- An environmental consultant provided plans and specifications for the installation of monitoring wells at a contaminated facility. Contamination had seeped from the ground surface into a shallow aquifer. Following installation of monitoring wells, sampling showed evidence of contamination in both the shallow aquifer and in a lower lying aquifer. The facility owner filed an insurance claim against the consultant, alleging that well placement (location and depth) was responsible for the cross-contamination of the lower lying aquifer. The settlement amounted to $250,000.
- An environmental consultant performed a Phase I Site Assessment at a site that had been used previously for industrial purposes. The consultant submitted a report stating that negligible contamination had been found. The property was subsequently sold. During excavation, an unregistered leaking underground storage tank (UST) was discovered on the site. The property developer sued the consultant for $1.2 million for remediation expenses, lost profits, and diminution in value.
- A consultant failed to delineate wetlands on property which was to be developed into a new regional landfill. As a result, the landfill had to be re-engineered, thus delaying its opening. The settlement amounted to $7 million.
- A developer retained a consultant to perform a geologic/geotechnical investigation for a residential subdivision. During final grading of the site, a major landslide occurred which extended off-site and impacted adjacent properties. The developer filed a suit against the consultant for breach of contract and negligence in failing to provide proper design engineering services during excavation of a sloped area. The resulting settlement totaled $300,000.
- A landfill retained a consultant to design and perform construction observation for improvements to a site, including the installation of a storm drainage system. An explosion occurred in a concrete out-flow box into which the landfill system drained. Bodily injury insurance claims due to worker injuries exceeded $400,000.
While the coverages we offer are designed to address these general issues, we make no guarantee or warranty that any individual policy we offer will respond to all issues as described herein. Please refer to the actual policy wording in each offered form to determine coverage applicability and acceptability. In the event your client applies for coverage and we offer terms, please review those terms carefully to determine if all of your client’s exposures are being addressed. In some instances, more than one policy or type of coverage may be necessary.