Frequently asked questions – 55 answers in one place.

CAR (Contractors' All Risks) is all-risk cover for building works, and EAR (Erection All Risks) is all-risk cover for erection works – CAR is typical for building and civil engineering work, EAR for technological installation and machinery erection. On a mixed project, the main focus decides; for details, see CAR and EAR basics.

It means the policy doesn't cover a list of named perils but works on a principle of completeness: whatever isn't excluded is typically covered. That's what makes the structure strong – but the exclusions list is still essential reading: what it covers and what it doesn't.

There's typically no general statutory obligation – in practice, it's the client's contract, the tender documentation or the financing bank that requires it. Contractor's and designer's liability insurance, on the other hand, has been a statutory obligation since 2025 (Government Decree 191/2009, Sections 21/B–21/G, and Government Decree 266/2013 respectively) – but it covers the liability risk and does not replace CAR/EAR cover; on the details, the applicable laws in force always prevail.

For a handful of large projects, an individual policy is efficient; for continuously running work, an annual open cover is – and with the latter, keeping to the notification rules is key so that no job gets left out. Comparison: project cover or annual open cover.

Typically from taking possession of the site until handover – the policy sets out the exact start and end points. After handover, maintenance cover can carry things forward: start and end.

It bridges the period after handover: it can handle damage caused during maintenance-period call-backs, or typically traceable to a construction defect. Its scope depends on the wording and has to be requested in advance – details: maintenance cover.

CAR cover typically closes at handover – the risks don't disappear there, they just change category: the completed building needs property insurance instead, with a business-interruption element if it's an operating company. It's worth timing the switch so the new cover starts, ideally, exactly on the handover date: the logic of the cover switch.

In principle yes, in practice rarely: CAR (contractors' all risks) insurance is essentially a business product, taken out by the contractor or the principal, and some Hungarian insurers do not conclude CAR contracts with consumers at all (one publicly available set of policy conditions states: “This contract may not be concluded with a consumer”), while others accept a private builder as policyholder only if the work is carried out by a registered contractor – several policy conditions exclude self-building and kaláka, or accept them only after individual underwriting and with narrower cover; this differs from insurer to insurer. The reason is simple: all-risks cover is built on professional workmanship and an orderly site, which the insurer cannot assess in the case of an ad hoc crew, and on top of that, with kaláka the defective-workmanship exclusion removes most losses from the cover from the outset. For a private builder, the workable route is therefore typically home insurance taken out on the house under construction: several insurers accept this from the structural stage onwards, but the cover is narrower than CAR (fire, storm and other natural perils yes; theft and materials not yet installed often only with lockable, covered storage or with separate contents cover), and it contains conditions tied to the stage of completion, the roof and lockable doors and windows. Accidents to the helpers are a separate question: injuries to kaláka participants are not dealt with by the property section of CAR, and the liability section and the liability part of home insurance deal with them only as the policy conditions provide, so the cleaner solution here is for the participants to have their own accident insurance. If the structural work or the building services are nevertheless carried out by a contractor, ask them for proof of their compulsory contractor's liability insurance, and clarify who takes out CAR for the project – this is the subject of my article on whether the main contractor or the principal should take it out. If you let me know, I compare the solutions available for a self-built house for you.

The works under construction – materials, structures already built in, work completed – plus the temporary works, and existing property can also be brought in. This is the policy's "first leg": the two sections.

Material damage and personal injury caused to third parties – the classic example is cracking in a neighbouring building during foundation work. This section is tied to the project, and doesn't replace the company's own general liability insurance: how the two relate.

Yes, with the existing property extension – for an extension, adding a storey, or work in an operating building, this is the most important switch to flip: existing property.

Typically not by default – they can be brought in with an endorsement, or covered by separate machinery or fleet insurance. Borderline cases (a machine that counts as a vehicle, a rented machine) are dealt with in separate articles: machinery and equipment.

Contractual penalties and fines aren't insured losses, wear and tear isn't an unforeseen event, and intentional damage is a ground for exemption rather than an exclusion. The full picture, honestly: the exclusions map.

Within limits: it typically doesn't cover the cost of redesigning or rebuilding the faulty part, but it can cover consequential damage arising from the error with an endorsement. The honest details: the limits of design-error cover.

Not necessarily: under-insurance is typically settled on a pro-rata basis, in proportion between the reported value and the actual value – so a shortfall doesn't wipe out the payout, but it does reduce it meaningfully. That's why it pays to set a realistic project value at inception, and to notify any increase along the way: the works value and the sum insured.

Typically yes, but the testing period is one of the most sensitive phases under EAR, and it's usually addressed separately in the policy wording – cover is often time-limited, and drawing the line against the manufacturer's warranty matters too. We clarify this already at the quote-request stage, since practice varies by project and by insurer: mechanical erection in detail.

Not necessarily. Under Hungarian policy conditions, general liability insurance typically covers damage caused to third parties outside a contract – the Public Procurement Authority's 2026 guidance also states that such cover does not extend to damage caused to the contractual partner (the client), and remedying defects in the contractor's own work (warranty, liability for defects) is never a liability insurance loss. Compulsory contractor's liability insurance (Government Decree 191/2009, Section 21/C) provides cover for property damage and personal injury caused by breach of professional rules and of the construction contract, but whether it also extends to the client's existing property varies by insurer and by clause – the wording of the policy decides. The gap is filled by the existing property clause of CAR or by an extension of the contractor's liability insurance to the client's property; without this, the contractor compensates the loss from its own assets under the rules on breach of contract (Ptk. Sections 6:142–6:143). Ask for the policy before signing the contract, and if I am brought in as a broker, I help review the clauses.

Not the defective part itself: following the Munich Re model, Hungarian CAR policy conditions exclude the cost of replacing or repairing defective material and defective workmanship, because this is the contractor's own warranty obligation (jótállás and szavatosság), for which – as the construction insurance guidance of the Public Procurement Authority also states – liability insurance provides no cover, so it cannot be passed on to an insurer. According to the wording of the policy conditions, however, the exclusion “applies only to the parts directly affected”, and it does not apply to damage that the defective material or workmanship causes to parts built without defects – this is consequential damage, which is covered by the property section of CAR. An example: if a defectively built floor beam collapses, replacing the beam is the contractor's cost, but restoring the defect-free partition walls and building services it smashed may be an insured loss, subject to the deductible. In practice, the line is drawn during the loss adjuster's examination: what was defective from the outset (the insurer does not pay for this) and what was destroyed as a result (this it does pay for), which is why precisely delimiting the defective element, the site diary and photographs are in the contractor's interest. The same logic applies to defective design, but there even the consequential damage is typically covered only by a separate endorsement – this is covered in my article on design defects. The exact wording differs from insurer to insurer, so it is worth reading this exclusion word for word before taking out the policy.

Not automatically: Hungarian CAR (contractors' all risks) policy conditions deal separately with a longer stoppage of the works, and what insurers expect in such cases differs from insurer to insurer. One Hungarian insurer's CAR product information document, for example, excludes damage arising from a complete or partial stoppage of the works lasting more than 30 days; other conditions require the stoppage to be notified and the insurer's consent, prescribe security and maintenance for the period of the stoppage (a closed-off site, covered structures, dewatering, winter protection), and may set an additional premium or restricted cover. If the stoppage means that construction runs beyond the period of cover set out in the policy, the cover expires, because CAR is written for a fixed term – an extension must be arranged with the insurer in advance, because insurers typically do not grant cover retroactively for a period that has already expired. What to do in practice: notify the insurer in writing of a financing delay or a winter shutdown within the deadline stated in the conditions, keep the site guarded and its condition preserved, and also record the notification and the security arrangements in the construction log, because the insurer checks this in the event of a claim. Notification is the policyholder's obligation, which I as a broker do not take over; if you get in touch before the stoppage, I help where I can with interpreting the relevant clause of the conditions and with preparing the discussion with the insurer.

Only if they were declared. The material damage section of a contractors' all risks (CAR) policy covers the works and the value stated in the policy, and Hungarian policy conditions, following the international model, expect the sum insured to reflect the value of the entire works – including the materials and equipment supplied by the client. According to the 2026 construction insurance guidance of the Public Procurement Authority (Közbeszerzési Hatóság), the sum insured may not be less than the total amount of the construction contract, and it must include the value of the materials and equipment that the client makes available to the contractor, together with the transport costs. If the contractor insures only its own contract price, the insurer may pay for damage to a lift or production line bought by the project owner only proportionally, citing underinsurance, or – if the item does not appear in the policy at all – may reject the claim, and in such cases the two parties typically point to each other's insurance. Under the policy conditions, property owned by others is usually covered only if the insured is responsible for it, so it is worth stating in the construction contract when the contractor takes over the client's materials and who insures them from then on, and naming the client as an insured in the policy as well. The details – cover during delivery and during storage at business premises, and the handling of materials before installation – differ from insurer to insurer; if you let me know, I prepare the request for quotes and the comparison of the offers.

Typically not. Following the international model, Hungarian contractors' all risks (CAR) policy conditions provide that the insurer's cover ends for parts of the works that have been taken over or put into service – even if work is still going on in the rest of the project – so flats in a residential development that people have already moved into, or a production line already running in a plant, may fall into a grey zone from the moment of partial handover, where neither the CAR nor a property policy taken out on the completed building is in force. According to the 2026 construction insurance guidance of the Public Procurement Authority (Közbeszerzési Hatóság), cover can be extended by a clause to facilities taken over or put into service through partial handover (in the international conditions this is Endorsement 116); in such cases Hungarian conditions usually pay only for damage to the taken-over part that arises from the works still in progress, and do not accept the risks arising from use – the details differ from insurer to insurer. From the other direction, the completed part is picked up by the residents' home insurance and by the property insurance of the condominium or the operator, but these must be taken out to match the partial handover, not at the end of the whole project. In practice, the date of the partial handover and acceptance record is the dividing line: it is worth sending it to the insurer as a notification of change as well, and clarifying in advance whether the policy includes the partial handover clause or whether new cover is needed for the completed part. Moving in before handover – without a record – is the worst scenario, because under the policy conditions the fact of taking the part into use can in itself end the insurer's cover, while on paper the part has not yet been handed over; if you let me know, I prepare a comparison of the clauses based on the handover schedule.

The liability section (Section II) of CAR (contractors' all risks) insurance is for property damage and bodily injury caused to third parties, and Hungarian CAR policy conditions typically exclude damage caused by environmental pollution from it: at most they provide cover with a separate clause, with a sub-limit and only for a sudden, unforeseen, accidental event – for example hydraulic oil leaking within a few hours from a burst hose on a construction machine – while slow, gradual or repeated pollution (a dripping tank, fuel leaking for weeks) stays outside cover as a rule, with wording that differs from insurer to insurer; whether your policy contains such a clause, how high its sub-limit is and whether it also pays the cost of remediation can only be established from the wording of the policy conditions and the policy. The stakes are high because under the Environmental Protection Act (Kvt.) the environment user bears both civil-law and administrative-law liability for the environmental effects of its activity, and Section 6:535 of the Hungarian Civil Code (Ptk.) applies the strict liability for extra-hazardous activities to damage caused by an activity that endangers the environment – the authority may order the polluter to carry out a site investigation and remediation, in certain cases the Act also draws the owner of the property into liability, the neighbour, the water utility or the fish farm may claim compensation, and removing contaminated soil and restoring water-quality damage quickly runs into millions of forints. This is what separate environmental pollution liability insurance is for, which this year's construction insurance guidance of the Public Procurement Authority (dated 12 February 2026) also names as cover that can be required on its own, on the basis of Section 26 of Government Decree 322/2015 on public procurement of construction investments: according to the guidance it can be taken out as a supplement to general liability insurance or as a stand-alone contract, its basic cover applies to soil, air and water pollution that occurs accidentally and to the costs of cleaning it up and neutralising it, an extension can be requested for the further spread of contamination that is already known and for continuous, non-accidental events, and a separate supplement is also needed for damage falling within administrative-law liability – in practice this includes remediation ordered by an authority; the extent to which its cost is covered is set out in the wording of the supplementary conditions – because the basic cover is built on civil-law liability. In practice, then, three layers are worth checking: whether the liability section of the CAR policy has a clause for accidental pollution, and with what sub-limit; whether the company's general liability insurance or compulsory contractor's liability insurance covers sudden pollution; and whether stand-alone environmental pollution cover is needed – because of the client's requirements, the site (a water source, a stream, civil engineering works) or the machinery and materials used; how the liability section works is described in the article “The liability section: damage to third parties”, and the underground risks in the article “Civil engineering and utilities: the underground risks”, and if you have a question specific to your own project, I will help where I can.

Simplified employment (casual work, for no more than five consecutive days, fifteen days a month and ninety days a year) is not a looser legal relationship: under the Simplified Employment Act the employment relationship is created by notifying NAV (the Hungarian tax authority) before work begins, and – with the deviations set out in that Act – the Labour Code applies to it, which means that the employer is liable in the same way under Section 166 of the Labour Code for damage caused to a worker in simplified employment (EFO) in connection with the employment relationship (it can be released from liability only by proving an unforeseeable circumstance outside its sphere of control, or that the damage was caused solely by the unavoidable conduct of the injured person), and it remains bound, without any change, by the obligations under the Occupational Safety and Health Act – training, protective equipment, fall protection. Employer's liability insurance covers the employees of the insured company, and Hungarian policy conditions define differently from insurer to insurer who else, beyond those in a traditional employment relationship – persons engaged under a service contract, agency workers, employees engaged under simplified employment – the cover extends to, so it is worth seeing it itemised in the policy or the policy conditions whether casual workers are included and whether they are counted in the headcount or payroll on which the premium is based, because an undisclosed headcount can, in the event of a claim, lead to proportionate payment or to the insurer invoking a breach of the duty of disclosure. With an undeclared worker the situation is worse: failing to register the worker does not make the employer's liability disappear – the occupational safety authority and the courts look at the actual employment, and the injured person may claim compensation and restitution for non-pecuniary harm (sérelemdíj) – but as regards the insurer, the policy conditions typically apply to registered, lawfully employed employees, or expressly exclude damage connected with undeclared employment, and if the insurer proves that the accident is connected with grossly negligent conduct by the employer (a deliberate breach of occupational safety rules), the insurer may also be released from paying – exclusion and exemption of the insurer are two separate legal grounds, and in both cases the burden of proof lies with the insurer; on top of this come fines from the employment supervisory authority and the tax authority, and the fact that the state health insurer may require the employer to reimburse the accident benefits it has paid if the accident occurred because of a breach of occupational safety rules. CAR does not help here: its liability section excludes bodily injury to the insured's and the subcontractors' own employees from the outset – for registered and undeclared workers alike – and the layers of protection for workers (employer's liability insurance, group accident insurance) are described in the article “Accident protection for workers on the construction site”; if you have a question specific to your own team, I will help where I can.

First, we read the tender documentation carefully – for the specific requirement, the tender documentation always prevails. Then we compare it against your existing cover, and top it up if needed. The process: certificates in tenders + checklist.

The certificate is issued by the insurer, typically after inception or after the premium is settled; turnaround time varies by insurer. That's why it's worth starting in good time ahead of a tender deadline – details: how certificates are issued.

Both models are used; what matters is that every party in the contractual chain is brought into cover, and that the contract or tender requirement is met. The comparison: who should take out the CAR policy?

At the very least: who takes it out, for what cover, with what limits, for how long it's maintained, and how it's evidenced. The wording is also a legal matter – the insurance angle: the clauses article.

German-speaking clients typically arrive with detailed, written insurance requirements, and ask for certificates more strictly too. How to prepare: foreign clients + EN–DE–HU mini glossary.

The change has to be notified so that cover keeps up with reality – an unreported delay or increase in value can come back to bite you at claim time. The routine: notifying project changes.

What matters isn't the size of the job but the size of the potential loss: a short job next to an occupied building, an operating plant, or significant third-party property nearby can carry serious exposure. If you already have a well-sized annual open cover, the small job is often protected under that already (a contractor's liability policy, by contrast, only covers damage caused to others, not damage to the works themselves) – worth checking, not assuming: what to weigh for small projects.

In public procurement, yes, because this is not the contracting authority's decision: under the rule on securities in the Public Procurement Act (Kbt.), the tenderer may provide the performance security, the warranty security or the advance repayment security, at its own choice, as a cash deposit, as a bond (garancia) or absolute (directly enforceable) suretyship undertaken by a financial institution or an insurer, or as a bond issued under an insurance contract that contains an absolute suretyship undertaking – so the contracting authority cannot refuse surety insurance (a surety bond) merely because it is not a bank document. With a private client, the construction contract decides: if the contract expressly specifies a bank bond, acceptance of surety insurance depends on the client's consent, so it is worth recording the form of security as “bank bond or insurer's bond” already in the offer or when drafting the contract. What clients typically look at when deciding whether to accept it is the wording of the bond: they expect a document that pays on first demand and unconditionally, has a fixed expiry date and is made out in the beneficiary's name, so it is worth sending them the insurer's bond template in advance. The contractor's advantage is the credit line: surety insurance does not use up the bank credit line, but its premium and collateral requirements vary by insurer, and the insurer examines the company's financial position just as the bank does. An important distinction is that surety insurance is a financial security for a contractual obligation undertaken towards the client, not cover for damage, so it does not replace CAR (contractors' all risks) insurance; bid, performance, advance repayment and warranty (defects liability) bonds are all available on the Hungarian market, and if you let me know, I compare the form of security requested by the client with the insurer's bond template.

Subcontractors can typically be included as insured parties under a CAR/EAR policy – this clarifies claims settlement within the chain. Exactly who's included is decided by the policy wording: the subcontractor chain.

If the main contractor's policy extends to you too, typically not for that project – but it's worth knowing this on evidence, not hearsay. For your own tools, machinery and other work, though, your own cover is the right answer: who needs CAR/EAR?

Towards the client, it's typically the main contractor who answers for it, while the internal settlement is a matter of contract and cover. The typical scenarios: damage caused by a subcontractor.

Not just whether the paper exists, but what's in it: what it covers, with what limits, what deductible and exclusions, and whether it's still in force. Points to check, explained: the principal's checks + checklist.

A joint policy for the project, or coordinated separate covers – both routes work, but joint and several liability has to be reflected. Points to consider: the consortium article.

Typically the hirer, in line with the hire agreement – which is why the hire terms and the insurance cover need to be looked at together: rented machinery.

No: CAR/EAR protects the works, while workplace accidents are a matter of the employer's statutory duties and a separate group personal accident policy – the latter pays a fixed sum to the worker or their family if an accident occurs. The two complement each other, but neither replaces the other: protecting workers against accidents.

Always on the insurer's claims line or online portal – this is the fastest route, and the contact details are in the policy and on the insurer's website. If a case stalls or the claim is disputed, I step in as broker to help the client, where I can: how notification works.

Dated photos, a site diary entry, the steps taken to mitigate the loss, witnesses, and every relevant document. The printable checklist: claim documentation checklist.

Natural-peril damage is one of the typical loss types under CAR – disputes tend to revolve around temporary protection (sheeting, fixing down). What the insurer expects: storm damage on an open building.

Theft cover typically requires security or enclosed storage, and a police report is needed. The details: theft from the site.

Document it immediately, secure the affected part of the works, and notify the insurer – and a condition survey done before work started is worth a great deal. The process: damage to a neighbouring building.

Typically: an excluded loss type, a missed precaution requirement, late notification, under-insurance, or an unreported change. The good news: most of these are avoidable – common reasons for declining claims.

It may be justified, because the liability insurer pays not under the injured party's own contract but as compensation: under Section 6:470 of the Ptk., it indemnifies the insured, in the manner and to the extent specified in the contract, against paying compensation for the damage they caused, and the extent of the loss is given by Section 6:522 of the Ptk. – the loss in value of the assets and the necessary cost of eliminating the detriment, reduced by any financial benefit arising from the damage. This is why the insurer compensates old paintwork or tiling at its value at the time of the loss, whereas your own home insurance often pays new value for building damage. If restoration is technically possible only over a larger surface, the necessary cost of that can be argued to be part of the loss; if the insurer does not accept this, the difference can be claimed from the party that caused the damage, provided that it is due under the Ptk. In a dispute, after a complaint to the insurer, the Financial Arbitration Board (PBT) or the court decides; the MNB does not rule on individual claim disputes. It is also worth checking your own home insurance: if the loss is an insured event under it, after paying under your own policy conditions the insurer enforces its recourse claim against the party that caused the damage. Details: The contractor's insurer pays “with depreciation”: why does the injured party receive less?.

There are two separate questions here – the regulatory one and the insurance one – and the insurance answer is not a simple “it pays or it doesn't” but a matter of how exclusions work: Hungarian CAR (contractors' all risks) policy conditions typically exclude damage connected with a breach of legislation, official requirements or the approved plans – building without a permit or notification, or deviating from them – and if the insurer proves that the insured caused the damage intentionally or through gross negligence, the insurer may also be released from paying (exemption); whether the exclusion applies only to the damage connected with the irregularity or to the whole of the irregular part of the building depends on the wording of the policy conditions (it differs from insurer to insurer), but it is the insurer that must prove that an exclusion applies or that it is released from paying. Home insurance policy conditions typically do not regard buildings or parts of buildings built without a building permit or deviating from it as insurable, or exclude them from cover – several sets of conditions make insurability conditional on an occupancy permit in the first place, and cover property under construction only with a separate clause – and the home insurance available for a house under construction protects against a narrower range of risks to begin with, as the article “Home insurance or CAR for a house under construction?” describes; if the insurer asks about the permit or the notification in the proposal and the answer does not reflect reality, that can also be a ground for the insurer to be released from paying under the Civil Code rule on the duty of disclosure, if the circumstance that was misstated or withheld contributed to the damage occurring. Misunderstanding the simple notification is a common mistake: under the building regulations in force since autumn 2024 (the Act on Hungarian Architecture and the government decree on building authority procedures and inspections, the 281/2024 Procedural Code), a residential building used exclusively for housing with a total useful floor area of no more than 300 square metres may be built or extended on the basis of a simple notification, but this is not an exemption from permits: the notification, the design documentation and keeping the electronic construction log (e-építési napló) are compulsory, and deviating from the plans also has its own notification rules – where someone builds or deviates without these, the authority may start building enforcement proceedings and impose a fine, the fate of the building may depend on a retention permit or on demolition, and in the event of a claim the insurer may rely on precisely this breach of the law. The practical order is therefore: first sort out the legal position (submitting the missing notification, amended plans, a retention permit), and only then the cover – for CAR the actual content of the project, and for home insurance the permit status of the building, must be disclosed truthfully; a broader list of reasons for rejection is given in the article “Common reasons for rejection – honestly”, and if you have a question specific to your own situation, I will help where I can.

It depends on the project – there's no responsible one-size-fits-all figure. The premium is typically shaped by the project value, the technical scope, the duration, the extensions, the deductible and the claims history; some of these can be deliberately adjusted. Running a competitive comparison gives you the accurate picture: comparing quotes.

I don't charge the client a fee for advice or for running the competitive comparison – the insurer pays the intermediary's remuneration. The decision is always the client's; details: About.

In six steps: project data, cover structure, the quote table, inception and certificate, issues during construction, handover and the maintenance period. With a timeline: How it works?

The project's basic details: what's being built, where, at what value, from when to when, with whom, and whether there's existing property or machinery involved. A ready-made outline: project data sheet template.

Yes, typically at the anniversary date – when switching, handling projects already in progress and keeping continuity is key. The anniversary routine: reviewing the annual open cover.

CAR/EAR isn't an off-the-shelf product: no two projects are the same, and what matters is the way cover is structured, not a quick number. As broker, I obtain quotes from several insurers tailored to your project, and I hand over the table – I answer your questions, and the decision is yours.

Not necessarily: a lower premium almost always reflects a difference in substance – a higher deductible, a lower sub-limit, a missing extension – and that only becomes obvious at claim time. The right question isn't how much cheaper an offer is, but what it leaves out that another one includes: the cheap-offer trap.

The deductible is one of the factors that shapes the premium: a higher deductible typically brings a lower premium, in exchange for a larger amount staying with you at every claim. The right level depends on your expected claims frequency and your risk appetite, so it is worth working through it item by item when comparing offers: comparing quotes.

Under Section 6:449 of the Ptk., the insurer sends you a written reminder setting a thirty-day grace period counted from the date it is sent; if this is unsuccessful, the contract terminates retroactively to the due date of the missed premium, so there is no cover from that day. Within one hundred and twenty days of termination you can request reinstatement of the contract if you pay the arrears – the insurer may reinstate it, but is not obliged to. Under Government Decree 191/2009, the insurer reports the termination to the MKIK within fifteen days, and the chamber prohibits the activity until a contract is concluded, for up to six months, and then, if the gap is not remedied within that time either, removes the contractor from the register. As long as there is no valid certificate of cover in the chamber system, you may not lawfully take on new work, and your ongoing contracts may also be affected, because they typically stipulate that the insurance must be maintained. Project CAR is a separate contract, which the termination of the compulsory insurance does not in itself end, but the work stoppage must be reported under it too. Paying the premium and uploading the certificate remain your obligations; if you need a new quote, I prepare the comparison. Details: Compulsory contractor's liability insurance has lapsed: prohibition, ongoing project, CAR.