When a lease makes a specific reference to “Builders Risk” coverage, we know the conversation is going to go sideways. That’s because the proponent of that provision rarely knows anything more about that kind of insurance than can be intuited from the words: “Builders Risk” itself.
Here is an opening premise: the normal (ISO) coverage form for “Building and Personal Property Coverage” does not pertain to buildings under construction. [The ISO, or Insurance Services Office, is an association of insurance companies and it promulgates commonly used insurance forms. Many, but not all carriers use these forms. So, people who really want to know what is or is not covered always need to look at the policy itself. Those who draft leases might want to requires insurance policies to be on ISO forms or be on the functional equivalent of those forms.] [Read more…]
Print
Without a remedy, your lease or other contract is suitable only for framing. And, to save you a trip to the mall, the range of standard size frames does not include 8-1/2 by 11 inches. In two prior Ruminations’ postings – 
The purpose of asking for a representation in a purchase contract, lease or other agreement is two-fold. The representation serves as a risk-shifting device and it serves as an element of the due diligence process. This is never clearer than when it comes to the ever contentious “environmental rep.”
Here’s a “bonus” posting, but you’ll need to decide if “bonus” is the right description. This is somewhat autobiographical but, as they say, “write from your own life experience.” This week we received two notices that were sent to us by certified mail. That’s not unusual because we often receive notices by certified mail. After all, we are named in many documents as a secondary, but required, place to where notices must be sent. What was unusual was that the certified mail envelopes themselves were inside a larger envelope that was mailed to us, by ordinary mail, directly from the original sender of the notices. The original notices were mailed on March 9. We eventually received them on April 16. 
First, thank you for all of the comments and observations you posted to last week’s blog entry. There were more than a dozen other valuable comments made to various Linked in Groups as well. Ruminations is about provoking discussion and, without your participation, it wouldn’t be a discussion. All in all, a typical posting now sees about 20 comments.
If you want to make a deal, then you’ve got to deal. You’ve got to trade. Yes, it requires give and take. You’ve got to satisfy the other side’s legitimate needs and concerns. That’s why I’ve never understood any of the negotiating responses listed below. Some can be countered with the question, “why.” Others are just negotiation enders or merely the start of a detour about process, not substance. Even the ones that naturally lead to a “why” response are sidetracking frustrations. They wouldn’t be such if the speaker continued with “because.” After all, how can you satisfy someone’s legitimate needs or concerns if they haven’t expressed them? 
Recent Comments