Archive for the ‘Damages’ Category

Contractors Get Good Insurance & Use It!

On January 12, 2012 Author By Seth Smiley

More and more in my everyday practice I encounter issues with contractor general liability insurance (GL). Whether I am defending a contractor or going after one, there tend to be issues with GL carriers. Here are some tips on coverage and others for contractors who have issues.

First and foremost, contractors need to get a solid policy, pay the policy premium form year to year and do not let it lapse. This is typically where contractors get it right. The bad thing is, that most think this is all they need to do in order to be “covered” in the event of a loss or occurrence. Unfortunately, I represent contractors all the time who never take it past this step.

Next, the most important and most often overlooked aspect is notifying the insurer when trouble starts. Every policy has notice requirements within it that must be strictly followed. If you are an electrician and a fire happens on the job, the first person you should call is the insurer and/or your insurance agent and put them on notice. This way you put the ball in the insurance company’s court, and legally they must do certain things in response, such as decline coverage and/or adjust the claim. If you ever have a lawsuit filed against you put the insurer on notice immediately! This is a must, and I’ve had insurers get out of cases the insurance company was not noticed timely.

A lot of contractors do not want to make claims to the insurance because they feel they policy premium will rise. While this may be an end result, the potential downside of litigation is much more harsh than an increased policy premium. Do not be afraid to make the claim because the insurer will not hesitate to deny your claim and/or fight you regarding coverage.

One huge benefit of notifying insurers when problems occur, is the insurers duty to defend. Even if there is the slightest possibility there may be coverage under the policy, the insurance company has s duty to defend a contractor in litigation. This aspect alone could save you thousands of dollars in legal fees. Insurers will defend the insurable interest, so it may be wise as a contractor to get separate counsel to assure that all of your interests will be covered. The counsel you retain personally can work in conjunction with the one provided by the insurer, whereby you get double the legal manpower for half the price.

Finally, most contractors know and all should know that GL policies do not cover bad work or defective workmanship. This would be covered in a totally different policy called builders risk. Courts here in Louisiana have decided on a number of occasions that GL policies do cover damage that is a result of bad workmanship. ie… a GL policy does not cover a poorly installed leaky roof, but it will cover all the water damage the house suffers as a result.

The moral of this story for contractors to not only get GL coverage, but to use it. There is no point in paying thousands of dollars each year for a premium, if you are not going to use the benefits of it. If you think the insurance company is going return the favor if an issue does arise, you will be sadly mistaken.

Wolfe Law Group fights for the rights of owners/contractors who are having issues with insurance companies and other players in the construction industry.

Posted in:     Business Matters, Damages, Insurance  /    /   1 Comment

Litigation Topics for Prime / Subcontractor Contracts

On November 2, 2011 Author By Seth Smiley

I had a speaking engagement today here in Kenner, Louisiana (a suburb of New Orleans) whereby I had the pleasure of speaking to a group of contractors and architects regarding construction contracts. The bulk of the discussion focused on the most contested provisions within construction contracts.

The information is very helpful to contractors and can be used a resource when a contractor begins the contracting phase of a construction project to help get a better understanding of what is going on within the contract documents.

Prime/Subcontractors Contracts

Contracts between prime/general contractors and their subcontractors make up a vital link in the construction project chain. Here both parties need to negotiate terms to better protect when a dispute arises. A well crafted contract can better protect a prime and/or a sub when default arises. Typically subcontractors are at the mercy of the prime. A good subcontractor will have his attorney review any agreement to make sure that the deal is an even one.

AIA – American Institute of Architects is the most common standard form contracts in the construction industry. AIA contracts are a good starting point and offer contracts for Prime/sub relationships, Architect/owner, Owner/Prime, and any other design professional/contractor relationship that may exist.

• Commonly litigated subcontract provisions

There are a number of provisions which could be contained in a prime/subcontractor contract that need to raise a red flag when present and should be negotiated by either party so as to keep the contract from becoming one-sided.

1. Incorporation by Reference Clauses: (flow-up & flow-down provisions)

  • a Flow-down provision in a prime/sub contract will incorporate by reference terms and provisions of the owner/prime contract;
  • conversely, a Flow-up provision incorporates the duties owed by the owner to the prime into the prime/sub contract;
  • Many times parties enter into these agreements with out ever seeing the referenced document making them susceptible to unknown provisions;
  • Enforcement depends on the reciprocality of the provisions and lack of ambiguity

2. Scope of Work Provisions

  • Prime contractors want a broad scope of work provision with subs so that they can pin other work to them later on if needed;
  • Subs should demand very specific scope of work provisions so as to know exactly what work is expected and what exactly they have bid on;
  • This provision can incorporate other documents such as plans and specifications;
  • Provision needed for extra work or change order if work called for is outside of the scope;

3. Change Order and Extra Work Provisions

  • Very popular area for dispute in construction contracts – changes are always happening
  • There should be a clear provision in the contract outlining the process whereby CO’s are made and approved;
  • Define change order – modification to work already contemplated by the agreement; (ie different materials)
  • Define extra – item of work beyond the original scope of work that is added during construction;
  • MAKE SURE change orders and/or extras are in writing;

4. Notice Provisions

  • Found in various places within a prime/sub contract
  • Very important risk-shifiting devices – can determine a win or loss regarding a claim

5. Indemnity Clauses

  • Typically these trickle down the line Owner -> Prime -> Sub
  • These are generally enforceable, Subs should be careful and not allow indemnity for negligence of another party
  • Insurance can be purchased by prime or sub to cover the indemnity obligation

6. No Damages for Delay Clauses

  • Owners and Primes try to insert “no damage for delay” provisions in contracts for protection against unforeseen delays
  • Parties want to check all referencing documents to see if this provision is in there

7. LD’s – Liquidated Damages Provisions

  • Very helpful provisions because the pre-determine delay damages, usually on a per day basis;
  • Enforceable unless determined to be a penalty or if they are a “one- size fits all” provision;
  • LD’s are a good way to measure delay damage but can enhance the need for Contractor/Sub to accelerate work to avoid further damage, leading to defects and workmanship issues;
  • For LD’s to apply the contractors work must be a substantial factor in the delay;

8. Lien Waivers

  • reduce the chance for encumbrances to be placed on the title of the property;
  • Usually not enforceable if lien waiver required before work performed;
  • A good tool for Prime and Owner to reduce exposure;
  • Can be used in an incremental fashion as payments are distributed

9. “Pay-when-paid” v. “Pay-if-paid”

  • Pay-if-paid is defined as a subcontractor gets paid by the general contractor only if the owner pays the general contractor for that subcontractor’s work.” Requires a condition precedent.
  • Pay-when-paid in contrast to the pay-if-paid; a pay-when-paid clause does not establish a condition precedent, but merely creates a timing mechanism for the general contractor’s payment to the subcontractor.

10. Retainage

  • Typically 5%-10% of each payment will be withheld by the Owner/Prime until a later date, such as substantial completion
  • Its purpose is to keep a pool of money to remedy any defects in workmanship by that sub

11. Termination provisions

  • Termination for Cause
  • Usually nonpayment, excessive delay, insolvency, or convenience are reasons to terminate the contract

12. ADR Clause (Arbitration/Mediation clauses)

  • Arbitration (most popular) – binding way to avoid litigation;
  • Mediation – non-binding way to avoid litigation;
  • Both can be effective, typically arbitration can be more intimidating due to its binding and no (very limited) ability to appeal

13. Attorney fee provisions

  • Very popular as no one likes to pay an attorney!
  • Many provisions will say that the unsuccessful party must pay attorney fees but others to be careful will put the burden on one party
  • Primes and subs should include an attorney fee provision in all contracts
  • Good to be specific on the provision and include for litigation and ADR

14. Forum selection & choice of law

  • If working out of state, make sure you know which venue a dispute will be held in;
  • This can be a very costly provision

(list partially obtained from the ABA’s Fundamentals of Construction Law)

 

Posted in:     Arbitration & ADR, Change Orders, Construction Contracts, Construction News, Damages, Delays, Dispute A Lien, Disputes, Insurance, Litigation, Louisiana, Mechanics Lien  /  Tags: , , , , ,   /   1 Comment

Tropical Storm Lee – Prepare for Insurance Claims

On September 4, 2011 Author By Seth Smiley

Contractors and property owners should be very knowledgable of the claims process after a natural disaster. Over the Labor Day weekend the New Orleans metro area, along with southern Louisiana experienced high winds and double-digit rainfall totals due to Tropical Storm Lee.

Contractors who have equipment, property and unfinished work need to report any flood, wind or wind driven rain damage to your general liability insurer in a timely fashion so that you may collect reimbursement for damages sustained from this storm. Your insurer will assign a claims specialist to assess the damage and this person is who you will work with to obtain reimbursement. Be sure to read the policy to make sure you follow all the specific guidelines, otherwise your insurer may use this against you as an excuse not to timely pay up on the claim.

Homeowners in south Louisiana should be well versed in the drill of making claims against your homeowners insurance. This, too is a situation whereby you must read the policy to make sure you follow the set guidelines and timely file a proof of loss. If the insurance company does not value your damage to a level where you are satisfied, then you may want to hire a public/private adjuster by searching the Louisiana Dept of Insurance – Public Adjusters search or reaching out to an reputable firm such as Louisiana Adjusters. The final step is to hire an attorney to escalate your claim.

Due to Hurricanes Katrina and Gustav, firms like the Wolfe Law Group have valuable experience with handling these matters. The mere hiring of an attorney will escalate your claim to another level within the insurance hierarchy and depending on your claim, it may render more effective results.

Remember that you typically have 60 days to file a satisfactory proof of loss and you have one year to file suit against the insurer, both from the date of the loss.  It is important to take photographs and video if possible before clean up to maintain evidence of your loss. Another important tip is to keep good records of invoices and receipts of all work performed on your repair. The insured (contractor or property owner) has a duty to mitigate its damages, so do what you can to prevent damage from getting worse once the storm has passed.

Remember to consult with an attorney or your insurance agent when reviewing the terms of your policy. The policy is the set of rules by which you and the insurer operate when making claims. Do not fight for your claim alone against your insurance company, hire an an attorney who can help you navigate the claim as well as the reconstruction of your property in an efficient manner. Whether you are a contractor or a property owner, contact Seth Smiley with the Wolfe Law Group to discuss your Tropical Storm Lee claims so that you get the results you deserve.

Posted in:     Collections, Construction News, Damages, Insurance, Litigation  /  Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,   /   Leave a comment

Common Law Analysis – Pay-if-paid, Pay-when-paid & Liquidating Agreements in Construction Contracts

On August 9, 2011 Author By Seth Smiley

In a recent decision, Sloan & Company v. Liberty Mutual Insurance Company (“Sloan”), the US Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit has an in depth discussion regarding some technical yet very important clauses found within many construction contracts between general contractor, subcontractors, owner and the surety. Although the court interprets Pennsylvania law, these concepts are good to know for any jurisdiction.

Pay-If-Paid & Pay-When-Paid

The pay-if-paid discussion starts on page 9 and is defined as “a subcontractor gets paid by the general contractor only if the owner pays the general contractor for that subcontractor’s work.” The court goes on to next define pay-when-paid in contrast to the pay-if-paid. “[A] pay-when-paid clause does not establish a condition precedent, but merely creates a timing mechanism for the general contractor’s payment to the subcontractor.”

The basic difference here is pay-if-paid may never happen if the the owner does not pay the general contractor for the work performed by the subcontractor, in theory. But the pay-when-paid acts more as a timing mechanism for the general contractor to pay the subcontractor, regardless of what the owner has paid for.

Generally courts will look to the four corners of the contract between the parties to determine which way to interpret the meaning of the clause. The interesting part of this holding and a common practice in construction contracts is a clause which modifies the pay-if-paid clause to become a pay-when-paid and this was done here by eliminating the condition precedent after a stipulated amount of time.There are many reasons why this may be done but typically many subcontractors will not agree to an absolute pay-if-paid clause, as the end result can place too much of the risk of loss on the subcontractor. Click here for Daniel S. Brennan’s The Construction Contracts Book.

Liquidating Agreement

Another technical term that is not often discussed in construction, yet is present in many construction contracts is the mechanism know as a “liquidating agreement” Sloan pg 16. The Sloan court defines a liquidating agreement clause as a “process by which a general contractor may assert the claims of its subcontractors against the owner.” This is similar to subrogation in the insurance context. Do not confuse a liquidating agreement with liquidated damages. A liquidating agreement clause can act like a lien, in that it gives causes of action to the subcontractor against the owner where there is no privy of contract. Sloan pg 17.

“Liquidating agreements that enable pass-through claims, such as the one in the contract before us, can also serve to limit the subcontractor’s damages to the amount the contractor recovers from the owner. See Carl A. Calvert & Carl F. Ingwalson, Jr., Pass Through Claims and Liquidation Agreements, Constr. Lawyer, Oct. 1998, at 32, 33.” Sloan pg 18.

Conclusion

The end result here, is that typically the general contractor bears the risk of loss when the owner does not pay up, but they can use contractual mechanisms to lower that risk and allocate some of it to the subcontractors. Liquidating agreements and pay-if-paid/pay-when-paid clauses, carefully negotiated at the contract phase of construction projects can lead to limiting liability at the end of a project when things do no go as planned. In the Sloan holding, the general contractor did not bear all of the loss but was forced to pay its subs in a proportional manner to the work performed, keeping nothing for itself. Sloan pg 20. Prevent this from happening to your construction company by working through these clauses when forming your next contract.

Further reading: California Pay-if-paid Wm. R. Clarke v. Safeco Insurance (distinguished by other jurisdictions); Pay-when-paid. A google search of these terms will provide a wealth of information. Always consult with an attorney before negotiating contracts in the construction industry no matter how large or small the project.

Posted in:     Construction Contracts, Construction News, Damages, Federal, Insurance, Litigation, Payment Requirements, State & Federal Contracting  /  Tags: , , ,   /   1 Comment

Is Failure To Achieve LEED Certification Consequential Damages?

On October 14, 2010 Author By Scott Wolfe Jr

The LEED Certification process can be quite complex.   It takes months after a project’s completion to get the paperwork process, the paperwork itself can be a heafty stack, and that’s not even taking into account the complicated points framework, the certification gray-areas, the de-certification process and more…. (Want a good discussion of all these frustrating and unanswered questions?  -  See our friend Chris Cheatham’s great Green Building Law Update Blog).

Since I’m a lawyer, the LEED rating system begs this question:   What happen is a project shoots for certification, and fails?   What are the damages?   Whose on the hook?

These are some intensive questions and I can spend a few posts trying to answer.    See some of our previous posts for discussions, including review of the the LEED tag, and this post:  Uh-Oh:  I Made A LEED Mistake and Don’t Know What To Do.

What I want to focus on in this post is an interesting point that I recently read in legal article hosted at Consesusdocs.org:  Legal Commentary:  Green Building Risks.   The well-written article, by attorney Martha Perkins, discusses some issues a contractor should keep in mind when entering a green building contract.

It is the following point, however, that caught most of my attention:

Generally, a contractor should include a disclaimer guaranteeing a particular outcome such as a green-building certification or specific energy efficiency. Failure to achieve a desired certification or a specific green performance is often deemed a consequential damage. As a result, ensure that consequential damages are waived.

Two things strike me.

First, her statement that certification failures are “often deemed a consequential damage” seems a bit off the mark.    I’m not saying that these failures will not be considered consequential damages – they may – but, I’m not aware of any case law on the issue.   I would be particularly concerned about advising a construction client that a simple waiver of consequential damages could plug this liability hole.

Second, however, is her opinion that a LEED Certification failure might be considered a consequential damage…and therefore, sometime waived out of many construction contracts.

Could this be the case?

Wikipedia, the great collection of legal definitions, defines consequential damages pretty well, as follows:

When a contract is breached, the recognized remedy for an owner is recovery of damages that result directly from the breach, such as the cost to repair or complete the work in accordance with the contract documents, the loss of value of lost or damaged work. Consequential damages (also sometimes referred to as indirect or “special” damages), include loss of product and loss of profit or revenue and may be recovered if it is determined such damages were reasonably foreseeable or “within the contemplation of the parties” at the time of the contract.

Looking at this issue from a big-picture standpoint and not getting bogged down with case-law, I think there is some argument on both sides of the issue.

On the one hand, failure to certify can be considered a damage caused to the owner directly from the breach.   Now, just as the owner may have to repair an improperly constructed wall, so too does the owner have to repair his building to achieve the proper certification (or take it without the certification and assume a credit).

On the other hand, a failure to certify certainly is different than an improperly constructed item within the building.  You sometimes can’t put a dollar figure on a certification failure to calculate a credit, and the “loss” may be more closely aligned with a loss of profit or revenue as a result of the certification failure.

I found this to be an interesting point made by Ms. Perkins…but not one that is settled.    What does everyone think about this question – a consequential damage, or no?   Anyone know of any case law on the topic?

Posted in:     Damages, Green Building  /  Tags: , , , , ,   /   6 Comments
Next Page »