any professional working on a bonded project who is not paid for his labor within 90 days has the ability to make a claim on the bond. Private projects in North Carolina do not require the use of payment bonds, although these individuals may elect to use them at their own discretion. This goes to show that although bonds are not always be required in North Carolina, they are most certainly enforced. Oftentimes this means that individuals working within North Carolina’s construction industry must take the initiative to utilize construction bonds.

——————————-

Danielle and I welcome your thoughts, comments, and questions about surety bonds in the comments section, below.

——————————-

Photo “Checking the bond” by Stephen via Picasa/Creative Commons License.