In early 2017, the American Institute of Architects (“AIA”) introduced its 2017 updates to its form construction contract documents, including a new exhibit that addresses insurance requirements between the owner and contractor. As AIA forms are among the most popular and commonly used form documents in the construction industry,1 the forms are usually considered construction industry standards. Any company involved in construction as a project owner, architect, contractor or subcontractor should familiarize itself with the new AIA insurance terms and carefully consider the insurance coverage for any project it will undertake.2
It has been AIA’s practice to revise its family of contract documents every 10 years, with the last revision in 2007. While the 2017 changes go beyond insurance, possibly the most noteworthy change in 2017 is the launch of a separate exhibit for insurance. Entitled AIA Document A101™ - 2017 Exhibit A – Insurance and Bonds, this document is intended to be used in conjunction with AIA Document A201™ 2017 General Conditions of Construction – Article 11.3 The new exhibit does not replace Article 11; rather, the exhibit is intended to expand upon the insurance provisions of Article 11.
While the changes to the owner’s responsibility for builder’s risk insurance have not changed significantly, a thorough review by the owner (including owner’s legal counsel) of this section in the new exhibit is still important. For instance, builder’s risk insurance must be in effect through the expiration of the period of correction of the work (in lieu of the final payment or no insurable interest of anyone other than the owner – whichever was later). The period of correction is to be set forth in Section 12.2.2 of the General Conditions.
In addition, the AIA prohibits certain exclusions (instead of enumerating every cause of loss) – coverage is to be purchased for direct physical loss or damage, not excluding the risks of fire, explosion, theft, vandalism, malicious mischief, collapse, earthquake, flood or windstorm.
Specifically required is coverage for ensuing loss or resulting damage from error, omission or deficiency in construction means, methods, design, specifications, workmanship or materials. As some insurers apply a very broad interpretation of faulty workmanship exclusions (and very narrowly construe what constitutes ensuing loss or resulting damage), this area of coverage is likely to be a point of contention.
Finally, the exhibit includes a menu, check-the-box approach to certain optional coverages – such as Loss of Use, Business Interruption, Delay in Completion, Ordinance or Law, Expediting Expenses, Extra Expense, Civil Authority, Ingress/Egress, Soft Costs and Cyber Security Insurance.
Arguably, the most prominent changes in the new exhibit are found in the contractor’s liability insurance section. This includes the requirement that the coverage is to be in effect until the expiration of the period of correction or later if a different duration is stated in the documents. The contractor is also required to disclose to the owner any deductible or self-insured retentions applicable.
The contractor is required (to the extent permitted by law) to include as an additional insured the owner, the architect and the architect’s consultants for claims “caused in whole or in part by the Contractor’s negligent acts or omissions during the Contractor’s operations.”4 The owner is also to be an additional insured for claims “caused in whole or in part by the Contractor’s negligent acts or omissions for which loss occurs during completed operations.”5 Coverage for the additional insured is to be on a primary and non-contributory basis to any owner and, if commercially available, is to be no less than ISO CG 20 10 (07 04), CG 20 37 (07 04) and CG 20 32 (07 04) for the Architect and its consultants. In the context of the exhibit, whether the ISO April, 2013 edition additional insured endorsements provide less coverage than the ISO July, 2004 edition additional insured endorsements will be difficult to determine, as the scope of additional insured coverage depends on the fact and circumstances of a particular claim.
The exhibit requires commercial general liability insurance (limits are inserted in the document) for most claims generally covered6 by a standard ISO Commercial General Liability policy. Instead of listing each of the type of coverage required in the CGL policy, AIA lists 11 exclusions or restrictions that are prohibited and are not to be included on the contractor’s CGL policy.
The following are summaries of each prohibition. The CGL cannot exclude:
As some of the above exclusions are widely used in the marketplace (particularly the non-admitted/surplus lines marketplace), a contractor may not be in compliance with the 2017 CGL insurance requirements.
The umbrella is to be no less broad than the underlying policies, which means that all of the above prohibited exclusions cannot be used in an umbrella policy. In addition, the exhibit requires that the umbrella shall not require exhaustion of the underlying insurance only through actual payments by the underlying insurer.
While a complete understanding of the automobile, workers’ compensation and employers’ liability insurance requirements is always necessary, the requirements are straightforward. The exhibit also contains a list of other possible contractor insurance requirements to be considered, including insurance for Jones Act, USL&H Act, professional liability, pollution liability, maritime liability, aircraft (manned and unmanned), Railroad Protective, Asbestos Abatement, coverage for storage and transportation of property to the construction site and property at the construction site owned by the contractor, such as equipment.
As noted on the sample AIA Document 101A™ - 2017 Exhibit A – Insurance and Bonds, the documents have important legal consequences and consultation by the owner or contractor with an attorney is encouraged. While the document discussed above is between the owner and the contractor, the expectation is that some, if not all, of the requirements imposed on the contractor will also be imposed on subcontractors of various tiers. Awareness of the 2017 AIA changes to insurance requirements is desirable for those who specialize in handling insurance and risk matters of the construction industry.
1 Daniel M. Murdock, “Highlights of the 2017 Revisions to the AIA A201,” Build Smart, (May 5, 2017),© 2017 Bradley Arant Boult Cummings LLP.
2 Kenneth Gorenberg, “Hot Topic: New AIA Terms for Insurance Construction Contracts,” (July 25, 2017), © 2017 Barnes & Thornburg LLP.
3 Sample - AIA Document A101™ -2017 Exhibit A Insurance and Bonds, pg. 1
4 Sample - AIA Document A101™ -2017 Exhibit A Insurance and Bonds, §A.3.1.3 pg. 4
5 Sample - AIA Document A101™ -2017 Exhibit A Insurance and Bonds, §A.3.1.3 pg. 4
6 As the standard ISO CGL policy contains numerous exclusions, no ISO CGL policy provides full coverage for the contractor’s indemnity obligations under the contract documents.
ABOUT THE AUTHOR
Legal Disclaimer. Views expressed here do not constitute legal advice. The information contained herein is for general guidance of matter only and not for the purpose of providing legal advice. Discussion of insurance policy language is descriptive only. Every policy has different policy language. Coverage afforded under any insurance policy issued is subject to individual policy terms and conditions. Please refer to your policy for the actual language.
(c) 2017 AmWINS Group, Inc.
Construction contract negotiations, which determine the kind and amount of insurance required for a construction project, can be time-consuming, complicated and frustrating. Project owners require contractors on a project to name the project owner as an additional insured on the contractor’s casualty insurance program. It's important that both project owners and contractors understand the coverage provided by these additional insured endorsements. This article discusses four common ISO additional insured endorsements related to commercial general liability policies purchased by contractors, including their limitations, conditions and exclusions.
A common complication during the claim process is the late reporting of claims. In some cases, a late claim can put the agent or broker's own E&O policy in jeopardy. There are many reasons for missing a reporting deadline; however, in most cases, they will not matter to the insurer or the courts. This article discusses typical claim reporting requirements, common causes of late reporting, and recommendations to mitigate the risk of late notice claim denials.
The theories of recovery, as well as the ensuing loss provisions, contained in property insurance policies are often complex and, at times, seemingly in conflict. Although a policy may not directly address these theories, their application by courts plays a significant role in the coverage determination process after the claim. It is essential that brokers understand the primary theories of recovery – Efficient Proximate Cause, the Concurrent Causation Doctrine, and the Anti-Concurrent Causation Doctrine – in order to navigate the challenging post-claim process and effectively serve their clients.
The Thomas Fire, the largest fire in California's history, subsequently led to a mudslide on January 9, 2018, which caused a massive amount of damage in Santa Barbara and Ventura counties. The California Insurance Commissioner has issued a formal notice reminding carriers to pay for damage, citing the "efficient proximate cause doctrine." This article takes a closer look at the doctrine and how it has been challenged in court over the years.
Ordinance or Law insurance coverage provides limited protection for costs associated with repairing, rebuilding, or constructing a structure when physical damage to the structure by a covered cause of loss triggers an ordinance or law. Compliance with ordinances and laws after a loss can add 50% or more to the cost of a claim. This article will help you educate your insureds on exclusions and limitations and help them take a proactive approach to their insurance program.
In 2017, the issue of sexual harassment – especially in the workplace – gained greater awareness as accusations of harassment by high-profile individuals were constantly in the news. In many cases, sexual harassment lawsuits seriously impacted businesses and their respective insurers. Employment Practices Liability Insurance not only provides protection against employee lawsuits, but can also help your clients mitigate their sexual harassment risks.