My client has gotten involved with an OCIP and the OCIP wants my client to name their architect as additional insured. Hm....yes where is that famous OCIP saying that we deserve a credit because your CGL will not need to respond?
Anyhow my client has a blanket AI endorsement and I am not keen on putting the architect down as an AI on the COI. According to IRMI if there is some claim by the architect the coverage under the policy would be difficult to establish. Then the architects attorney would come sniffing my way!
What say ye?????
International Risk Management - Jack Gibson
Assume a blanket additional insured endorsement provides AI status to entities or individuals other than those with whom a direct contract exists, and an owner requires a contractor to name an owner-hired architect or engineer as an additional insured. Will the contractor's CGL policy insure the architect or engineer for its professional liability if there is not a professional liability exclusion on the contractor's policy?
The standard additional insured endorsement intended for the purpose of adding architects or engineers as additional insureds—CG 20 32, Engineers, Architects or Surveyors Not Engaged by You—does contain its own design professional liability exclusion. Thus, if that endorsement were used, the named insured contractor would not be providing coverage for that exposure even if the policy itself contained no such exclusion. If there were no such exclusion in either the CGL policy or in the AI endorsement (a nonstandard endorsement without an A/E professional exclusion, for example), then the additional insured would indeed receive some coverage for the professional liability exposure. That coverage would, however, be subject to the CGL terms and conditions that make professional liability coverage under the policy difficult to establish (such as the requirement of an "occurrence").
Your response to industry hot topics.
1 post • Page 1 of 1