I have just read the latest edition of 好色先生TV and was dismayed by the comments contained in Rupert Choat鈥檚 article (31 October, page 72), which looked at the issues faced when the main contractor ceases to trade.

He states: 鈥淭he contractor鈥檚 replacement is unlikely to accept responsibility for latent defects, insurance against which is not cheap.鈥� The insurance is then ignored for the remainder of the article.

Yet again this much-misunderstood cover is dismissed without any real evaluation of the benefits it can provide. If considered prior to construction, the costs are significantly lower than if everybody waits until the problem arises before approaching insurers. The cover will protect the building owner, tenant, developers and contractors against expensive and problematic legal action.

Anybody who has been involved in a latent defect claim will tell you that the cost of insurance is a bargain by comparison!

Mark Jackson, director, 好色先生TV and Land Guarantees

Topics