|
March 3, 2008
Questions and answers about the impact on
insurance rates for small builders
Will
SB 6385 drive up the cost of insurance builders are
required to carry?
First, we have to look at what insurance builders are
required to carry. RCW 18.27 requires builders to
provide $250,000 in liability insurance to cover claims
made for personal injury or property damage caused by
the builder. All builder policies exclude coverage for
defective work and breach of contract. More recently, to
avoid having to cover water damage claims, insurers have
excluded coverage for any form of water intrusion, wet
or dry rot, mold, mildew and decay. SB 6385 does not add
any additional requirements to carry insurance.
It is hard to see how insurance premiums will rise
when the insurers do not provide coverage for the types
of claims that might arise from these warranties.
Have mandatory warranties driven up the costs of
insurance in other states?
At least ten other states require home builder
warranties, including California, which has had a
mandatory 10 warranty for years. No one, not BIAW or
Master Builders has shown any impact on residential
building following the enactment of warranty
legislation. Until the end of 2006, most homebuilders,
including California and Oregon builders, enjoyed record
profits. This may change now due to the nationwide
bursting of the housing bubble, but not because of laws
holding builders accountable for shoddy construction.
According to the Master Builders Website, at least 19
states require builders to have liability insurance.
These programs have been in place for many years. Master
Builders does NOT report that these states have seen
huge increases in insurance premiums. In fact, they
offer no information or evidence of any insurance
impact.
Won’t the bill increase insurance premiums?
Even if the liability policies covered claims for
breach of warranties, or are offered in the future, all
such insurance is experienced-based. That means the
insurers will look at the experience of the builders in
terms of prior lawsuits, and claims against them. It’s
no different than obtaining auto insurance, which is
also required by law. If you have repeated traffic
violations, your premiums will go up. If you drive for
five years without a violation or accident, your
premiums decline. It is and has been the same for
builders. Even without the warranty bill, insurers have
charged builders various rates depending on the number
of accident claims filed against them.
Can’t homeowners get their own insurance?
No. Every homeowner’s insurance policy specifically
excludes damages due to construction and design defects,
including latent defects. Those policies also exclude
damages arising from water intrusion, mold, wet and dry
rot. Homeowners cannot buy coverage to protect them from
construction defects.
What effect will the warranty bill have on overall
quality of construction?
Our society operates on principles of personal
responsibility. If you act recklessly and insure either
a person or his property, the common law requires the
responsible party to pay the other party for his damage.
Builders have never had to compensate injured
homeowners for damages to their homes. The warranty bill
would, for the first time, impose responsibility on the
builders. This is no different than other industries,
including doctors, lawyers, pharmacists, salon
operators, and dog trainers. If you are negligent, you
can be held responsible. If you want to minimize those
risks, you find ways to cut down on your exposure. You
send your employees for new training, you attend
continuing education courses. Maybe, you hire a
consultant to look at your operations. The point is,
when you know you can be held accountable, you respond
in a business-like way.
Builders will send their key people to waterproofing
seminars to learn from experts how to avoid these
problems. In fact, commercial builders and condominium
builders hire experts to oversee the construction. All
subcontractors on condominiums have to prove to the
developers that they have the expertise to perform the
required work. There is no doubt that builders will
train themselves and their subcontractors to minimize
the risk by improving the quality of their work.
Builders who try to cut corners, who refuse to adjust
their work, will and should suffer from performing
shoddy workmanship, the same way other businesses suffer
from negligence. If some unscrupulous builders go out of
business, that may be a good thing. Their futures are in
their own hands.
If insurers do not currently insure construction
defects, is it fair to require that they be held
accountable?
Right now, it is the homebuyer himself who is acting
as the builder’s insurer. If the builder builds a shoddy
home, the buyer not only has to pay to buy it, but then
has to pay again to fix it. The homebuyer is in effect
offering free insurance to the builder. Is that fair?
To answer this question, we have to remember that
builders are already required to comply with all
building codes and ordinances. The Warranty bill does
not add any requirements. Also, with most new home
purchases, buyers have no ability to verify that the
homes were built properly. So, as between the builders
and the buyers, the builders are the only ones capable
of preventing the defect in the first place.
As a society, we have decided to require minimum
building codes, minimum standards for food production
and safety, labor standards, and many other regulations.
We do so without regard to whether the responsible party
can obtain insurance. Government’s job is to protect
people from unreasonable risk of harm to persons and
property. We cannot base decisions on whether to protect
ourselves on whether insurance is available or not.
Is there anything contractors and insurers can do
to minimize any impact from the new warranties?
The bill does not take effect until July 2009, more
than 16 months from now. During that time, builders and
insurers should get together to discuss what they can do
to minimize any impact. For example, insurers could
provide coverage for ordinary construction defects if
builders agree to undergo training and certification.
The industry could offer waterproofing classes,
superintendent classes, and subcontractor certification.
Hospital insurers routinely audit hospitals to verify
compliance with health and safety standards. They
compare a hospital’s surgery results with other
hospitals. They require administrators to certify that
all surgery centers meet minimum quality standards.
Builders and their insurers could do the same thing.
If hospitals can run efficiently, if space programs can
operate effectively, home builders can learn to build
homes without major defects. Doing so will result in
better homes, and lower costs of both construction and
insurance. Those builders who go through the appropriate
training could use that as a marketing tool. Maybe the
industry would offer a certificate course and builders
who participate would qualify for lower cost of
insurance.
Builders committed to high quality construction, and
not the highest possible profit, will prosper. Those
whose only goal is to maximize profit will eventually
suffer the consequences, as they should.
Is there anything small builders can do to minimize
the effects on their businesses?
They should ask their associations, the BIAW or
Master Builders, to offer training courses and establish
quality standards. They could also self-insure through
BIAW. Imagine that BIAW would offer high quality
training programs throughout the state. If a builder
obtains the BIAW certificate of Excellence, it would
become eligible for self insurance through BIAW.
During construction, BIAW could send its own
inspectors to inspect their Excellence members’ work, to
identify any problems and protect both the builders and
the homeowners. This program would bring down the costs
of construction in the long run, and the number of
construction defect claims.
They should be doing this now, but they have no
incentive because they have immunity from lawsuits and
can’t be held accountable. Bills to hold builders
accountable have been offered in Olympia for a decade,
but they have been defeated by the industry. Builders
will not have any financial incentive to improve their
practices unless they can be held accountable.
Return to Sen. Weinstein's home page
|