Second Circuit rules in a trio of cases that the collapse provision of an insurance policy does not cover the cost of fixing a cracked foundation due to defective construction. In the past several years dozens of suits have been filled which stem from the faulty concrete used to pour foundations for homes in Connecticut. Due to this defect these homes began developing vertical and horizontal cracks in their concrete foundations; however the properties have remained standing.
The policy language only provided coverage for a “collapse of a building structure . . . [that is] a sudden and accidental direct physical loss” and “does not include settling, cracking, shrinking, bulging or expansion.” The court ruled that this language was not satisfied as the buildings remained standing. The limited definition of collapse as defined by the Additional Protection portion of the policy is sufficient to bar coverage in the instance of these claims.