Builders liability insurance levels - what's the norm?

Cutting to the chase before explaination - does anyone here know of=20
normal/reasonable levels of liability insurance that a builder would be=20
expected to have for private residential building work in the s/w London=20
area (Richmond/Twickenham/Kingston)?
Background... about to have builder starting extending kitchen to fill=20
in the "side return" of a typical late Victorian terrace.
Neighbour, originally perfectly fine with the plans, decided she didnt=20
want it all halfway through the design process so there was=20
unfortunately no chance of amicable agreement and shaking of hands over=20
party wall act stuff (excavation > foundation depth within 3 metres,=20
building to boundary wall, etc). Served with notices, she appoints a=20
party wall surveyor who later and with much persuasion reluctantly=20
agreed that he could be appointed as independent mutually agreed=20
surveyor (else I have to pay for two surveyors).
Well, he has dragged on the drawing up of a party wall award for about 7=20
weeks now - impossible to get hold of, never returns calls, etc - and=20
now at the 11th hour decides that he wasn't going to release the award=20
(agreement) until builder deposited with him a copy of his insurance and=20
also a detailed method statement. He's sat on the insurance certificate=20
for a couple of days and now come back with a demand that he double it=20
as it is insufficient.
Builder is covered for =A31m liability for building works and =A31m public=
liability. It's enough to rebuild next door from the ground three times=20
Builders insurance brokers are somewhat puzzled - they reckon that this=20
is the norm for their other building companies carrying out similar=20
work. My father (FRICS building surveyor for 40+ years) is=20
incandescent, but his experience is all in the North.
So, if anyone does similar work, or has any direct experience of this=20
then I'd be very interested to hear of what reasonable level of=20
insurance is.
Richard Sampson
Reply to
I don't know, but buying an additional £1m of cover for one job should be pretty cheap.
Reply to
In article , owain47125 says...
I'll ask the builder about one-off cover, but he said that the insurance=20 agents had quoted him something like an extra =A31k+ for =A32m cover (thoug= h=20 in this instance I think he might have been talking about general=20 doubling of cover for the year).
--=20 Richard Sampson
Reply to
In article ,=20 says...
yep - think that's probably about right for PLI, though I could=20 understand that insurers might want a higher premium for the business of=20 builders (by the very nature of the work there is inherently more risk=20 of public injury/loss than e.g. my line of work - software development -=20 which incurs a similar premium to yours). =20
Where the increase seems to be occurring is in his "Products=20 Liability" - also =A31m (per claim and aggregated). i.e. what happens if= =20 he digs the foundations, fails to sure things up properly & next door=20 collapses (dramatically exaggerated circumstance, but it illustrates the=20 insured peril).
Problem is I just don't know who to turn to to tell me what is a=20 reasonable level of cover - and from recent experiences I dont trust the=20 party wall surveyor in this respect.
--=20 Richard Sampson
Reply to
Yes, it should be. The additional cover would only be invoked if a claim =
exceeded the existing cover so it is a low risk for the insurer.
--=20 djc
Reply to
"RichardS" wrote in message news: In article , owain47125 says... ...
When I needed £10 million product liability cover, it was a lot cheaper to get £5 million cover with one insurer and cover for claims over £5 million, up to £10 million with a second, as the risk to the second insurer was much lower. I don't know whether they same sort of two stage cover would be available at only £2 million total though.
Colin Bignell
Reply to
I had 1M public liability cover until last year when a corporate client demanded 2M. It cost me about £30 to increase my cover to 2M for the remaining six months of the year
Reply to
Anna Kettle
I think the surveyor is taking the Mickey. The level of cover is of no direct relevance to the Party Wall matters. The level of cover is normal. Suggest reporting him to his professional body.
Peter Crosland
Reply to
Peter Crosland
This demonstrates how insurance is really just a bookie's operation. Isn't this one called laying off bets?
Reply to
Andy Hall
As well as rebuild costs there are also rehousing costs, professional fees, and the possibility of litigation and potentially an adverse judgement.
If there is the slightest chance of rebuild exceeding 1m then he would be right to ask for 2m. If not, perhaps he just wants out and is trying to encurage you to walk away. Earlier comments would fit this possibility.
Reply to
Insurance is indeed merely a bookies operation, and reinsurance is a posh name for laying off bets.
Reply to
Oh, I know what they *call* it. That's just a technical term to make it look acceptable worked out by actuaries. We know that an actuary is simply an accountant who found that job too exciting for him.
Reply to
Andy Hall
"RichardS" wrote in message news:
What entitles him to demand anything ?
Threaten him that you will complain to his Institute
Reply to
Fergus O'Rourke
What does that allow you to do? For me and an assistant is nearer £60/month, and that is a very good deal as most other companies quote nearer £100/month.
Reply to
Ed Sirett
Laying off is when I place a big bet and the bookie then places another one with someone else to cover mine. In this case, I was making separate bets with two different bookies, one of whom would only need to pay out if my winnings exceeded the limit the first one had set.
Colin Bignell
Reply to

Site Timeline Threads

  • Soooooo since no one is mentioning building something I'll mention the POS I...
  • site's last updated in


HomeOwnersHub website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.