BuildROI – For Insurers and Warranty Providers

For Insurers and Warranty Providers

Offsite and hybrid construction raise questions about responsibility and evidence. BuildROI would capture independent, verified evidence at every milestone, and the pilot would test whether that helps you underwrite and handle claims with more confidence.
Current Position: BuildROI is at proposal stage: no live projects have been completed, and no insurer has endorsed it. A government-funded pilot is proposed to test it properly. This page describes what the pilot would test, and we would like insurers to tell us whether we have it right.

The Questions MMC Raises

Concerns that are often raised about MMC delivery include:

  • No single party responsible for both factory production and installation
  • Disputes between manufacturer and installer that leave liability unclear
  • Evidence that is inconsistent or incomplete from one project to the next
  • Defects found on site that are expensive and hard to attribute

Why it matters: where responsibility and evidence are unclear, it is harder to be confident about the risk. We would like to hear from insurers whether we have understood this correctly.

How BuildROI Would Help

BuildROI would bring independent governance across the whole delivery pathway, from factory to final installation:

  • Verified milestones at factory, transport, craning, installation and commissioning
  • Evidence-based sign-off using photos, video, measurements and checklists, taken by an independent Project Manager and dated and stamped
  • One accountable team from factory to installation, with a documented trail
  • Earlier defect detection in the factory, where fixes should be cheaper and faster
  • Escrow-controlled payments, released only after independent verification

BuildROI doesn't decide who is liable. That stays with the contract and the policy. What BuildROI adds is a clear record of what happened, and when.

What the Pilot Would Tell Insurers

Defects

Are fewer found, found earlier, and easier to attribute?

Disputes

Do disputes between manufacturers and installers fall when the evidence is captured at the time?

Evidence

Is it complete and consistent enough to rely on when underwriting or handling a claim?

Data

Would project-level data on factory QA, installation accuracy, defect rates, timelines and cost predictability be useful to you?

An independent evaluator, chosen by government, would assess the answers. BuildROI wouldn't.

Working With BuildROI

We aren't asking insurers for special terms, or to endorse anything. Cover and pricing are for insurers to decide. We would like three things:

  • Your view on what evidence you would need to see before it changed how you assess an MMC or hybrid project
  • A look at samples of the pilot's evidence, and your feedback on whether it is good enough
  • If you are willing, a comparison of verified jobs with your own claims data, so the evidence can be tested against real outcomes

Get in touch: contact jim@buildroi.co.uk to discuss how BuildROI's evidence could support your approach to MMC.

← Back to the homepage  ·  The case for government →

Data builds the case. People make it work.