As a risk and insurance manager at Bland Bankart, I am aware of the case mentioned and the circumstances of the damage to the roof. Unfortunately, it seems that the clients have chosen to rely on the third party liability insurance provided by the contractors and professionals involved in the construction. This is the case with most commercial construction contracts. In this particular instance, it demonstrates the clear benefits of clients retaining control of rectification and repairs to their buildings in the event of inherent defect damage occurring to the structure beyond practical completion.
By providing first party protection, the need to prove negligence and commence legal proceedings can be removed, thus speeding the repair process. There is no mention of this potential solution in the article.
The commercial building guarantee used to be expensive and cumbersome to put in place. However, there are policies which operate in partnership with Local Authority Building Control. In most cases, they remove the need for insurer inspections thereby reducing the costs and simplifying the protocol for supplying a guarantee.
Perhaps Mr Akenhead should advise readers to consider this form of insurance to avoid the situation altogether.
Mark Jackson, Bland Bankart, via email