Imagine you are a widget manufacturer reviewing your insurance program for potential liabilities. You or your product causing bodily injury or property damage to a third party is an obvious exposure that is commonly covered by your standard General Liability (GL) and Product Recall policies. However, the General Liability and Recall policies are missing something important. What if there are financial damages to a third party caused by neither bodily injury nor property damage?
U.S. manufacturing is growing: according to the Bureau of Economic Analysis, the manufacturing industry contributed to just over 12% of the U.S. economy in 2015. In terms of gross output, that amounted to around $6.2B of the country’s overall GDP. This figure is expected to increase with the new administration’s emphasis on spurring domestic production and anticipated incentives for businesses to keep operations stateside. A few notable companies have already considered growing their domestic manufacturing, including Ford, Carrier, and Apple. When large manufacturers increase their output, there are a host of supporting smaller component manufacturers that will also see their business grow. While new growth in production and sales is a positive development for businesses, it may also open the door to an elevated and often misunderstood risk; risk that can be transferred through the use of insurance. Structuring a comprehensive insurance program for a manufacturer includes General Liability, Product Recall, and other, often overlooked coverage, like Manufacturer’s E&O.
Brief breakdown of apparent coverage considerations:
Bottom line: With no bodily injury or property damage trigger, there is no coverage under the GL or product liability form for a third party financial loss related to the manufacture or design of a product.
Manufacturer’s E&O responds to the financial damages an insured is legally obligated to pay a third party (often a client or an end user) due to negligence in the design or manufacturing of their own product – regardless of a property damage or bodily injury trigger.
While a few carriers will tailor their traditional E&O forms for manufacturers, we’ve seen an increasing trend of dedicated Manufacturer’s E&O forms within the marketplace. Key elements of Manufacturer’s E&O may include coverage for the following activities: design, development, manufacturing, selling/reselling, installation, consulting, plan specification, labeling, packing, and instructions for use and maintenance of products.
Some insurers may extend coverage to encompass additional coverage items outside the professional liability exposure. Such insuring agreements may include product recall, replacement costs, pollution liability, regulatory liability, and even cyber liability. Generally, these additions come at an additional premium, but there is added value in a form that can comprehensively address the various liabilities faced by manufacturers.
A manufacturing or design error may also lead to a claim alleging breach of contract by the manufacturer. Many policies have a breach of contract exclusion. Policies often do not include allegations of breach of contract within the definition of claim, which is a material risk that needs to be addressed in a properly structured policy.
As discussed, there are a variety of liability exposures that manufacturers face, many of which aren’t addressed by a traditional E&O policy. While the form can be modified to suit the manufacturing exposures, there are some points where the offerings may differ, such as:
The following are a few fictional scenarios to help illustrate various E&O exposures for a manufacturer:
Given the dynamic yet relatively limited marketplace for Manufacturer’s E&O, insurance agents and brokers need to be aware of emerging coverage enhancements, as well as new players in the market. AmWINS has that needed expertise and market access. AmWINS has both a Professional Liability and Manufacturing/Distribution industry practice, with brokers able to assist with this line of coverage. In addition to the expertise and market access, AmWINS offers an exclusive Manufacturer’s E&O product from Lloyds of London. Please contact us to help round out your manufacturing clients’ insurance programs with this essential coverage.
This article was authored by Megan North and Charles Grodecki, members of AmWINS’ national Professional Lines Practice.
Legal Disclaimer. Views expressed here do not constitute legal advice. The information contained herein is for general guidance of matter only and not for the purpose of providing legal advice. Discussion of insurance policy language is descriptive only. Every policy has different policy language. Coverage afforded under any insurance policy issued is subject to individual policy terms and conditions. Please refer to your policy for the actual language.
(c) 2017 AmWINS Group, Inc.
Construction contract negotiations, which determine the kind and amount of insurance required for a construction project, can be time-consuming, complicated and frustrating. Project owners require contractors on a project to name the project owner as an additional insured on the contractor’s casualty insurance program. It's important that both project owners and contractors understand the coverage provided by these additional insured endorsements. This article discusses four common ISO additional insured endorsements related to commercial general liability policies purchased by contractors, including their limitations, conditions and exclusions.
A common complication during the claim process is the late reporting of claims. In some cases, a late claim can put the agent or broker's own E&O policy in jeopardy. There are many reasons for missing a reporting deadline; however, in most cases, they will not matter to the insurer or the courts. This article discusses typical claim reporting requirements, common causes of late reporting, and recommendations to mitigate the risk of late notice claim denials.
The theories of recovery, as well as the ensuing loss provisions, contained in property insurance policies are often complex and, at times, seemingly in conflict. Although a policy may not directly address these theories, their application by courts plays a significant role in the coverage determination process after the claim. It is essential that brokers understand the primary theories of recovery – Efficient Proximate Cause, the Concurrent Causation Doctrine, and the Anti-Concurrent Causation Doctrine – in order to navigate the challenging post-claim process and effectively serve their clients.
The Thomas Fire, the largest fire in California's history, subsequently led to a mudslide on January 9, 2018, which caused a massive amount of damage in Santa Barbara and Ventura counties. The California Insurance Commissioner has issued a formal notice reminding carriers to pay for damage, citing the "efficient proximate cause doctrine." This article takes a closer look at the doctrine and how it has been challenged in court over the years.
Ordinance or Law insurance coverage provides limited protection for costs associated with repairing, rebuilding, or constructing a structure when physical damage to the structure by a covered cause of loss triggers an ordinance or law. Compliance with ordinances and laws after a loss can add 50% or more to the cost of a claim. This article will help you educate your insureds on exclusions and limitations and help them take a proactive approach to their insurance program.
In 2017, the issue of sexual harassment – especially in the workplace – gained greater awareness as accusations of harassment by high-profile individuals were constantly in the news. In many cases, sexual harassment lawsuits seriously impacted businesses and their respective insurers. Employment Practices Liability Insurance not only provides protection against employee lawsuits, but can also help your clients mitigate their sexual harassment risks.