Re: Commercial building owner with renovation
Posted: Tue Jun 02, 2009 2:41 pm
It will need to stay as-is since I'm sure it's already haunted anyway.....
Insurance Forums for the Property Casualty Insurance Industry
https://www.insurancejournal.com/forums/
https://www.insurancejournal.com/forums/viewtopic.php?f=1&t=2617
Rob wrote:Hi! Thanks for your input. Let me clarify: He IS the building owner. He is not a contractor. He wants to protect himself should one of the contractors sue him should they get hurt while on his property.LadyBroker wrote:Hi Rob,
while I love your posts, I find too often we get way out into the realm of what if...and lose track of the actual issue.
If I could summarize, you have a client risk that May or May Not be a GC, for a renovation of a small business from something into a Yogurt shop. My guess is going to be that if tyour client reads the contract with the Building Owners, he will find that the renovations have to be done by a licensed GC, which would clear up the first point. If your client isn't a licensed GC, then he has to hire one. That would then push the Construction liability onto the GC. Your client would be named as an AI on their policy, as well as would be the building owner. Then your client would get an OCP to cover the premises liability during the build. If your client is in fact a GC, then he would have to provide the insurance for the build itself, and also secure an OCP for his exposures as the tenant of the property in question.
The GC would be responsible for ensuring that all his subs, as well as his employees, are properly insured, and that would mean work comp if warranted. If the sub or the GC does not have work comp, then that can be it's own issue. If they don't have it because they have no employees, that's one thing. If they don't have work comp because they chose not to, then perhaps let's not hire them.
Does this help at all? I am just envisioning your client getting OCP quotes from other retailer with ease while we debate these really fine points, and i would like to see you write this account!
He was saying he might hire all the subs himself to save some money or hire a GC and asked for my advice on that as well. He has other lines with me and he, as far as I know, hasn't talked to any other brokers and is relying on me to come up with a solution.
Also if you check out my post about a commercial building with paranormal activity it is related to this. His yogurt shop might be turning into something else that I "fear" may not be insurable.
LadyBroker wrote:Rob wrote:Hi! Thanks for your input. Let me clarify: He IS the building owner. He is not a contractor. He wants to protect himself should one of the contractors sue him should they get hurt while on his property.LadyBroker wrote:Hi Rob,
while I love your posts, I find too often we get way out into the realm of what if...and lose track of the actual issue.
If I could summarize, you have a client risk that May or May Not be a GC, for a renovation of a small business from something into a Yogurt shop. My guess is going to be that if tyour client reads the contract with the Building Owners, he will find that the renovations have to be done by a licensed GC, which would clear up the first point. If your client isn't a licensed GC, then he has to hire one. That would then push the Construction liability onto the GC. Your client would be named as an AI on their policy, as well as would be the building owner. Then your client would get an OCP to cover the premises liability during the build. If your client is in fact a GC, then he would have to provide the insurance for the build itself, and also secure an OCP for his exposures as the tenant of the property in question.
The GC would be responsible for ensuring that all his subs, as well as his employees, are properly insured, and that would mean work comp if warranted. If the sub or the GC does not have work comp, then that can be it's own issue. If they don't have it because they have no employees, that's one thing. If they don't have work comp because they chose not to, then perhaps let's not hire them.
Does this help at all? I am just envisioning your client getting OCP quotes from other retailer with ease while we debate these really fine points, and i would like to see you write this account!
He was saying he might hire all the subs himself to save some money or hire a GC and asked for my advice on that as well. He has other lines with me and he, as far as I know, hasn't talked to any other brokers and is relying on me to come up with a solution.
Also if you check out my post about a commercial building with paranormal activity it is related to this. His yogurt shop might be turning into something else that I "fear" may not be insurable.
Again, we are getting lost on the May or May Nots of this Risk.
If your client is NOT a GC, then again, check the contract. He doesn't want to, nor should he even consider, acting as the GC. Hire a GC, buy an OCP. If the GC trips on the property, he either has work comp or is self insured if he has no work comp.
As far as the paranormal exposures, why is that even in this post? We're discussing the CGL versus an OCP deal, whether you need one or both. I can tell you I write the CGL on several paranormal risks, including a tour of a ship that is supposedly haunted. It's not a tough write, so when you get to that point, call me!