Reputation: 5
-
Total posts: 1
Hello,
</br>Just thinking on this one a bit. Why would the homeowner agree to sign a WOS contract with the contractor in the first place? That's basically suggesting if any damages occur, the homeowner is waiving their right to subrogate the loss against the contractor, which would then fall entirely under the home insurer and is a terrible clause/transfer of liability for any insurer to accept. No wonder they want off the risk.
</br>This may be customary for joint ventures between contractors and subs, but certainly not in a construction relationship from my experience between contractor and homeowner.
</br>The first thing I would recommend is scratching that from the agreement.
</br>Second, you need to ask the question whether the home will be vacant during renovation. Theft of building materials/builders risk is typically only necessary during vacancy so if they'll be occupying the home during these renovations, you shouldn't be required to add. Wasn't part of your initial question but something to keep in mind.
</br>Finally, you should just be able to endorse the policy for the higher limits anticipating the value once completed.
</br>Many carriers don't like to get on the hook for renovations at inception, in which case either a specialty lines renovation or vacant renovation policy may be most prudent, however if Chubb has been on this risk for a while, and the client is now undergoing renovations mid-term, I suppose they could go through the formal process of cancellation, which depending on the state would take a few months or they generally just deal with it and remain on the risk, especially if all else meets their desirability guidelines.
</br>If they want to cancel after a number of years, that's a sour business move but they reserve the right to do so if they uncover a situation that materially changes their initial perspective of the risk. Take for example a vicious dog breed now in the home. Either way, I'd advise the client to reject that clause to preserve their insurability as the path of least resistance and best course of action if they can get it scrapped is just send Chubb the revised agreement and they'll likely rescind the NOC. They certainly don't want a formal NOC on their file when approaching a new market so best to get ahead of it before firm decisions are processed.
</br>Good luck!