Good point about the hybrid paperwork approach; I've noticed similar things in construction contracts too. Even when digital signatures are accepted, some contractors still insist on physical copies for certain critical documents—like change orders or substantial completion certificates. It feels redundant, but I guess it's partly about legal reassurance. Maybe insurers and builders alike are cautious due to past disputes or court rulings that favored paper trails? Seems like it'll take a while yet before everyone fully trusts digital records...
"Maybe insurers and builders alike are cautious due to past disputes or court rulings that favored paper trails?"
That's probably spot-on. When we renovated our place, the builder specifically asked for physical copies of every single change order. Seemed unnecessary at first, but later, when there was confusion about some tile work, having that paper trail saved us from a big headache. I'd guess insurers push for this approach too... digital is convenient, but old habits (and caution) die hard.
Digital records can be just as solid, though. Had a project last year where a pipe burst—insurance accepted our digital docs without issue. It's less about format, more about clarity and consistency in documentation. Paper isn't always king...
Digital docs are convenient, sure, but I've had a couple of experiences where insurers got picky about timestamps and metadata authenticity. Had a client whose claim dragged on because the insurer questioned the digital trail—nothing major, just enough to cause headaches. Paper might not be king, but sometimes having a physical backup tucked away can save you from unnecessary stress...just saying.
Fair point about insurers getting picky, but isn't the real issue more about how clearly the digital docs are managed rather than digital vs. paper itself? I've seen paper backups get lost or damaged plenty of times—coffee spills, anyone? Maybe the trick is having a solid digital archiving system with clear audit trails and secure timestamps. Ever tried using third-party verification services to keep insurers happy? Curious if that might ease some of those headaches...
