Good points, but honestly, relying solely on builder insurance—even with thorough checks—still makes me uneasy. I've seen cases where exclusions were buried deep enough that even brokers missed them initially. Personally, I prefer pushing for clear contractual language upfront that explicitly assigns responsibility for specific risks. It's a bit of a hassle negotiating that, sure, but it beats the stress of discovering coverage gaps mid-project...especially when you're knee-deep in mud and broken pipes.
"Personally, I prefer pushing for clear contractual language upfront that explicitly assigns responsibility for specific risks."
Couldn't agree more. Learned that lesson the hard way when our basement flooded mid-renovation. Builder's insurance conveniently excluded "groundwater intrusion," buried deep in the fine print. Ended up footing a hefty bill ourselves. Now I always insist on spelling out responsibilities clearly in the contract—it's tedious upfront, sure, but saves you from nasty surprises later on. Better safe than sorry...
Had a similar headache when a client's roof leaked during construction—builder claimed it was "weather-related" and not covered. Now I always push for explicit language on weather damage too. Contracts are boring, but vague wording costs way more in the end...
"Contracts are boring, but vague wording costs way more in the end..."
Couldn't agree more—how many times do we all learn that lesson the hard way? Ever tried negotiating insurance coverage for flooding or drainage issues? Absolute nightmare if the wording isn't crystal clear. Builders love to lean on "acts of nature" to dodge responsibility, but what exactly qualifies as weather-related anyway? Heavy rain, sure, but what about a storm that's stronger than expected?
I once had a project delayed because a retaining wall collapsed during heavy winds. Builder said it was an "unforeseeable event." Seriously, wind in autumn...unforeseeable? After that fiasco, I always push for specifics: wind speeds, rainfall inches, even temperature extremes if relevant. It's tedious as hell, but when something goes south, you'll be grateful you spent those extra hours hashing out details.
Have you found builders willing to get specific without pushback, or is it always a struggle to nail down those definitions clearly?
Totally agree about getting ultra-specific. I usually ask builders to define exactly what "standard conditions" mean for humidity and moisture levels—especially with wood flooring. Learned that lesson after a client’s hardwood warped from "unexpected" humidity... expensive fix.
