Common E&O claim triggers

• Client disappointment: the result didn’t match what the client believed was promised.
• Financial consequence: the client claims a delay, error, or omission caused monetary loss.
• Assignment of blame: responsibility is placed on professional advice, design, or execution.

Claims are about perception as much as performance. Clear work can still produce unclear expectations.

E&O risk lives in the gap between what was delivered and what the client thought would be delivered.

• Vague initial agreements: Engagements that describe outcomes loosely (“support,” “advice,” “oversight”) invite interpretation.
  Clients often remember conversations—not written limits.
• Unpriced extras: Small add-ons done “as a favor” can later be reframed as required work that was done improperly or incompletely.
• Scope creep without documentation: When responsibilities expand informally, coverage disputes follow.
  E&O responds to professional services as defined—undefined work creates gray areas.

If it isn’t scoped, priced, and documented, it will eventually be disputed.

• Regulatory or filing deadlines: late submissions can create irreversible financial harm.
• Project timelines: delays that affect financing, construction, launches, or transactions.
• Dependency failures: work completed correctly—but too late to be useful.
  “Correct but late” is still a claim trigger.

In E&O claims, timing errors are treated as professional errors.

• Unconfirmed assumptions: professionals assume the client understands limitations; clients assume coverage is broader.
• Email-only clarification: informal messages without formal confirmation can be reinterpreted later.
  Tone and intent are often reconstructed after a loss.
• Client decision-making: clients ignore advice—but later claim the advice was insufficient or unclear.

If a key decision isn’t confirmed in writing, it will be questioned after the fact.

• Missing engagement letters: no clear start, end, or responsibility boundaries.
• No change orders: expanded services with no written approval or pricing.
• Incomplete files: missing drafts, approvals, or sign-offs.
  In a dispute, absence of proof favors the claimant.

The strongest E&O defense is a boring, complete file.

• Failure to advise: “You should have warned me about this risk.”
• Failure to recommend: “You should have suggested a better option.”
• Failure to disclose: “You didn’t tell me about a limitation or consequence.”
• Negligent misrepresentation: “I relied on what you said, and it was wrong.”
• Professional negligence: “A competent professional would have handled this differently.”

Many E&O claims hinge on hindsight, not incompetence.

• Define scope narrowly: say what you do—and explicitly say what you don’t.
• Document changes: use written change orders and confirmations.
• Confirm decisions: recap advice and client choices in writing.
• Track deadlines: use redundancy for critical dates.
• Keep complete files: preserve drafts, approvals, and final deliverables.

Good process lowers claim probability; E&O insurance handles severity when it still happens.

Does E&O cover mistakes only?
No. E&O typically responds to allegations of negligence, errors, omissions, or failure to perform professional services—even if you believe you did nothing wrong.

Will poor documentation void coverage?
Not usually, but it can weaken defense. Coverage depends on policy terms; outcomes depend heavily on records.

Can a client sue even if they ignored my advice?
Yes. That’s why written confirmation of advice and decisions matters.