At a panel for the NC Bar Association Construction Law Winter Meeting, attorney Melissa Brumback and her colleagues discussed insurance issues for design professionals. One hot topic was the way architects and engineers can inadvertently invalidate their insurance by agreeing to overly broad contractual language. Frequently, this has to do with the standard of care. Melissa penned the following post for the NC Construction Law Blog, and we have reposted it here with her permission:

As most of you know, Errors & Omissions insurance (“E&O” coverage)  is meant to provide coverage for mistakes you may make in performing your professional architecture or engineering services. E&O coverage is important to protect you in the event of a lawsuit because, as you know, no set of plans is perfect (nor is perfection the standard of care).

Be careful, though. Do not promise to provide a higher standard of care than the “professional standard.”

If you are asked to sign a contract that states you will use your “professional best,” “best efforts”, “highest care” or similar, you are being asked to sign something that could cost you your E&O coverage.

Examples of such language:

[Architect] [Engineer] shall perform the Services in accordance with the highest standards of professional competence in the industry.

[Architect] [Engineer] shall exercise a high degree of care and diligence in providing the professional services.

[Architect’s] [Engineer’s] services shall be of first class quality and free from defects.

E&O policies cover you for failing to meet professional standards, but not in cases where you agree by contract to provide a higher/better/best standard. 

Explain the risks in such language to your owner clients.  No owner will want to put your insurance policy in jeopardy, and they should be willing to strike or modify that language to ensure that your work on the construction project is fully protected and covered by your E&O policy.

Some examples of coverable standards:

All services to be performed shall be performed in a manner consistent with that level of care and skill ordinarily exercised by members of Designer’s profession.

All services shall be performed in a manner consistent with that level of care and skill ordinarily exercised by members of Designer’s profession currently practicing in the location of the project for which the services are rendered, or similar locations.

Remember this, and make sure your future construction contracts contain favorable language that will actually be insurable.  You know–the whole reason you have professional liability insurance in the first place!

About the Author

Melissa Dewey Brumback, who blogs at www.constructionlawNC.com, is an attorney at Ragsdale Liggett in Raleigh, North Carolina, where she represents architects and engineers in risk avoidance, contract negotiation, and construction litigation.

shutterstock_462881602

You have just learned that the other party to your contract has filed for bankruptcy. That party owes you money for past work and the project is not yet completed. This is a difficult and confusing situation that your firm might encounter.

In this Practice Note, attorney Jeremy W. Katz provides insight into the bankruptcy mechanism and the steps you might take to protect your firm’s interests.

A prime designer or lead contractor on a design/build project files bankruptcy. Can a design professional/consultant working under contract to the entity filing for bankruptcy protection pack up its gear and walk off the job site or stop work? Can the consultant enforce its mechanics’ lien rights against the real property’s owner? Can the consultant look to the bankrupt’s payment bond for payment? A bankruptcy filed by one party to a construction contract creates significant problems that put at risk the other party’s right to payment. When this happens, the non-debtor party to the construction contract should be ready to act.

The construction business is a volatile one, and it makes little difference if times are good or bad. Prime contractors, consultants, subcontractors, and property owners are constantly filing for bankruptcy protection. They can be huge companies, such as Washington Group, International, Enron, and PG&E, or they can be small mom-and-pop operations. But no matter how large or small the bankruptcy, creditors are likely to suffer, because rarely are they paid in full. All bankruptcies have a ripple effect; the goal is to keep the waves as small as possible. In order to best protect its interests, the creditor should have some knowledge of creditors’ rights and remedies. This knowledge allows the creditor to recognize, anticipate, and act upon issues that arise in a bankruptcy.

This article identifies some of the issues that arise when a bankruptcy is filed, as well as steps a design professional/consultant or subconsultant can take to protect its interests in the project contract. First, this article describes the bankruptcy process from a general standpoint. Second, it discusses specific issues related to the bankruptcy of owners and primes, whether they are design firms or contractors on a design build project. This article is not intended to be a comprehensive study of the topic, nor is it a substitute for a good bankruptcy lawyer. Its purpose is to allow a consultant to identify problems that may affect a construction contract when a bankruptcy is filed. This knowledge makes it more likely that the contractor will fare better than other creditors in the fight to be paid.

Download the full article–Construction Contracts and Bankruptcy: The Ultimate in “Value Engineering”–to continue reading the following sections:

  • How Bankruptcy Works – An Overview
  • Pending or Executory Contracts
  • Perfect Your Mechanics’ Lien Rights!
  • The Automatic Stay
  • Unauthorized or Preferential Transfers, or Having to Give Money Back to the Debtor

If you have further questions on construction contracts and bankruptcy, contact your local a/e ProNet broker. We’re here to help!

PNN_1312This article reviews some of the issues addressed in a standard Owner/Design Professional Agreement, outlines concerns from the Design Professional’s perspective, and discusses how the Design Professional can reduce liability on a project and ensure equitable adjustments to the contract price and schedule for changed or additional design services. The agreement contemplated by this article is one to be used as part of a traditional design-bid-build approach.

Standard of Care

When trying to hold a Design Professional liable for negligence, one of the first legal considerations is the standard of care owed. Absent an express contractual warranty, the law does not require the Design Professional to guarantee that the design will be perfect. Rather, the standard of care that the courts will typically apply is that degree of care which a reasonably careful architect/ engineer would use under like circumstances. However, nothing prevents an Owner from seeking contractual language that increases the typical standard of care owed by the Design Professional to the level of an express warranty of the design; in fact, Owners frequently attempt to do so in their proposed agreements – and courts will enforce such language. This is a danger to the Design Professional, as it is possible that the increased standard of care could go beyond professional liability insurance coverage available to the Design Professional. Thus, the Design Professional should insist on the deletion of any such guarantee as unreasonable.

Similarly, a Design Professional should insist on the deletion of any proposed language that attempts to establish a fiduciary duty between the Design Professional and the Owner, as such language also results in an increased standard of care owed on the Project. Continue reading “Review of the Owner/Design Professional Agreement from The Design Professional’s Perspective”