Faulty Workmanship is not an Occurrence
The South Carolina Supreme Court determined in L-J Inc. v. Bituminous Fire and Marine Ins. Co., that faulty workmanship, standing alone, could not constitute an occurrence. However, if the faulty workmanship causes an accident it would be an occurrence because it is neither expected nor anticipated from the standpoint of the insured.
In Auto Owners Insurance Co., Inc., v. Newman, the court took this decision one step further and declared that if the defect causes injury to other property there is coverage in the policy. In Newman, improperly installed stucco caused damage to both the stucco itself and to the building’s substrate. The court found coverage for the damaged substrate, but not for the actual defective stucco. The insured’s only recourse as to the faulty workmanship was against the contractor.
This site and any information contained herein is intended for informational purposes only and should not be construed as legal advice. Seek a competent attorney for advice on any legal matter.
In Auto Owners Insurance Co., Inc., v. Newman, the court took this decision one step further and declared that if the defect causes injury to other property there is coverage in the policy. In Newman, improperly installed stucco caused damage to both the stucco itself and to the building’s substrate. The court found coverage for the damaged substrate, but not for the actual defective stucco. The insured’s only recourse as to the faulty workmanship was against the contractor.
This site and any information contained herein is intended for informational purposes only and should not be construed as legal advice. Seek a competent attorney for advice on any legal matter.
Comments