PNN_1602We’ve posted several times about the confusion surrounding so-called “standard contracts,” as well as the most commonly misunderstood clauses in design professional contracts. When reviewing a new contract for the first time, it can be helpful to know what sound contract language looks like. In February, we published an issue of ProNetwork News titled Template of Reasonable Contract Clauses for Design Professionals. In it, author Kent Holland of ConstructionRisk, LLC lays out 16 templates to help architects and engineers deal with contract review and negotiation.

The following is an excerpt of the Indemnification clause portion of the newsletter, including six different templates for this deceptively complex contractual requirement:

In the examples provided below, some include an obligation to indemnify a client for reasonable attorneys fees and defense costs.  To the extent the a/e is required to pay attorneys fees for its client only because it obligated itself do so by the indemnification clause (i.e., attorneys fees would not be imposed on the a/e by a court under common or law or statute), then these costs will not be covered by insurance.  The contractual liability exclusion will bar their recovery.

Sample 1:

Consultant shall indemnify and hold harmless the Client, its officers, directors, employees, from and against those liabilities, damages and costs that Client is legally obligated to pay as a result of the death or bodily injury to any person or the destruction or damage to any property, to the extent caused by the willful misconduct, negligent act, error or omission of the Consultant or anyone for whom the Consultant is legally responsible, subject to any limitations of liability contained in this Agreement. Consultant will reimburse Client for reasonable defense costs for claims arising out of Consultant’s professional negligence based on the percentage of Consultant’s liability.

Sample 2: For California contracts must add that there is no duty to defend:

Consultant shall indemnify and hold harmless (but not defend) the Client, its officers, directors, employees, from and against those liabilities, damages and costs that Client is legally obligated to pay as a result of the death or bodily injury to any person or the destruction or damage to any property, to the extent caused by the willful misconduct, negligent act, error or omission of the Consultant or anyone for whom the Consultant is legally responsible, subject to any limitations of liability contained in this Agreement. Consultant will reimburse Client for reasonable defense costs for claims arising out of Consultant’s professional negligence based on the percentage of Consultant’s liability.

Continue reading “Indemnification Clause Templates for Architects & Engineers”

The word standard implies many things. A bar to be cleared; a rubric to be followed. But for design professionals, the word becomes tricky when applied to contracts. Project owners often want to keep things simple by requiring so-called Standard Contracts for all parties. This is a problem for architects and engineers, especially from an insurance perspective.

Construction contracts cause problems for design professionals.

The following are a few Frequently Asked Questions we see from architects and engineers on this issue:

My project Owner insists on using their own contract for hiring my professional services. They are adamant this is a Standard Contract. How should I respond?

There is no such thing as a Standard Contract. Be sure to read each contract submitted by your clients carefully. You need to understand both the client’s expectations and your firm’s rights and responsibilities. It is a good idea to have all owner-drafted agreements reviewed by your attorney and/or insurance broker. This will help to determine whether you are accepting responsibility beyond what common law would hold you to in the absence of the agreement.  If, for example, you agree to accountability beyond the protection afforded by your professional liability insurance, that’s a problem.

When I perform professional services for a Contractor in lieu of an Owner, should I be concerned?

Yes. Construction contracts are not meant to be used in this arrangement; they are not designed to meet the needs of the design professional.

What are some of the problems with using “construction contracts” for design services?

Construction contracts are problematic for design professionals. A General Contractor’s contract with a project Owner includes certain requirements (e.g. means, methods, procedures, sequences, safety, etc.). These requirements trickle down to construction subcontractors the verbiage of construction contracts. Beyond that, none of these requirements meet the test of what a design professional should required to do on the same job.

Contract document libraries available via the AIA and EJCDC can be a good place for design professionals to begin. These are standard in the sense that they are templates. However, it’s still important to seek individualized guidance from your attorney and/or insurance broker.

What are some of the other problems with utilizing “construction contracts” for design services?

Most construction contracts contain warranties/guarantees, and some have performance standards. To our knowledge, all professional liability insurance policies for design professionals exclude coverage for warranties/guarantees and (likely) performance standards. Remember: if you commit your design firm to more responsibility than the law expects of you, your insurance policy cannot protect you the way that it should.

We hope you’ve found this helpful. As always, be sure to contact your local a/e ProNet broker if you have further questions.

Some of the most frequently asked questions we hear are triggered by the disparities between the insurance coverage available to design professionals and the demands made for coverage by general contractors and their standard contracts.

 

shutterstock_333194531

This is a nuanced area, and you should call your local a/e ProNet broker if you have specific questions. In the meantime, here are a few quick answers to the biggest FAQs concerning this issue:

Is it wise of General Contractors to require professional subconsultants to sign their usual sub-contract form?

No. Contractors that require the use of the same contract form used for construction sub-contractors may unwittingly void the precise coverage they are seeking from their design professional. Professional Liability (Errors & Omissions, or E&O) policies for design professionals typically exclude warranties and guarantees, which are generally an integral part of construction sub-contracts. If the design firm “agrees” to the warranties and guarantees or any other responsibility excluded by their professional liability policy, the design firm will be assuming the defense costs and payment obligations if an award is granted by the courts.

The General Contractor has requested to be named as an “Additional Insured” on my professional liability policy. Can I accommodate this request?

It is not a good idea to name the contractor as an additional insured in the sub-consultant’s design E&O policy, because an “Insured vs Insured” exclusion exists in virtually all design E&O policies. If the contractor believes he has a cause of action against his subconsultant design firm, this exclusion will eliminate coverage for both the contractor and the design firm.

How can the General Contractor protect themselves?

The General Contractor may purchase Contractor’s Professional Liability insurance. This will protect the General Contractor from vicarious liability claims from third parties and also solves the problem of the “Insured vs Insured” exclusion that would apply if the contractor brings an action against the subconsultant design firm, when named as an additional insured. Another benefit is a separate set of insurance limits. The General Contractor would have their own set of insurance limits that would not be subject to dilution or reduction from other claimants against the design professional’s E&O policy covering their general practice.

Why would the General Contractor need Professional Liability coverage?

Several reasons:

The General Contractor has the same “vicarious liability” for the negligent acts, errors or omissions of their professional subconsultants as they do for the non-professional subcontractors.

The General Contractor cannot rely solely on the hold harmless indemnity clause in the contract document. The hold harmless may not be enforceable in certain jurisdictions because of the language of the indemnity clause.

The subconsultant may not have sufficient insurance or their policy limits may be reduced or exhausted from other claims.

The subconsultant’s policies may be cancelled by the carrier giving notice or for non-payment of premiums. The General Contractor is then left with a false sense of security if they rely on the general liability insurance of the subconsultant, which excludes professional design activities and responsibilities.

Meeting halfway, in this case, really involves helping everyone acquire appropriate coverage. If you are a General Contractor in need of Professional Liability (E&O) insurance, or if you are a design professional who needs someone to explain all this to a General Contractor demanding such ill-advised insurance/contract decisions, please don’t hesitate to call on us.

More answers to Frequently Asked Questions can be found on our FAQ page.