Insurance query

Frank Black

Apologies if this is the incorrect forum to ask this query.

We're building a house at the moment. During the week the property was broken into and all of the first fix electrical wiring was ripped out. Our builder reckons that we're talking €1,000's of damage.

We got in touch with our insurance company, but our Building Insurance policy does not cover theft from the site, only fire, explosion, etc...

Our builder claims his insurance does not cover the theft.

We've spoken to the insurance broker, whose view is that they told us what the policy covered.

We were not advised by the broker as to what wasn't covered or whether there were alternative policies available which would have covered the theft.

TBH we hadn't a clue when we were getting the policy as to what we should have been covering.
I'm just wondering if we have any legal options available to us. Does the broker have an obligation to have provided better advice. Is the builder responsible for the site during construction ( our contract with the builder is silent on this issue)

Any advice appreciated, and thanks in advance.

mitzicat

Unfortunately you will generally be deemed to have read any contract you sign. Have you now gone through your whole policy - this should be a document with multiple pages, not just the light summary of cover - to determine yourselves that there's no coverage for theft?

jblack

Have you a building contract?

Does his CAR cover this?

Lots of questions here are very relevant as to whether or not you are covered.

Frank Black

Thanks for replies.

I've looked through the policy, it's pretty clear as to what's it covers (thunderbolt ffs!) - it lists what's covered and says everything else is excluded basically.

We have a building contract, but no mention of anything like theft from the site or whose responsibility it is.

It's the builder's view that once the items are installed and paid for by us (which first fix electrical was), they are ours rather than his.

I can see the. Builder's point, and I'm more pissed off that our broker never advised us on this issue, I doubt we're the only people whose site has been robbed, I would have thought that it was a common enough thing to want to cover insurance wise.
We never asked the question because it never occurred to us at the time.

mitzicat

Common problem that is, unfortunately. Curious though as to why your broker didn't offer for theft cover as that would have meant a higher premium. By chance did you purchase any of the materials on your credit card? Sometimes your purchases are insured through the credit card company- don't know about Ireland though.

Frank Black

mitzicat wrote: »

Common problem that is, unfortunately. Curious though as to why your broker didn't offer for theft cover as that would have meant a higher premium. By chance did you purchase any of the materials on your credit card? Sometimes your purchases are insured through the credit card company- don't know about Ireland though.

Materials were bought by Builder, we paid Builder by cheque.
It's probably the labour costs are going to hit us worse anyway.

jblack

Black Francis - You need to be aware of the fact that whilst there are many people who post that will give you some decent pointers, this is an insurance matter and more specifically construction insurance.

There are many, many factors here;

For example is the builder in complete control of the site, or is there partial possession granted, or indeed is he granted access to certain parts of the building during the day? The law treats builders as licencees but in fact they enjoy rights and liabilities that are commensurate with land law, such as liability under the OLA 1995.

Next while your insurance may not cover theft his might, or even if his does not he may be in breach of a contractual obligation to have theft covered. For instance, most standard form contracts impose a duty on the builder to insure the works until practical completion or partial possession is granted.

This is a niche area and I would be careful running back with the first answer you think is correct.

Procrastastudy

Bear in mind there is plenty of other things that can be stolen from a building site;

• Copper Piping
• Slate of the roof
• Anything else lying around
• Oh! The windows - heard of that one before.

I'm sure others would be able to point to many other things that could be nicked.

There is also the possible issue of liability for injury on your property. I would suggest getting a better broker (try a few) and get some advise because this one seems to be a bit rubbish.

sinnerboy

black francis wrote: »

( our contract with the builder is silent on this issue)

What is the form of contract ?

What advice is your contract administrator offering ?

jblack

sinnerboy wrote: »

What is the form of contract ?

What advice is your contract administrator offering ?

Yep, and just to illustrate the point, if the builder is in breach of a contractual obligation to insure the works the building company will be liable, and if they are unable to pay then the contract administrator may himself be liable.

See: Pozzolanic Lytag v Bryan Hobson & Associates

Frank Black

Just regarding the contract, the Builder told us to draft the contract, I drew one up by downloading a template from the Internet (yes, I am currently regretting not employing a solicitor to do this).

Procrastastudy

LOL - Smart builder!

sinnerboy

black francis wrote: »

Just regarding the contract, the Builder told us to draft the contract, I drew one up by downloading a template from the Internet (yes, I am currently regretting not employing a solicitor to do this).

.... and not employing architect/engineer to administer ?

jblack

sinnerboy wrote: »

.... and not employing architect/engineer to administer ?

I wonder what contract was downloaded? I would find it highly improbable that any downloadable contract is suitable for such projects.

Frank Black

sinnerboy wrote: »

.... and not employing architect/engineer to administer ?

We have an engineer administering the build.

jblack

black francis wrote: »

We have an engineer administering the build.

That may be contractually meaningless depending on the provisions in the contract that you have used.

What you're looking for is a provision giving the contractor an obligation to insure the works.

Frank Black

jblack wrote: »

That may be contractually meaningless depending on the provisions in the contract that you have used.

What you're looking for is a provision giving the contractor an obligation to insure the works.

Yep, I realise that, just responding to the post that suggested it would have been useful to have an engineer supervise the build - didn't see the relevance in the suggestion myself.

The contractor tells us the insurance he carries only covers PI and such-like, and is not relevant to theft of our fittings.

IMO, the negligence rests with the broker who failed to inform us of the different insurance options available. And also with ourselves for not researching the matter properly.

You live and learn.

BTW - the site was broken into again yesterday evening and they managed to remove most of the wiring they had missed the first time around.:mad:

sinnerboy

So .....

sinnerboy wrote: »

What advice is your contract administrator offering ?

sinnerboy

black francis wrote: »

BTW - the site was broken into again yesterday evening and they managed to remove most of the wiring they had missed the first time around.:mad:

You need a solicitor - FAST. At present it appears that every brick, window, roof tile , fireplace etc can simply walk off the site and you have to pay for it. That is not how a properly executed and administered contract works.

BTW an engineer appointed to supervise the build is not the same as one appointed to administer the contract. They can be the same individual - but the roles are distinct.

So again - seek expert ( not just the least expensive) legal advice as to what implied terms the contract that you prepared impose on the builder. Or perhaps even advice on how to determine the contract.

The current set up is not sustainable imo.

jblack

sinnerboy wrote: »

So .....

It appears he doesn't have one, only an engineer casting an eye over the works.

If I was that engineer I wouldn't be offering any advice on this issue unless I was paid to and covered, in fact PII insurance will often be voidable at the instance of the insurer for offering such advice.

Frank Black

sinnerboy wrote: »

You need a solicitor - FAST. At present it appears that every brick, window, roof tile , fireplace etc can simply walk off the site and you have to pay for it. That is not how a properly executed and administered contract works.

BTW an engineer appointed to supervise the build is not the same as one appointed to administer the contract. They can be the same individual - but the roles are distinct.

So again - seek expert ( not just the least expensive) legal advice as to what implied terms the contract that you prepared impose on the builder. Or perhaps even advice on how to determine the contract.

The current set up is not sustainable imo.

Yep, but I'd imagine the answer is to get a different insurance policy that covers theft, combined with trying to increase the site security somehow.
Our engineer is not a contract administrator, he is a relative with the necessary qualifications, expertise and PI insurance to supervise the construction.
We have no formal contract with him.

If we were to try to get an alternative policy at this stage would we have problems, I.e. do we need to declare that we've had a couple of robberies from the site?

jblack

black francis wrote: »

Yep, but I'd imagine the answer is to get a different insurance policy that covers theft, combined with trying to increase the site security somehow.
Our engineer is not a contract administrator, he is a relative with the necessary qualifications, expertise and PI insurance to supervise the construction.
We have no formal contract with him.

If we were to try to get an alternative policy at this stage would we have problems, I.e. do we need to declare that we've had a couple of robberies from the site?

Contracts of insurance are contracts of utmost good faith (uberrimae fides) and therefore you must disclose anything that would affect either the premium charged or the decision to insure.

Failing to declare two recent break ins would almost certainly result in your insurance contract being voided.

Although from your PM I consider it unlikely, sinnerboy's advice to check could there be an implied term for the builder to insure the works may shift responsibility to him might be one avenue.

If this was the case then it appears the builder is not insured and you're going to end up in some dispute forum (arb clause in your contract?). Your next avenue is your original thought; your broker. Any hope of pinning professional negligence or negligent misstatement here is highly dependent upon his conditions of engagement, the service he provided and the service you sought.

sinnerboy

jblack wrote: »

Yep, and just to illustrate the point, if the builder is in breach of a contractual obligation to insure the works the building company will be liable, and if they are unable to pay then the contract administrator may himself be liable.

See: Pozzolanic Lytag v Bryan Hobson & Associates

If he was found negligent in his duty by failing to determine that the contractor was insured ....

jblack

sinnerboy wrote: »

If he was found negligent in his duty by failing to determine that the contractor was insured ....

Thus the word may find himself liable.

Frank Black

sinnerboy wrote: »

If he was found negligent in his duty by failing to determine that the contractor was insured ....

I won't be taking an action against the Engineer - like I say he's a relative.

I've arranged for a security company to do regular patrols of the site, and we are discussing with the builder how we can make the site more secure, as well as trying to fast track the ESB connection so we can install an alarm.

It seems from replies that I will need to write this one down to experience.

Thanks to all who advised.