Ledcor claimed the damages against its insurance policy, but was declined on the basis of a clause excluding coverage for «the cost of making good faulty workmanship, construction materials or design...» Alberta's Court of Queen's Bench ruled that reasonable expectations of the parties weighed in favour of the applicants» interpretation of the insurance contract, but was overruled on appeal. (canadianlawyermag.com)
The insurer argued on appeal that the over-deflection, bending and cracking was not «direct physical loss or damage to the property insured» but a manifestation of faulty workmanship. (theallgrouponlinejournal.com)
It does not cover damage that occurs from faulty workmanship or parts or insufficient warranties. (trustedchoice.com)