If a contractor assumes liability for damages due to poor workmanship without a state law governing, will their liability insurance cover these costs?

The reason that liability insurance would cover damages arising from poor workmanship, especially when the contractor has assumed liability through a signed contract, is that such insurance typically provides coverage for claims that arise from actions the contractor takes as part of their work. When a contractor accepts responsibility for the quality of their work in a contract, they are effectively acknowledging the risk associated with that work. As a result, if a claim is made based on this liability, the contractor’s liability insurance can effectively cover the costs associated with damages that arise from their workmanship, as the claims are directly tied to their contractual obligations.

In many cases, liability insurance is designed to address these risks, especially when there is a formal agreement in place. The signed contract serves as a basis for the expectations and responsibilities of the contractor, therefore reinforcing the type of risk that the insurance is meant to cover. This means that in scenarios where the contractor's own workmanship is under scrutiny, and they have contractually accepted liability, their insurance would typically respond favorably.

The other options present limitations or conditions that do not apply directly to the scenario where a contractor has explicitly accepted liability through a signed agreement. Thus, the correct perspective emphasizes that the presence of a signed contract specifying liability is a key factor for insurance coverage