Why doesn’t anyone address the unethical practice of many general contractors requiring additional insured endorsements that they have to know darn well are not available to small contractors? We have clients who perform work and are then unable to collect payment due to contracts that they are forced to sign to get the work. While I can understand the concerns of the general contractors, this practice seems tantamount to robbery.
Clark,
If you expect ethical conduct from a general contractor, you have never worked in the construction industry. It’s true that nobody issues CG2010 11 85 anymore. However, if your carrier will allow, any of the following should be acceptable:
CG2010 11 85
Or
CG0132 02 00
Or
CG2026 11 85 (maybe)
Or
CG2010 03 97 plus CG2037 10 01 (location and description of completed operations must state, “all work performed for the additional insured.”)
Or
CG2010 10 01 plus CG2037 10 01. (location and description of completed operations must state, “all work performed for the additional insured.”)
Construction Defect litigation is indeed, “tantamount to robbery.” Especially for lower tiered contractors whose scope of work may have nothing to do with the alleged defects. These contractors’ insurance adjusters typically make a “cost of defense” settlement with the general contractor just to avoid further costs and potentially higher damages payments. It’s a shake-down by the plaintiff’s bar as well as a cottage industry for “experts” who will argue drywall is the cause of a grading problem, just so long as their consultant fee check clears the bank. Disgusting.
OK one of my favorite topics! Think about the attorney who has recommended to their client (the General Contractor) that the language in the contract is acceptable to the project. Now you are a subcontractor who has always done work on a handshake and you think this one will be ok too. Well folks it’s time to wake up. This has become a big business in a mostly unregulated industry. IN Pennsylvania there is no registration of contractors or licensing on a state wide basis. So the contract rules. The two construction defect lawsuits brought against my contractors have all come from the INSURANCE Industry!! Home owner company adjustors who, and I quote stated, “A wire was placed in close proximity to a staple and the normal vibration of the house over a 5 year period caused the casing to rub off which created an arch and spark which was the proximate cause of the fire” end quote. How they determined that after the entire house burnt to the ground and the fire marshal on the scene at the time of the fire and through his investigation could find no such evidence to support that theory is mute. It cost my clients insurance company $50,000 to get my clients name removed from the lawsuit which went away. In an ironic twist the same contractor rebuilt the house and the homeowners company paid him. Life is good!
The second case is similiar and has just begun but it is brought by another homeowners company after a fire.
The primary problem here is one previously stated…”It’s all about the contract, dummy”. Get it right and what you screwed up your responsible for, what the subs do is on them. One major problem in the standard market though is the lack of the proper endorsement filings OR their total lack of willingness to insure through endorsements. In there absence how does a contractor insure the future insurability of their subcontractors? I’m still baffled by my insurance companies unwillingness to address that question with a response.
And the LAWYERS laugh all the way to the bank…… and now people want to put one of these LAWSUIT LAWYERS SCUMBAGS in the White House as Vice President? Great, just great……
I am located in Colorado and we have passed a statute known as the Colorado Construction Defect Action Reform, C.R.S.§13-20-80.
I understand the frustration of honest contractors who make a mistake and are willing to correct…and it is sad that so many class action suits are filed in this regard…but as a homeowner who had the “bad penny”, I have been trying to understand the intent of this type of rule as I have attempted to work within the legal system since last April (2003) when a small independent General Contractor decided he would not follow plans, specifications, city codes, contractual agreements or my rights under the consumer protection act. When these items were brought to his attention, he claimed they were “not his fault” and he would charge to correct as an “extra” expense…try and figure that on compaction that didn’t meet the Soils Engineer’s recommendations or the footer that was undersized and hidden underground! In fact, the electrical was sabotaged because I disputed extra charges for items detailed on the plans and specifications.
I have spoken with the Attorney General’s Office, the City Inspection and Licensing offices, our Department of Regulatory Agencies and our State Senators and all are sympathetic (and shocked) but none can offer any solutions for moving this issue to a conclusion.
The contractor’s insurance carrier and the insurance carrier for the electrician have already advised both that they may NOT have coverage for their negligence in this matter, but they have continued to defend them and have successfully delayed my efforts to bring this issue to mediation, settlement or before a court of law for more than a year and a half (the defects were found in April and the complaint was filed a year ago).
With regards to the Consumer Protection Act violations, I understand there may be a possibility of filing criminal charges against these individuals with the District Attorney’s Office when the civil case has been concluded since the contractor was paid for the majority of the contract (including work not done) and both the contractor and electrical subcontractor have filed false liens and the contractor has refused to provide any accounting documents.
Can someone please explain to me why, as a homeowner with that “one in a million bad contractor”, I must play this legal game for as long as it takes and as much as it costs (by the way, not including my legal fees, it cost more than $60,000 to fix the negligent work).
I’d like to understand why the insurance carrier would put a homeowner through this process and how a consumer can get “just, speedy and inexpensive determination in every action” in keeping with Rule 1, C.R.C.P.
I’d like to hear from the contractor side…no sympathy, just an idea of how to make the system work…if that’s even possible these days!
Thanks for listening…and I’d welcome any comments or suggestions to corknme@hotmail.com. If you would like to see more of the story, I already have two published stories on this matter…one in the local business journal and the other on our major TV station…but still no resolution…again…”it wasn’t his fault”!
Mikki,
So sorry to hear of your nightmare. A question I have asked on numerous occasions to folks like yourself is, “And how much time did you spend researching the contractor before you signed the contract?” “Are you aware of his history and his clients satisfaction records?”
Many people who have work performed on their homes are only concerned with the bottom line on a contract, which is their prime criteria for selecting their contractor. The reality is your nightmare!
If folks took more time in the selection of the contractor, questioning references, visiting past projects, understanding the contract and all the clauses contained in them the contractor “Wheat will separate itself from the chaff”. Legitimate guys want to have a long term relationship with homeowners and want to give you the time to be comfortable with them and engage them in the process of making your dreams come true.
Most are excellent tradesmen and artisans that have become good businessmen and women. Next time check out http://www.nari.org for a TRUELY professional contractor. One that supports his or her profession and educates themselves and their employees on a regular basis.
Best of luck with your situation Mikki but once you start down the legal road your in for the ride.
Builder sponsored laws protect builders, despite the fact they’re often promoted as consumer protection. The court records don’t support the notion that everyone is suing their builder, either. For starters, the publicly traded builders especially, post high customer satisfaction rates in the high 90-percent range, and high profits, so where are all the people suing them? Are they considered among the “satisfied?”
These laws create more hoops for the homeowner to jump through, when homeowners are already notifying their builders. Homeowners may try for months or years to get the warranty honored. They may be prevented from suing by arbitration clauses. Suing may be unaffordable. Despite the myth that people can get big awards for silly claims, it’s actually very hard and expensive to sue and win and collect. The case has to be valid. These laws make the assertion that all cases are frivolous and that’s not true.
Home buyers pay a builder a lot of money for that builder’s “professional” services, and they deserve to get a house that meets building codes, keeps the rain out, and does not start falling apart as soon as they close. To avoid lawsuits the builders need to learn to build a house right and do it, and then honor the warranty.
Too many new homes do not even meet code. Too many new homes have missing window flashing. Too many new homes have foundations that aren’t to engineering recommendations for the local soil and climate. These are shortcuts and mistakes that cost a home buyer thousands, they are not a savings the builder passes on to the buyer.
The insurance industry problem is not the home buyers’ fault. But they’re the group getting stuck with the bill, and this new law only sticks it to home buyers more.
Cindy,
Not all of the consumer bills before the various states are in fact sponsored or endorsed by Builders or their organization. I agree with you that some are and are not necessarily a good thing for consumers at atll.
A truly simple fix in this day and age is to demand that the various legislative bodies realize that “Construction on a Residential Bases” is really a professional type of business on a par with manufacturing. I can provide product liability for manufacturing firms but it is not commercially available for “Remodeling Contractors”. New Home Builders/Developers have a core group of Professionals advising them: Lawyers, CPA’s, Insurance Professionals, HR Personal, etc. They build the cost of those services into the price of their product, the new home. Simple solution is to have the legislative bodies develope licensing laws for construction companies and their owners. It should include continuing education. The various state legislative bodies are responsible for the zoning issues you mention but so much of their election support comes from the building industry that they dare not think of ticking these people off. Some states already have taken these steps and the troubles are fewer there. Other states like Pennsylvania don’t even require registration of contractors so if one rips you off the chances of finding them is slim to none.
Insurance companies want nothing to do with most Residential Remodeling contractors or those dealing with Townhomes, Condo’s or Tract Housing. Even companies who do 5 million in sales for remodeling projects are finding it difficult to find coverage today.
It is a difficult topic with many difficult points and perspectives to consider. The bottom line is that the consumer contemplating having work done today or a new home built REALLY needs to do their homework…after all it’s their money they are spending.
My response to the comment about not being able to get A/I as a sub that the sub should find a new agent or the agent should find a new company to write with…the endt is there – yes sometimes for a cost but is available.
Well Stephanie you assume that the contractors who need this endorsement (which is all of them) one are willing to pay for it and two that it is available in every state. You would be wrong on the first and second assumption. NOT ALL INSURANCE COMPANIES HAVE STATE FILINGS FOR ALL OF THE ISO ENDORSEMENTS. Big point here is that if its not absolutely necessary why would they file a form which is outdated due to legislative changes in a particular state and have the additional liability for paying out claims if you don\’t have too. Yes you can get it in the E&S Market BUT in PA to offer an E&S over a standard company is dicey at best and down right illegal. NOT ALL THINGS ARE AS EASY AS THEY SEEM. Now if you want to write small contractors (defined as 50K in premium and below) you ain\’t getting the CG2010 1185 form in PA. If on the other hand you want to write the 100K + accounts, well that\’s a different story. It\’s not fair to all but fair to all that can pay to play. It insurance for goodness sake did you expect it to make sense?
Mark…I did win my case in January 2006 and received a judgment for $129,000 plus court costs and interest. The insurance company’s lawyers who defended the contractor told him, he was not responsible and they had a reservation of rights and would not pay anthing. Now, two years after the jury made their decision, I’m still waiting for some type of resolution. My lawyer has just filed a writ of garnishment. We’ll see what happens. But meanwhile, the contractor left the state of Colorado, moved to California, was not able to retain his license due to the judgment and has now returned to Colorado under another business name. He was able to secure insurance with another carrier because he did not tell them he had a claim. I have spoken with the National Insurance Fraud line and nothing has been done. Meanwhile, he is continuing to work in the state (it appears only one jurisdiction has issued a new contractor’s license, the rest have refused due to the judgment). And he has just disolved the original corporation which was the name he used for my project. How does this happen and why didn’t the new insurance company cancel him when they found out about the unreported claim…isn’t that an obligation of the agent? Also, we’ve all read the policy (including our AG’s office), we never saw a “right of refusal letter” and the insurance company is CLEARLY responsible for the damages…how do they get away with this. I’d appreciate your thoughts. Thanks!
Our Agency requires contractor’s insurers to provide endorsement CG 20 10 11 85. Insurer says that this is an obsolete endorsement and ofers to replace it with another one called U-GL-1175. question: is this one acceptable?
Thank you,
Javier Sierra
Associate Engineer
City of Redwood City
The Right of Refusal letter is sent by virtually ALL insurance companies were a construction defect lawsuit is claimed. Defective Workmanship is not a covered peril. It goes against the “Business Principal”. Think about it for a moment Mikki; I put a roof on your house and you pay me for it (labor and material) then I put a claim in against my insurance company when it leaks so I get paid again (labor and material). In other words I get paid twice for the same job. Workmanship for residential contractors is virtually NEVER insured. Yes on large commercial jobs it sometmes is insured and the premium is steep but if the margins and contracts permit/demand it then you can get it.
As to state licensing issues and why everyone associated with a real estate transaction MUST be a licensed professional EXCEPT the only people who can cause physical damage to the property – THE CONTRACTOR – is beyond me. I have lobbied in PA for 11 years now to get just registration, not even licensing and still the legislators drag their feet and wring their hands saying it will bar people from the industry. The Realtor, The Mortgage Banker, The Architect, The Surveyor, The Insurance Person, The Title Company, The Lawyer, hell even the haircutter and beautician who get you ready for the closing on your new house are all licensed but the contractor who rips your house apart and then walks off isn’t. Defies common sense but it is the way it is.
You will probably never see your money from this guy Mikki and I know it hurts. Best of luck to you in all your future endeavors.
PS – As to insurance agents suppose to do something about scums like this guy??? Well we have those type of people in our industry too…they usually just dress alittle nicer…
I thought all of you might appreciate a consumer’s perspective…our legal system STINKS…after winning my judgement, the insurance company verified they would PAY FOR NOTHING…not even the court costs they created. They had not provided a copy of the insurance policy despite requests from the State’s Division of Insurance and then refused to pay the fine for not providing the documents requested. Then there’s the issue of the General Contractor…yes, you guessed it, he claimed everything was the responsibility of the company (he was the only employee), he dissolved the company and then went out and got another insurance policy as a tile installer…doing general contracting on the side. NO, he never told his new insurance carrier about the claim or the lawsuit. Sad but true…our system does not protect…it encourages this type of action. I wouldn’t recommend the courts to anyone. Even my lawyer ended up with nothing in this matter…that’s sad!
Why doesn’t anyone address the unethical practice of many general contractors requiring additional insured endorsements that they have to know darn well are not available to small contractors? We have clients who perform work and are then unable to collect payment due to contracts that they are forced to sign to get the work. While I can understand the concerns of the general contractors, this practice seems tantamount to robbery.
Clark,
If you expect ethical conduct from a general contractor, you have never worked in the construction industry. It’s true that nobody issues CG2010 11 85 anymore. However, if your carrier will allow, any of the following should be acceptable:
CG2010 11 85
Or
CG0132 02 00
Or
CG2026 11 85 (maybe)
Or
CG2010 03 97 plus CG2037 10 01 (location and description of completed operations must state, “all work performed for the additional insured.”)
Or
CG2010 10 01 plus CG2037 10 01. (location and description of completed operations must state, “all work performed for the additional insured.”)
Mike Brown
Brown’s Insurance Agency Inc.
Construction Defect litigation is indeed, “tantamount to robbery.” Especially for lower tiered contractors whose scope of work may have nothing to do with the alleged defects. These contractors’ insurance adjusters typically make a “cost of defense” settlement with the general contractor just to avoid further costs and potentially higher damages payments. It’s a shake-down by the plaintiff’s bar as well as a cottage industry for “experts” who will argue drywall is the cause of a grading problem, just so long as their consultant fee check clears the bank. Disgusting.
OK one of my favorite topics! Think about the attorney who has recommended to their client (the General Contractor) that the language in the contract is acceptable to the project. Now you are a subcontractor who has always done work on a handshake and you think this one will be ok too. Well folks it’s time to wake up. This has become a big business in a mostly unregulated industry. IN Pennsylvania there is no registration of contractors or licensing on a state wide basis. So the contract rules. The two construction defect lawsuits brought against my contractors have all come from the INSURANCE Industry!! Home owner company adjustors who, and I quote stated, “A wire was placed in close proximity to a staple and the normal vibration of the house over a 5 year period caused the casing to rub off which created an arch and spark which was the proximate cause of the fire” end quote. How they determined that after the entire house burnt to the ground and the fire marshal on the scene at the time of the fire and through his investigation could find no such evidence to support that theory is mute. It cost my clients insurance company $50,000 to get my clients name removed from the lawsuit which went away. In an ironic twist the same contractor rebuilt the house and the homeowners company paid him. Life is good!
The second case is similiar and has just begun but it is brought by another homeowners company after a fire.
The primary problem here is one previously stated…”It’s all about the contract, dummy”. Get it right and what you screwed up your responsible for, what the subs do is on them. One major problem in the standard market though is the lack of the proper endorsement filings OR their total lack of willingness to insure through endorsements. In there absence how does a contractor insure the future insurability of their subcontractors? I’m still baffled by my insurance companies unwillingness to address that question with a response.
And the LAWYERS laugh all the way to the bank…… and now people want to put one of these LAWSUIT LAWYERS SCUMBAGS in the White House as Vice President? Great, just great……
I am a homeowner on the other side of this issue.
I am located in Colorado and we have passed a statute known as the Colorado Construction Defect Action Reform, C.R.S.§13-20-80.
I understand the frustration of honest contractors who make a mistake and are willing to correct…and it is sad that so many class action suits are filed in this regard…but as a homeowner who had the “bad penny”, I have been trying to understand the intent of this type of rule as I have attempted to work within the legal system since last April (2003) when a small independent General Contractor decided he would not follow plans, specifications, city codes, contractual agreements or my rights under the consumer protection act. When these items were brought to his attention, he claimed they were “not his fault” and he would charge to correct as an “extra” expense…try and figure that on compaction that didn’t meet the Soils Engineer’s recommendations or the footer that was undersized and hidden underground! In fact, the electrical was sabotaged because I disputed extra charges for items detailed on the plans and specifications.
I have spoken with the Attorney General’s Office, the City Inspection and Licensing offices, our Department of Regulatory Agencies and our State Senators and all are sympathetic (and shocked) but none can offer any solutions for moving this issue to a conclusion.
The contractor’s insurance carrier and the insurance carrier for the electrician have already advised both that they may NOT have coverage for their negligence in this matter, but they have continued to defend them and have successfully delayed my efforts to bring this issue to mediation, settlement or before a court of law for more than a year and a half (the defects were found in April and the complaint was filed a year ago).
With regards to the Consumer Protection Act violations, I understand there may be a possibility of filing criminal charges against these individuals with the District Attorney’s Office when the civil case has been concluded since the contractor was paid for the majority of the contract (including work not done) and both the contractor and electrical subcontractor have filed false liens and the contractor has refused to provide any accounting documents.
Can someone please explain to me why, as a homeowner with that “one in a million bad contractor”, I must play this legal game for as long as it takes and as much as it costs (by the way, not including my legal fees, it cost more than $60,000 to fix the negligent work).
I’d like to understand why the insurance carrier would put a homeowner through this process and how a consumer can get “just, speedy and inexpensive determination in every action” in keeping with Rule 1, C.R.C.P.
I’d like to hear from the contractor side…no sympathy, just an idea of how to make the system work…if that’s even possible these days!
Thanks for listening…and I’d welcome any comments or suggestions to corknme@hotmail.com. If you would like to see more of the story, I already have two published stories on this matter…one in the local business journal and the other on our major TV station…but still no resolution…again…”it wasn’t his fault”!
Mikki
corknme@hotmail.com
Mikki,
So sorry to hear of your nightmare. A question I have asked on numerous occasions to folks like yourself is, “And how much time did you spend researching the contractor before you signed the contract?” “Are you aware of his history and his clients satisfaction records?”
Many people who have work performed on their homes are only concerned with the bottom line on a contract, which is their prime criteria for selecting their contractor. The reality is your nightmare!
If folks took more time in the selection of the contractor, questioning references, visiting past projects, understanding the contract and all the clauses contained in them the contractor “Wheat will separate itself from the chaff”. Legitimate guys want to have a long term relationship with homeowners and want to give you the time to be comfortable with them and engage them in the process of making your dreams come true.
Most are excellent tradesmen and artisans that have become good businessmen and women. Next time check out http://www.nari.org for a TRUELY professional contractor. One that supports his or her profession and educates themselves and their employees on a regular basis.
Best of luck with your situation Mikki but once you start down the legal road your in for the ride.
Builder sponsored laws protect builders, despite the fact they’re often promoted as consumer protection. The court records don’t support the notion that everyone is suing their builder, either. For starters, the publicly traded builders especially, post high customer satisfaction rates in the high 90-percent range, and high profits, so where are all the people suing them? Are they considered among the “satisfied?”
These laws create more hoops for the homeowner to jump through, when homeowners are already notifying their builders. Homeowners may try for months or years to get the warranty honored. They may be prevented from suing by arbitration clauses. Suing may be unaffordable. Despite the myth that people can get big awards for silly claims, it’s actually very hard and expensive to sue and win and collect. The case has to be valid. These laws make the assertion that all cases are frivolous and that’s not true.
Home buyers pay a builder a lot of money for that builder’s “professional” services, and they deserve to get a house that meets building codes, keeps the rain out, and does not start falling apart as soon as they close. To avoid lawsuits the builders need to learn to build a house right and do it, and then honor the warranty.
Too many new homes do not even meet code. Too many new homes have missing window flashing. Too many new homes have foundations that aren’t to engineering recommendations for the local soil and climate. These are shortcuts and mistakes that cost a home buyer thousands, they are not a savings the builder passes on to the buyer.
The insurance industry problem is not the home buyers’ fault. But they’re the group getting stuck with the bill, and this new law only sticks it to home buyers more.
Cindy,
Not all of the consumer bills before the various states are in fact sponsored or endorsed by Builders or their organization. I agree with you that some are and are not necessarily a good thing for consumers at atll.
A truly simple fix in this day and age is to demand that the various legislative bodies realize that “Construction on a Residential Bases” is really a professional type of business on a par with manufacturing. I can provide product liability for manufacturing firms but it is not commercially available for “Remodeling Contractors”. New Home Builders/Developers have a core group of Professionals advising them: Lawyers, CPA’s, Insurance Professionals, HR Personal, etc. They build the cost of those services into the price of their product, the new home. Simple solution is to have the legislative bodies develope licensing laws for construction companies and their owners. It should include continuing education. The various state legislative bodies are responsible for the zoning issues you mention but so much of their election support comes from the building industry that they dare not think of ticking these people off. Some states already have taken these steps and the troubles are fewer there. Other states like Pennsylvania don’t even require registration of contractors so if one rips you off the chances of finding them is slim to none.
Insurance companies want nothing to do with most Residential Remodeling contractors or those dealing with Townhomes, Condo’s or Tract Housing. Even companies who do 5 million in sales for remodeling projects are finding it difficult to find coverage today.
It is a difficult topic with many difficult points and perspectives to consider. The bottom line is that the consumer contemplating having work done today or a new home built REALLY needs to do their homework…after all it’s their money they are spending.
My response to the comment about not being able to get A/I as a sub that the sub should find a new agent or the agent should find a new company to write with…the endt is there – yes sometimes for a cost but is available.
Well Stephanie you assume that the contractors who need this endorsement (which is all of them) one are willing to pay for it and two that it is available in every state. You would be wrong on the first and second assumption. NOT ALL INSURANCE COMPANIES HAVE STATE FILINGS FOR ALL OF THE ISO ENDORSEMENTS. Big point here is that if its not absolutely necessary why would they file a form which is outdated due to legislative changes in a particular state and have the additional liability for paying out claims if you don\’t have too. Yes you can get it in the E&S Market BUT in PA to offer an E&S over a standard company is dicey at best and down right illegal. NOT ALL THINGS ARE AS EASY AS THEY SEEM. Now if you want to write small contractors (defined as 50K in premium and below) you ain\’t getting the CG2010 1185 form in PA. If on the other hand you want to write the 100K + accounts, well that\’s a different story. It\’s not fair to all but fair to all that can pay to play. It insurance for goodness sake did you expect it to make sense?
Mark…I did win my case in January 2006 and received a judgment for $129,000 plus court costs and interest. The insurance company’s lawyers who defended the contractor told him, he was not responsible and they had a reservation of rights and would not pay anthing. Now, two years after the jury made their decision, I’m still waiting for some type of resolution. My lawyer has just filed a writ of garnishment. We’ll see what happens. But meanwhile, the contractor left the state of Colorado, moved to California, was not able to retain his license due to the judgment and has now returned to Colorado under another business name. He was able to secure insurance with another carrier because he did not tell them he had a claim. I have spoken with the National Insurance Fraud line and nothing has been done. Meanwhile, he is continuing to work in the state (it appears only one jurisdiction has issued a new contractor’s license, the rest have refused due to the judgment). And he has just disolved the original corporation which was the name he used for my project. How does this happen and why didn’t the new insurance company cancel him when they found out about the unreported claim…isn’t that an obligation of the agent? Also, we’ve all read the policy (including our AG’s office), we never saw a “right of refusal letter” and the insurance company is CLEARLY responsible for the damages…how do they get away with this. I’d appreciate your thoughts. Thanks!
Our Agency requires contractor’s insurers to provide endorsement CG 20 10 11 85. Insurer says that this is an obsolete endorsement and ofers to replace it with another one called U-GL-1175. question: is this one acceptable?
Thank you,
Javier Sierra
Associate Engineer
City of Redwood City
Mikki,
The Right of Refusal letter is sent by virtually ALL insurance companies were a construction defect lawsuit is claimed. Defective Workmanship is not a covered peril. It goes against the “Business Principal”. Think about it for a moment Mikki; I put a roof on your house and you pay me for it (labor and material) then I put a claim in against my insurance company when it leaks so I get paid again (labor and material). In other words I get paid twice for the same job. Workmanship for residential contractors is virtually NEVER insured. Yes on large commercial jobs it sometmes is insured and the premium is steep but if the margins and contracts permit/demand it then you can get it.
As to state licensing issues and why everyone associated with a real estate transaction MUST be a licensed professional EXCEPT the only people who can cause physical damage to the property – THE CONTRACTOR – is beyond me. I have lobbied in PA for 11 years now to get just registration, not even licensing and still the legislators drag their feet and wring their hands saying it will bar people from the industry. The Realtor, The Mortgage Banker, The Architect, The Surveyor, The Insurance Person, The Title Company, The Lawyer, hell even the haircutter and beautician who get you ready for the closing on your new house are all licensed but the contractor who rips your house apart and then walks off isn’t. Defies common sense but it is the way it is.
You will probably never see your money from this guy Mikki and I know it hurts. Best of luck to you in all your future endeavors.
PS – As to insurance agents suppose to do something about scums like this guy??? Well we have those type of people in our industry too…they usually just dress alittle nicer…
What is the most commonly used alternative to CG 20 20 11 85 for small contractors?
I thought all of you might appreciate a consumer’s perspective…our legal system STINKS…after winning my judgement, the insurance company verified they would PAY FOR NOTHING…not even the court costs they created. They had not provided a copy of the insurance policy despite requests from the State’s Division of Insurance and then refused to pay the fine for not providing the documents requested. Then there’s the issue of the General Contractor…yes, you guessed it, he claimed everything was the responsibility of the company (he was the only employee), he dissolved the company and then went out and got another insurance policy as a tile installer…doing general contracting on the side. NO, he never told his new insurance carrier about the claim or the lawsuit. Sad but true…our system does not protect…it encourages this type of action. I wouldn’t recommend the courts to anyone. Even my lawyer ended up with nothing in this matter…that’s sad!
Gee…do you think they ever confronted the contractor with his FRAUD in not reporting the claim when applying for new insurance…take a guess!
Can you translate that???