Builder Insurance—Ever Wondered Who Covers the Mishaps?
Been there—my last build was a real eye-opener. I figured “builder’s risk” meant I was covered, but when a pipe burst (contractor error), it was a mess. The builder’s insurance didn’t cover shoddy work, just accidental damage. Ended up chasing the contractor’s liability insurance, which took ages. I did get a homeowner’s policy before moving in, and honestly, it saved me when some tools got stolen near the end. It felt like overkill at the time, but looking back, better safe than sorry... The overlap is annoying, but gaps are worse.
The builder’s insurance didn’t cover shoddy work, just accidental damage. Ended up chasing the contractor’s liability insurance, which took ages.
That’s exactly the kind of headache I ran into with our last place. The builder’s risk policy looked solid on paper, but when a sub messed up the hardwood install, it was a finger-pointing circus. I’m still not sure if anyone ever really “owns” the problem until you threaten legal action. Did you ever get clarity on whether your homeowner’s policy would’ve covered something like faulty workmanship, or is that always a hard no? The fine print is wild...
- Yep, seen this mess way too often.
- Homeowner’s policies almost always exclude “faulty workmanship”—they’ll cover the damage it causes, but not fixing the bad work itself.
- The “who’s responsible” game gets wild when multiple subs are involved. Sometimes I wonder if anyone actually reads these insurance docs all the way through…
- Once had a client who thought their policy covered everything—turns out, only water damage from burst pipes, not the botched tiling job that caused the leak in the first place.
- The language in those policies is so vague, it’s like they want you to give up and eat the cost.
- 100% agree on the “who’s responsible” circus. Once you’ve got three or four trades in the mix, everyone’s pointing fingers and nobody wants to own up.
-
Couldn’t have said it better. I’ve read through a few of those policies and honestly, half the time I’m not sure what’s covered until something actually goes wrong.The language in those policies is so vague, it’s like they want you to give up and eat the cost.
- One thing I’ve noticed—some policies will cover “resulting damage” but not the actual repair of the shoddy work. So if a bad roof job leads to water damage, you might get new drywall but you’re still stuck with the original roof bill.
- Not sure if anyone else has tried, but getting a straight answer from an agent is like pulling teeth. They’ll dance around specifics until you’re blue in the face.
- I get why they don’t want to pay for every mistake, but man, it feels like you need a law degree just to figure out what’s actually protected.
- At this point, I just assume I’m on the hook for anything that isn’t catastrophic... keeps the surprises to a minimum.
BUILDER INSURANCE—EVER WONDERED WHO COVERS THE MISHAPS?
Honestly, I can’t blame you for feeling like you need a law degree just to read these policies. The legalese is exhausting. And you’re right about “resulting damage” versus fixing the original issue—it’s such a frustrating loophole. I had a similar experience with a custom window install gone wrong. Insurance paid for the damaged hardwood floors from the leak, but the shoddy window that caused it? Not their problem. It’s almost like they design these policies to keep you in the dark.
That said, I’ve found that being persistent—sometimes borderline annoying—does eventually get you clearer answers from agents. Not perfect ones, but at least something you can work with. It’s definitely not ideal, but I guess it’s better than nothing.
Your approach of expecting to cover anything short of a total disaster isn’t far off from reality, at least in my experience. It’s a bit disheartening, but at least it keeps the sticker shock down when something goes sideways.
