Whiting-Turner checks the policies behind subs' certificates, and compliance rose from 12% to 70%

Whitmore spoke on a panel at the construction conference of the International Risk Management Institute (IRMI), which ran Oct. 25 to 28, ENR reported. After a long selection process, the contractor brought in a compliance platform vendor, and the reviews showed that many subs did not carry what their subcontracts required: entity names did not match and required endorsements were missing. Whitmore said some executives had assumed that collecting the paperwork meant the risk had actually been transferred.

On one loss, a subcontractor had limits high enough to pay the full claim, but its policy used a different Insurance Services Office form than the subcontract called for, and Whiting-Turner could tap only part of those limits. In another case, a state workers' compensation board sent a notice that led her to a certificate printed in several fonts; the workers' comp policy listed on it belonged to another company. She also pointed to entity mismatches, such as a subcontract with ABC Drywall, LLC backed by a policy issued to ABC Drywall, Inc., and to mid-project buyouts that leave it unclear which company owes a defense.

The certificate is a one-page summary; additional insured rights come from the policy wording. An IRMI expert commentary notes that ISO's CG 20 10 endorsement covers ongoing operations while the separate CG 20 37 covers completed operations, and that since ISO's 2019 revisions its additional insured endorsements pay no more than the smaller of the policy limit or the amount the contract requires. Hyder Naqvi, CEO of verification firm Injala, told the same panel that even a job scoring 90% on compliance can leave the contractor holding a large share of the risk.