French damage to works insurance, the assurance dommages-ouvrage, prefunds repairs without waiting for anyone to be found liable. The insurer has sixty days to say whether it covers the claim, and ninety days to make an offer. Once those periods have passed, the insured may start the works and obtain an indemnity increased by twice the statutory interest rate.
What this insurance is actually for
Damage to works insurance is first party property cover, not liability cover. That is the whole difference, and it is what makes it the most effective instrument in French construction law. Article L. 242-1 of the Insurance Code requires any person who, acting as owner of the works, seller or agent of the owner, has construction works carried out, to take out before the site opens insurance covering, outside any inquiry into liability, payment of the whole of the works needed to repair damage of the kind for which builders are liable under article 1792 of the Civil Code.
The phrase outside any inquiry into liability is the heart of the scheme. The employer does not have to identify the builder at fault, nor apportion between the bricklayer and the carpenter, nor wait three years for the outcome of an expert process. He notifies the loss, the insurer prefunds, and then pursues the builders and their insurers. The order of operations is reversed compared with ordinary litigation, and that is what allows repairs to happen quickly.
The obligation does not fall on everyone. The same provision exempts public law legal persons, those acting as employer under a partnership contract, and legal persons above certain activity thresholds when they have works carried out on their own account for a use other than housing. For a private individual building or renovating, by contrast, cover is compulsory, and its absence is paid for on resale.
The chronology: when it takes effect, when it bites earlier
Damage to works insurance takes effect after the warranty of perfect completion expires, that is, one year after acceptance. During that first year it is the contractor who must put right the defects notified, and the insurer has no part to play.
Two exceptions are provided by article L. 242-1, and they save projects. The cover applies before acceptance where, after a formal demand has gone unanswered, the building contract with the contractor is terminated for non performance of his obligations. It also applies after acceptance, during the perfect completion year, where, after a formal demand has gone unanswered, the contractor has not performed his obligations.
In both cases the formal demand is the key. An employer whose site has stopped and who merely chases by telephone, then brings in another company, deprives himself of the cover. One who serves a recorded delivery demand, allows a reasonable time to pass, terminates in the form provided by the contract, and then notifies the loss, opens the door to payment. The sequence matters as much as the substance.
Sixty days, ninety days, fifteen days
The provision sets a tight timetable, and that is where most cases are decided.
The insurer has a maximum of sixty days, running from receipt of the notification of loss, to notify the insured of its decision on whether the cover applies. Where it accepts, it must within a maximum of ninety days, running from the same date, put forward an offer of indemnity, provisional if need be, to pay for the repair works. If the insured accepts the offer, payment follows within fifteen days.
There is a safety valve for heavy cases. Where exceptional difficulties arise from the nature or scale of the loss, the insurer may, at the same time as it notifies its agreement in principle, propose an extra period in which to formulate its offer. The proposal must rest exclusively on technical considerations and must give reasons. That extra period depends on the express acceptance of the insured and cannot exceed one hundred and thirty five days.
Two points deserve attention. The proposal of an extra period must be simultaneous with the notification of agreement in principle: an insurer that lets the sixty days pass and then asks for technical time is too late. And the acceptance of the insured must be express: silence is not agreement, and the insured is under no obligation to accept.
The sanction: start the works and double the statutory interest
Where the insurer fails to meet one of these deadlines, or where it puts forward a manifestly insufficient offer, the insured may, after notifying the insurer, incur the expenditure needed to repair the damage. The indemnity paid by the insurer is then increased as of right by interest equal to twice the statutory rate.
This sanction is formidable and often underused. It means the employer is not a prisoner of his insurer inertia: he can have the works done and be reimbursed, with an uplift. But it presupposes prior notification, a formality insureds neglect and insurers invariably plead. The letter announcing the intention to incur the expenditure, recalling the date of notification and the expiry of the period, is therefore a document to prepare with care.
The notion of a manifestly insufficient offer opens a second front. An offer covering only a fraction of the cost of a durable repair, or proposing a palliative treatment where the expert recommends structural works, falls into that category. The argument is won with a detailed quotation and, if possible, a technical opinion obtained in the presence of both sides.
Notifying a loss without disqualifying yourself
Notification is a technical act. It must identify the policy, the works and the date of acceptance, describe the defects and when they appeared, and be sent by a means that leaves a dated trace, since the date the insurer receives it starts the periods running.
Three mistakes recur. The first is notifying too late, hoping the defect will stabilise: the periods run from notification, but the cover presupposes that the defect is of decennial character and that one is within ten years of acceptance. The second is describing the defects vaguely, which allows the insurer to ask for further documents and to argue about when the period started. The third is accepting a provisional offer without reservation, in the belief that the balance will follow: it is better to accept expressly on a provisional basis, reserving the rest.
A word on limitation. All actions arising from an insurance contract are time barred two years after the event giving rise to them (Insurance Code, art. L. 114-1), the period running, in the case of a loss, only from the day the interested parties knew of it if they prove they were unaware until then. Since the Act of 28 December 2021, claims for damage resulting from ground movement caused by drought and soil rehydration, recognised as a natural disaster, are time barred after five years. The two year limitation coexists with the ten year period for suing builders, and it is the former that surprises employers, because it is short and it runs against the insurer while they are still arguing with the contractor.
The insurer recourse, and what it changes for you
Having paid, the damage to works insurer turns against the builders and their decennial liability insurers. That recourse does not directly concern the employer, but it explains certain behaviour: an insurer that senses a difficult recovery, because the company has disappeared or was not insured for the activity in question, drags its feet more.
This is where the two insurances meet. Article L. 241-1 of the Insurance Code requires every person whose decennial liability may be engaged to be covered, and to produce proof at the opening of any site that a policy is in place. But the cover extends only to the declared activities. The Third Civil Chamber has held, under that provision, that a court cannot mechanically limit the cover to the proportion of the price of the works falling within the insured activity, without examining whether the covered defects on their own justified the remedial solution adopted, in that case demolition and reconstruction of the house (Cass. 3e civ., 12 March 2026, no. 24-10.927).
For the employer the consequence is concrete: faced with an insurer proposing a proportional split, the expert must be asked a single question, whether the covered defect on its own required the remedial works contemplated.
Frequently asked questions
What is the risk of not taking out this cover?
Beyond the penalties provided by statute, the main risk is financial. A seller who cannot produce a damage to works certificate for works less than ten years old sells less well, incurs liability towards the buyer, and deprives him of prefunding. The absence of a certificate has become a standard due diligence point.
Does the cover follow the building on resale?
Yes. The policy is taken out for the benefit of the policyholder and of successive owners. The buyer of a property less than ten years old can therefore notify a loss under the policy taken out by his seller, which means obtaining the policy references at the time of sale.
What if the insurer stays silent?
Silence on expiry of the sixty day period is a breach. The insured may then, after notifying the insurer, incur the necessary expenditure, the indemnity being increased as of right by interest equal to twice the statutory rate. The prior notification is mandatory.
Does the cover extend to cosmetic defects?
No. The cover concerns damage of the kind for which builders are liable under article 1792, that is, damage compromising the solidity of the works or rendering them unfit for their purpose. Defects of appearance fall under the warranty of perfect completion, and then under the ordinary law.
Can a loss be notified during the perfect completion year?
The cover takes effect only after that year, except where, after a formal demand has gone unanswered, the contractor has not performed his obligations. In that case the notification is admissible and the formal demand must be enclosed.
How long is there to sue the insurer?
Two years from the event giving rise to the claim, with the starting point deferred to the day the loss became known where the insured proves he was unaware of it. Five years for damage linked to drought and soil rehydration recognised as a natural disaster.