ROOFING, CLADDING & FAÇADES
High rise residential buildings, façade design, fire engineering services and remediation projects continue to attract the most intense underwriting scrutiny.
As Daniel explains, this point has been some time coming:“ Wren absorbed a high number of notifications relating to pre 2019 work, claims many commercial insurers were reluctant to cover, and sadly that meant the exposure eventually became unsustainable. Wren asked members for additional funds beyond normal premiums to shore up reserves. Several practices decided the cost wasn’ t worth it and signalled they would likely leave.”
He continues:“ A mutual needs enough members to spread risk and operate efficiently. Once departures reached a critical mass, Wren’ s board concluded it could no longer offer competitive cover.”
Who is most affected- and who else should care? When asked who feels the biggest impact, Daniel is clear:“ Architects, fundamentally. Wren was an architects’ mutual, so it never covered contractors. Its closure directly affects design practices, particularly those with fire safety or cladding exposure.”
However, he is clear that the implications extend further:“ Contractors aren’ t immune here. They rely on their design consultants having adequate PI cover. If architects face narrower terms, higher excesses, or outright coverage gaps, that risk can ripple back through the supply chain- especially on design and build contracts where the contractor warrants the design.”
For planners and developers, this matters because insurance constraints can increasingly influence who can be appointed, on what scope, and at what stage risk becomes unmanageable.
Why cladding and façades remain under scrutiny Insurers remain highly alert to risk in cladding and fire related design. High rise residential buildings, façade design, fire engineering services and remediation projects continue to attract the most intense underwriting scrutiny.
That does not mean insurance is unavailable, but it does mean insurers are selective. As Daniel confirms:“ Exclusions or sub limits for these areas have been more common when the insurance market hardened. As general market conditions have improved, insurers
Daniel White
can provide cover if you can demonstrate product traceability, strict governance and compliance processes but the scrutiny is intense and generally reserved for best of sector.”
This is where specification and system clarity become relevant beyond aesthetics or cost. At Valcan, we see how non combustible systems, transparent testing data and clearly documented system performance can reduce ambiguity. From an insurer’ s standpoint, ambiguity equals uncertainty and uncertainty is priced as risk.
What architects should be focusing on now One clear message from Consort Insurance is that PI should now be treated as a strategic risk issue, not an annual administrative exercise.
As Daniel advises:“ Make sure the broker you select is competent in a complex professional indemnity placement. The market will be restricted, so the temptation might be to go to multiple brokers, but any more than two won’ t give you the best outcome. Selecting one may seem counter intuitive but interviewing several and then appointing one from there could well deliver the best result this year.”
Policy wording also demands closer attention than it did under Wren. Commercial insurers are more inclined to apply exclusions, aggregation clauses and restrictive notification triggers. Run off cover is particularly important, given that PI exposure can extend 12 years or more beyond project completion.
PAGE 87- ARCHETECH