Construction contracts are notoriously complex documents, often running dozens of pages with dense legal language that can overwhelm even experienced contractors.
While most business owners understand the importance of reading contracts before signing, the reality is that many contractors skim through these documents, focusing only on the scope of work and payment terms. This oversight can prove catastrophically expensive.
Hidden within the fine print of construction contracts are clauses specifically designed to shift risk away from project owners, developers, and general contractors onto subcontractors and suppliers.
These provisions can expose your business to unlimited liability, strip away your legal protections, and leave you financially responsible for problems you didn’t create.
Understanding these risk-shifting clauses isn’t just good business practice—it’s essential for your company’s survival.
Indemnification Clauses: The Silent Business Killer
Perhaps no contract provision poses a greater threat to contractors than broad indemnification clauses.
These clauses require one party to compensate another for losses, damages, or liabilities arising from the project. While some level of indemnification is standard and reasonable, many contracts contain overreaching provisions that can devastate your business.
Broad Form Indemnification represents the most dangerous type. These clauses require you to indemnify the other party for their own negligence, even when you bear no responsibility for the incident.
Imagine this scenario: You’re a subcontractor working on a construction site when the general contractor’s superintendent fails to secure a load properly, causing materials to fall and injure a worker.
With a broad form indemnification clause, you could be required to defend the general contractor in the resulting lawsuit and pay damages—despite having no role in causing the accident.
Many states have recognized the unfairness of broad form indemnification and enacted anti-indemnity statutes that limit or prohibit such clauses in construction contracts.
However, these laws vary significantly by jurisdiction, and some states still permit these provisions.
Even in states with anti-indemnity laws, contracts may still contain unenforceable broad indemnification language, and you’ll need legal assistance to challenge them.
Intermediate Form Indemnification clauses are more common and require you to indemnify the other party for damages arising from your negligence or the combined negligence of both parties. While more reasonable than broad form provisions, these clauses still expose you to liability beyond your proportional share of fault.
Limited Form Indemnification is the most equitable approach, requiring you to indemnify the other party only for damages caused solely by your own negligence. This aligns responsibility with actual fault and is the type of indemnification provision contractors should accept.
When reviewing indemnification clauses, watch for language like “to the fullest extent permitted by law,” “arising out of or in connection with,” or “caused in whole or in part by.” These phrases often signal overreaching provisions that shift disproportionate risk onto you.
Insurance Requirements That Set You Up for Failure
Construction contracts routinely include insurance requirements, but some provisions are crafted to create coverage gaps that leave you exposed when claims arise.
Additional Insured Requirements can be particularly problematic. While adding the project owner or general contractor as an additional insured on your liability policy is standard practice, the scope of coverage you’re required to provide varies significantly.
Some contracts require you to provide additional insured coverage on a “primary and non-contributory” basis, meaning your insurance must pay first and in full before the other party’s insurance contributes anything.
This arrangement can exhaust your policy limits on claims that should be covered by multiple insurance policies.
Even more concerning are contracts that require you to provide additional insured coverage “for the acts and omissions” of the additional insured party themselves.
This essentially requires your insurance policy to cover someone else’s negligence, which may conflict with your actual policy terms.
Many insurance policies provide additional insured coverage only for your own negligent acts or omissions, not those of the additional insured.
This creates a dangerous gap where you’ve contractually promised coverage that your insurance policy doesn’t actually provide.
Waiver of Subrogation Clauses require you to prevent your insurance company from seeking reimbursement from other parties who caused a loss. While mutual waivers of subrogation can be reasonable, one-sided waivers benefit only the other party.
These provisions may also increase your insurance costs, as insurers typically charge additional premiums for waiving their subrogation rights.
Some contracts include insurance requirements that exceed what’s commercially reasonable or available in the market.
Requirements for excessive policy limits, coverage for risks typically excluded from standard policies, or insurance for exposures not related to your scope of work can make contracts impossible to fulfill or prohibitively expensive.
Pay-When-Paid vs. Pay-If-Paid: Understanding the Difference
Payment terms in construction contracts often include clauses that condition your payment on the owner’s payment to the general contractor.
While these clauses sound similar, the legal distinction between “pay-when-paid” and “pay-if-paid” provisions can determine whether you ever receive payment for your work.
Pay-When-Paid Clauses establish a timing mechanism for payment. The general contractor must pay you within a reasonable time after receiving payment from the owner, but payment from the owner isn’t an absolute condition.
If the general contractor never receives payment from the owner, the general contractor typically remains obligated to pay you after a reasonable period has elapsed—usually 30 to 90 days, depending on jurisdiction.
Pay-If-Paid Clauses shift the risk of owner non-payment entirely onto you. These provisions make the owner’s payment to the general contractor an absolute condition precedent to your payment.
If the owner never pays the general contractor—regardless of the reason—you never get paid for your work, materials, or expenses. You’ve essentially provided an interest-free loan to the project owner and assumed all credit risk.
Courts in different states interpret these clauses differently, with some states refusing to enforce pay-if-paid provisions as contrary to public policy.
However, when clearly drafted and in jurisdictions that permit them, pay-if-paid clauses can leave subcontractors and suppliers without recourse when owners fail to pay.
The distinction often comes down to specific language. Phrases like “as a condition precedent,” “if and only if,” or “expressly contingent upon” typically indicate a pay-if-paid provision.
Regardless of the wording, these clauses should raise red flags and warrant negotiation or risk mitigation strategies such as requiring payment bonds or obtaining credit information about the owner.
No-Damage-for-Delay Clauses: Trapped on an Unprofitable Project
Construction projects frequently experience delays, and when delays occur, contractors typically incur additional costs for extended overhead, idle equipment, demobilization and remobilization, and lost productivity.
No-damage-for-delay clauses attempt to eliminate your right to recover these delay-related damages.
These provisions typically state that your sole remedy for project delays is a time extension—you get more time to complete the work but no compensation for the financial impact of the delay.
This can transform a profitable project into a money-losing proposition, especially when delays are caused by the owner, architect, or general contractor.
Common Delay Scenarios where these clauses become problematic include late delivery of owner-furnished materials, delayed permitting, changes in project scope, defective plans and specifications, and interference from other contractors.
In each case, you’re required to maintain your crews, equipment, and project infrastructure without compensation while the delay continues.
Most jurisdictions recognize some exceptions to no-damage-for-delay clauses. These typically include delays caused by bad faith or active interference, delays so unreasonable that they constitute abandonment of the contract, delays not contemplated by the parties when contracting, and delays caused by fraud or misrepresentation.
However, proving these exceptions often requires litigation and doesn’t guarantee recovery.
Some contracts include more nuanced “time-is-of-the-essence” provisions combined with liquidated damages clauses that penalize you for late completion while simultaneously including no-damage-for-delay clauses that prevent you from recovering costs when others delay the project. This one-sided arrangement creates enormous financial risk.
Scope Creep Through Vague Change Order Provisions
Change orders are inevitable in construction projects, but vague change order provisions can force you to perform additional work without fair compensation or any compensation at all.
Constructive Change Orders occur when the owner or general contractor directs changes to the work without issuing a formal written change order.
Some contracts include provisions stating that you must perform directed work before receiving a signed change order or that you waive the right to additional compensation unless you provide notice within an impossibly short timeframe—sometimes 24 or 48 hours.
These provisions create a catch-22 situation. If you refuse to perform changed work without a signed change order, you may be found in breach of contract.
If you perform the work while negotiating the change order, the other party has little incentive to agree to fair pricing since the work is already complete.
Watch for contract language requiring you to “proceed with changes upon verbal direction” or stating that “failure to provide written notice within [X] days constitutes waiver of any claim for additional compensation.”
These clauses shift the risk of scope changes onto you and can result in significant unreimbursed work.
Changed Conditions Provisions should also receive careful attention. Subsurface conditions, concealed site conditions, and unforeseen circumstances frequently differ from contract assumptions.
Reasonable contracts include differing site conditions clauses that provide equitable adjustments when actual conditions differ materially from those indicated in the contract documents.
Contracts that place all risk of unknown conditions on the contractor essentially require you to bid the worst-case scenario on every project, making you uncompetitive, or expose you to potentially unlimited losses.
Termination for Convenience: One-Sided Exit Clauses
Termination for convenience clauses allow one party to end the contract at any time, for any reason, without cause.
When project owners and general contractors include these provisions in subcontracts, they gain the ability to terminate your contract if they find a cheaper alternative, if the project is delayed, or simply because they change their minds.
While termination for convenience clauses typically require compensation for work completed and materials purchased, they rarely include payment for anticipated profits on unperformed work.
This means you can be removed from a profitable project after completing the difficult, low-margin mobilization and site preparation phases, just as the more profitable installation work begins.
These provisions also create uncertainty that affects your business planning, equipment purchases, and workforce management.
You may invest in specialized equipment or hire additional staff for a project only to have the contract terminated before you can recoup those investments.
Truly fair termination provisions should be mutual, allowing both parties to exit under the same conditions. Unfortunately, many contracts grant termination for convenience only to one party while requiring the contractor to continue performance regardless of changed circumstances.
Dispute Resolution Clauses That Eliminate Your Rights
The fine print surrounding dispute resolution can significantly impact your ability to seek fair compensation when conflicts arise. Many contracts include provisions that favor the other party if disputes occur.
Mandatory Arbitration Clauses require disputes to be resolved through arbitration rather than litigation. While arbitration can be faster and less expensive than court proceedings, arbitration clauses in construction contracts often include provisions that stack the deck against contractors.
These may include requiring arbitration in distant locations, limiting discovery rights, restricting your ability to consolidate related claims, or specifying arbitration rules that favor the drafting party.
Some contracts include shortened statute of limitations provisions that drastically reduce the time you have to file claims.
While state law may provide several years to pursue breach of contract claims, contracts may limit this to as little as six months or one year after substantial completion.
Given that construction defects and payment issues often don’t become apparent until months after project completion, these shortened timeframes can eliminate your remedies before you even know you have a claim.
Jury Trial Waivers eliminate your right to have disputes heard by a jury of your peers, requiring instead that a judge decide all issues. While this may be appropriate for some commercial disputes, it removes an avenue that can be favorable to contractors in cases involving equitable considerations.
Protecting Your Business: Strategies for Contract Review
Understanding these risk-shifting clauses is only the first step. Contractors must develop systematic approaches to contract review and negotiation.
Never Sign Contracts Without Reading Them Thoroughly—this sounds obvious, but time pressure and eagerness to start work lead many contractors to sign first and read later. This approach can be fatal to your business.
Develop a contract review checklist that identifies these common risk-shifting provisions and ensures every contract receives appropriate scrutiny before signing.
Negotiate Unfair Terms Before Signing—many contractors assume that contracts are non-negotiable, but most provisions can be modified through negotiation. General contractors and owners may include overreaching terms as a starting position, expecting contractors to push back.
By simply requesting more balanced language, you may find the other party willing to negotiate. Have alternative language prepared for common problematic clauses.
Involve Legal and Insurance Professionals Early—construction attorneys can review contracts for unacceptable risk before you sign, often identifying issues that aren’t obvious without legal training.
Similarly, discuss contract insurance requirements with your insurance broker before bidding. Learning that a contract requires insurance coverage you don’t have or can’t obtain after winning a bid puts you in an impossible position.
Price Risk Appropriately—when you cannot negotiate away unfair contract terms, ensure your bid reflects the additional risk you’re assuming.
Contracts with broad indemnification, pay-if-paid provisions, or no-damage-for-delay clauses warrant higher pricing to account for potential exposure. If the added risk premium makes you uncompetitive, the project may not be worth pursuing.
Document Everything—maintain detailed records of all project communications, directives, changes, and conditions.
When contracts contain provisions that require quick notice of changes or claims, having systematic documentation procedures can protect your rights. Contemporary documentation is exponentially more valuable than reconstruction of events months or years later.
Conclusion
The construction industry operates on thin margins where a single unfavorable contract provision can eliminate profits or even threaten business survival.
While the fine print in construction contracts may seem tedious and legalistic, these clauses contain the real terms that govern your rights and obligations when problems arise.
Risk-shifting contract provisions don’t appear in contracts by accident. They’re carefully crafted to transfer financial exposure from owners and general contractors down to subcontractors and suppliers.
By understanding these clauses, recognizing their implications, and taking steps to negotiate more balanced terms, contractors can protect their businesses from catastrophic losses hidden in the fine print.
Your signature on a construction contract represents more than agreement to perform work for payment—it’s a binding commitment that can obligate your business to potentially unlimited liability.
Take the time to read, understand, and negotiate construction contracts before signing. The fine print trap only catches those who don’t see it coming.
Also Read
Top UK Construction Regulatory Changes to Watch in 2026
Benefits of Using a Construction Estimating Software for Your Construction Projects
