{"id":891648,"date":"2017-02-15T10:35:45","date_gmt":"2017-02-15T17:35:45","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.myconstructionexpert.com\/blog\/?p=891648"},"modified":"2017-02-15T11:32:16","modified_gmt":"2017-02-15T18:32:16","slug":"recovery-insurers-oregon-not-require-money-judgment","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.myconstructionexpert.com\/blog\/recovery-insurers-oregon-not-require-money-judgment\/","title":{"rendered":"A \u201cRecovery\u201d Against Insurers in Oregon does not Require a Money Judgment"},"content":{"rendered":"

Dwain Clifford | The Policyholder Report | February 8, 2017<\/p>\n

Last week, the Oregon Supreme Court made it just a little easier for an insured to recover the attorney fees that it has been forced to spend in compelling an insurer to pay up. In Long v. Farmers Ins. Co. of Oregon<\/em>, the Supreme Court resolved an old ambiguity about what \u201crecovery\u201d means under the fee-shifting rule in Oregon\u2019s insurance statutes. This decision should put to rest at least one opportunity for gamesmanship by insurers in Oregon.<\/span><\/p>\n

Under ORS 742.061, an insurer must pay its insured\u2019s attorney fees if the insured\u2019s \u201crecovery\u201d is greater than any offer made by the insurer within six months after the insured submitted a proof of loss. This rule is meant to encourage quick investigations and settlements of coverage claims, an obligation that insurers violate at their peril for dragging their heels or low-balling the insured with take-it-or-leave-it settlement offers. Take longer than six months to make a justifiable offer? Then pay the freight for the insured\u2019s attorney fees in taking the dispute to court.<\/p>\n

\"leak\"
An Old Leaky Faucet is licensed under CC 2.0.<\/figcaption><\/figure>\n

Long<\/em> well illustrates how insurers try to game this requirement for a \u201crecovery\u201d by delaying, delaying, delaying, and then paying on the eve of a bad judgment \u2014 without paying the insured\u2019s attorney fees. The insured in Long<\/em> was a homeowner whose leaky sink damaged her home. She discovered the damages in December 2011 and submitted a proof of loss for the \u201cactual cash value\u201d the next month (which \u201cfar exceeded the sum that Farmers\u201d had determined and paid). A year later, Farmers had still not paid the claim, so she sued and forced Farmers to submit the claim to appraisers, who determined that Farmer\u2019s initial offer and payment had been far too low. Farmers finally paid this additional liability (for the \u201cactual cash value\u201d part of the claim only) in July and August 2013 \u2014 over 18 months since the claim was reported and the proof of loss submitted.<\/p>\n

The case went to trial in February 2014. The insured, of course, was no longer seeking a money judgment for the \u201cactual cash value\u201d of the damages because, by that time, Farmers had already paid it. Farmers then convinced the trial court that \u201crecovery\u201d under ORS 742.061 could mean only a money judgment, which led to the court\u2019s decision not to award the insured\u2019s attorney fees because the final judgment<\/em> \u2014 two years later \u2014 was not for an amount greater than the low-ball offers made by Farmers within six months of the proof of loss in January 2012.<\/p>\n

The Oregon Supreme Court refused to countenance this nonsense. The Long<\/em>Court recognized that the purpose of the fee-shifting statute is to \u201cdiscourage expensive and lengthy litigation.\u201d By the time that Farmers paid the fair \u201cactual cash value\u201d of its insured\u2019s loss in July and August 2013, the insured had already been litigating the case for eight months. The Court interpreted \u201crecovery\u201d in light of this purpose, holding that \u201cmid-litigation payments\u201d choked out of an insurer count as a \u201crecovery\u201d that comes too late for the insurer to avoid paying the insured\u2019s attorney fees:<\/p>\n

The statute ensures that, when insureds file suit to obtain what is due to them under their policies, they do not win the battle but lose the war by expending much or all of what they obtained in the litigation on attorney fees.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n

Careful readers of this blog will remember this post from October 2014<\/a>, which discusses the Triangle Holdings<\/em> case, an Oregon Court of Appeals opinion refusing to award attorney fees to the insured because it had accepted \u201cmid-litigation payments\u201d from the insurer that made the coverage dispute \u201cmoot.\u201d Under Long<\/em>, insureds should no longer have to worry about refusing an insurer\u2019s settlement offer just to preserve the right to chase that insurer for the attorney fees that it took to get the offer on the table.<\/p>\n

Finally, Long<\/em> offers a wrinkle about payment that insureds ought to mind carefully. According to the Court, the insured submitted \u201cproof of her replacement costs\u201d just before trial. The Court treated this proof as a second \u201cproof of loss\u201d for the \u201creplacement cost\u201d of the repairs that the insured made, holding that the insured could not recover fees incurred in obtaining this payment. It is unclear when the repairs were made and what \u201cproof\u201d the insured had submitted long before this point, but insureds ought to claim and document all damages as soon as possible to start the six-month clock ticking.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

Dwain Clifford | The Policyholder Report | February 8, 2017 Last week, the Oregon Supreme Court made it just a little easier for an insured to recover the attorney fees that it has been forced to spend in compelling an insurer to pay up. In Long v. Farmers Ins. Co. of Oregon, the Supreme Court… Continue reading A \u201cRecovery\u201d Against Insurers in Oregon does not Require a Money Judgment<\/span><\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"jetpack_post_was_ever_published":false,"_jetpack_newsletter_access":"","_jetpack_dont_email_post_to_subs":true,"_jetpack_newsletter_tier_id":0,"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paywalled_content":false,"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":"","jetpack_publicize_message":"","jetpack_publicize_feature_enabled":true,"jetpack_social_post_already_shared":true,"jetpack_social_options":{"image_generator_settings":{"template":"highway","enabled":false},"version":2}},"categories":[3],"tags":[9895,528,9908,320,9907],"class_list":["post-891648","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-insurance-claims","tag-advise-consult","tag-attorney-fees","tag-money-judgment","tag-oregon","tag-recovery","entry"],"jetpack_publicize_connections":[],"yoast_head":"\nA \u201cRecovery\u201d Against Insurers in Oregon does not Require a Money Judgment - Advise & Consult, Inc.<\/title>\n<meta name=\"description\" content=\"Oregon Supreme Court made it easier for an insured to recover the attorney fees that it has been forced to spend in compelling an insurer to pay up\" \/>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/www.myconstructionexpert.com\/blog\/recovery-insurers-oregon-not-require-money-judgment\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"A \u201cRecovery\u201d Against Insurers in Oregon does not Require a Money Judgment - Advise & Consult, Inc.\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:description\" content=\"Oregon Supreme Court made it easier for an insured to recover the attorney fees that it has been forced to spend in compelling an insurer to pay up\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.myconstructionexpert.com\/blog\/recovery-insurers-oregon-not-require-money-judgment\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"Advise & Consult, Inc.\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:publisher\" content=\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/Advise-Consult-Inc-126949043996790\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"2017-02-15T17:35:45+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2017-02-15T18:32:16+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"http:\/\/www.thepolicyholderreport.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/268\/2017\/02\/leak-173x320.jpg\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"admin\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:creator\" content=\"@adviseconsult\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:site\" content=\"@adviseconsult\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"admin\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"4 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\/\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.myconstructionexpert.com\/blog\/recovery-insurers-oregon-not-require-money-judgment\/#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.myconstructionexpert.com\/blog\/recovery-insurers-oregon-not-require-money-judgment\/\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.myconstructionexpert.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/0a11abe008083d5fb19c2b0feefe7bd7\"},\"headline\":\"A \u201cRecovery\u201d Against Insurers in Oregon does not Require a Money Judgment\",\"datePublished\":\"2017-02-15T17:35:45+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2017-02-15T18:32:16+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.myconstructionexpert.com\/blog\/recovery-insurers-oregon-not-require-money-judgment\/\"},\"wordCount\":765,\"commentCount\":0,\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.myconstructionexpert.com\/blog\/#organization\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.myconstructionexpert.com\/blog\/recovery-insurers-oregon-not-require-money-judgment\/#primaryimage\"},\"thumbnailUrl\":\"http:\/\/www.thepolicyholderreport.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/268\/2017\/02\/leak-173x320.jpg\",\"keywords\":[\"Advise & Consult\",\"Attorney Fees\",\"Money Judgment\",\"Oregon\",\"Recovery\"],\"articleSection\":[\"Insurance Claims\"],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"CommentAction\",\"name\":\"Comment\",\"target\":[\"https:\/\/www.myconstructionexpert.com\/blog\/recovery-insurers-oregon-not-require-money-judgment\/#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.myconstructionexpert.com\/blog\/recovery-insurers-oregon-not-require-money-judgment\/\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.myconstructionexpert.com\/blog\/recovery-insurers-oregon-not-require-money-judgment\/\",\"name\":\"A \u201cRecovery\u201d Against Insurers in Oregon does not Require a Money Judgment - Advise & Consult, Inc.\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.myconstructionexpert.com\/blog\/#website\"},\"primaryImageOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.myconstructionexpert.com\/blog\/recovery-insurers-oregon-not-require-money-judgment\/#primaryimage\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.myconstructionexpert.com\/blog\/recovery-insurers-oregon-not-require-money-judgment\/#primaryimage\"},\"thumbnailUrl\":\"http:\/\/www.thepolicyholderreport.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/268\/2017\/02\/leak-173x320.jpg\",\"datePublished\":\"2017-02-15T17:35:45+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2017-02-15T18:32:16+00:00\",\"description\":\"Oregon Supreme Court made it easier for an insured to recover the attorney fees that it has been forced to spend in compelling an insurer to pay up\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\/\/www.myconstructionexpert.com\/blog\/recovery-insurers-oregon-not-require-money-judgment\/\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.myconstructionexpert.com\/blog\/recovery-insurers-oregon-not-require-money-judgment\/#primaryimage\",\"url\":\"http:\/\/www.thepolicyholderreport.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/268\/2017\/02\/leak-173x320.jpg\",\"contentUrl\":\"http:\/\/www.thepolicyholderreport.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/268\/2017\/02\/leak-173x320.jpg\"},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.myconstructionexpert.com\/blog\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.myconstructionexpert.com\/blog\/\",\"name\":\"Advise & Consult, Inc.\",\"description\":\"Construction Expert Witnesses\",\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.myconstructionexpert.com\/blog\/#organization\"},\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\/\/www.myconstructionexpert.com\/blog\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":{\"@type\":\"PropertyValueSpecification\",\"valueRequired\":true,\"valueName\":\"search_term_string\"}}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"},{\"@type\":\"Organization\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.myconstructionexpert.com\/blog\/#organization\",\"name\":\"Advise & Consult\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.myconstructionexpert.com\/blog\/\",\"logo\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.myconstructionexpert.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.myconstructionexpert.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2015\/11\/AC-Red-Logo.png\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\/\/www.myconstructionexpert.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2015\/11\/AC-Red-Logo.png\",\"width\":162,\"height\":75,\"caption\":\"Advise & Consult\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.myconstructionexpert.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/\"},\"sameAs\":[\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/Advise-Consult-Inc-126949043996790\/\",\"https:\/\/x.com\/adviseconsult\",\"https:\/\/www.linkedin.com\/company-beta\/204526\/\",\"https:\/\/www.youtube.com\/user\/MrConstructionExpert\"]},{\"@type\":\"Person\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.myconstructionexpert.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/0a11abe008083d5fb19c2b0feefe7bd7\",\"name\":\"admin\",\"image\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.myconstructionexpert.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/image\/\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/b01e71b7acadd7657af782b7ad1a30cc?s=96&d=mm&r=pg\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/b01e71b7acadd7657af782b7ad1a30cc?s=96&d=mm&r=pg\",\"caption\":\"admin\"},\"sameAs\":[\"http:\/\/www.expertwitnessinconstruction.com\"]}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"A \u201cRecovery\u201d Against Insurers in Oregon does not Require a Money Judgment - Advise & Consult, Inc.","description":"Oregon Supreme Court made it easier for an insured to recover the attorney fees that it has been forced to spend in compelling an insurer to pay up","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/www.myconstructionexpert.com\/blog\/recovery-insurers-oregon-not-require-money-judgment\/","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"A \u201cRecovery\u201d Against Insurers in Oregon does not Require a Money Judgment - Advise & Consult, Inc.","og_description":"Oregon Supreme Court made it easier for an insured to recover the attorney fees that it has been forced to spend in compelling an insurer to pay up","og_url":"https:\/\/www.myconstructionexpert.com\/blog\/recovery-insurers-oregon-not-require-money-judgment\/","og_site_name":"Advise & Consult, Inc.","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/Advise-Consult-Inc-126949043996790\/","article_published_time":"2017-02-15T17:35:45+00:00","article_modified_time":"2017-02-15T18:32:16+00:00","og_image":[{"url":"http:\/\/www.thepolicyholderreport.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/268\/2017\/02\/leak-173x320.jpg","type":"","width":"","height":""}],"author":"admin","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_creator":"@adviseconsult","twitter_site":"@adviseconsult","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"admin","Est. reading time":"4 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.myconstructionexpert.com\/blog\/recovery-insurers-oregon-not-require-money-judgment\/#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.myconstructionexpert.com\/blog\/recovery-insurers-oregon-not-require-money-judgment\/"},"author":{"name":"admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.myconstructionexpert.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/0a11abe008083d5fb19c2b0feefe7bd7"},"headline":"A \u201cRecovery\u201d Against Insurers in Oregon does not Require a Money Judgment","datePublished":"2017-02-15T17:35:45+00:00","dateModified":"2017-02-15T18:32:16+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.myconstructionexpert.com\/blog\/recovery-insurers-oregon-not-require-money-judgment\/"},"wordCount":765,"commentCount":0,"publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.myconstructionexpert.com\/blog\/#organization"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.myconstructionexpert.com\/blog\/recovery-insurers-oregon-not-require-money-judgment\/#primaryimage"},"thumbnailUrl":"http:\/\/www.thepolicyholderreport.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/268\/2017\/02\/leak-173x320.jpg","keywords":["Advise & Consult","Attorney Fees","Money Judgment","Oregon","Recovery"],"articleSection":["Insurance Claims"],"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"CommentAction","name":"Comment","target":["https:\/\/www.myconstructionexpert.com\/blog\/recovery-insurers-oregon-not-require-money-judgment\/#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.myconstructionexpert.com\/blog\/recovery-insurers-oregon-not-require-money-judgment\/","url":"https:\/\/www.myconstructionexpert.com\/blog\/recovery-insurers-oregon-not-require-money-judgment\/","name":"A \u201cRecovery\u201d Against Insurers in Oregon does not Require a Money Judgment - Advise & Consult, Inc.","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.myconstructionexpert.com\/blog\/#website"},"primaryImageOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.myconstructionexpert.com\/blog\/recovery-insurers-oregon-not-require-money-judgment\/#primaryimage"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.myconstructionexpert.com\/blog\/recovery-insurers-oregon-not-require-money-judgment\/#primaryimage"},"thumbnailUrl":"http:\/\/www.thepolicyholderreport.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/268\/2017\/02\/leak-173x320.jpg","datePublished":"2017-02-15T17:35:45+00:00","dateModified":"2017-02-15T18:32:16+00:00","description":"Oregon Supreme Court made it easier for an insured to recover the attorney fees that it has been forced to spend in compelling an insurer to pay up","inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.myconstructionexpert.com\/blog\/recovery-insurers-oregon-not-require-money-judgment\/"]}]},{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.myconstructionexpert.com\/blog\/recovery-insurers-oregon-not-require-money-judgment\/#primaryimage","url":"http:\/\/www.thepolicyholderreport.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/268\/2017\/02\/leak-173x320.jpg","contentUrl":"http:\/\/www.thepolicyholderreport.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/268\/2017\/02\/leak-173x320.jpg"},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/www.myconstructionexpert.com\/blog\/#website","url":"https:\/\/www.myconstructionexpert.com\/blog\/","name":"Advise & Consult, Inc.","description":"Construction Expert Witnesses","publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.myconstructionexpert.com\/blog\/#organization"},"potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/www.myconstructionexpert.com\/blog\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":{"@type":"PropertyValueSpecification","valueRequired":true,"valueName":"search_term_string"}}],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"Organization","@id":"https:\/\/www.myconstructionexpert.com\/blog\/#organization","name":"Advise & Consult","url":"https:\/\/www.myconstructionexpert.com\/blog\/","logo":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.myconstructionexpert.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/www.myconstructionexpert.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2015\/11\/AC-Red-Logo.png","contentUrl":"https:\/\/www.myconstructionexpert.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2015\/11\/AC-Red-Logo.png","width":162,"height":75,"caption":"Advise & Consult"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.myconstructionexpert.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/"},"sameAs":["https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/Advise-Consult-Inc-126949043996790\/","https:\/\/x.com\/adviseconsult","https:\/\/www.linkedin.com\/company-beta\/204526\/","https:\/\/www.youtube.com\/user\/MrConstructionExpert"]},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/www.myconstructionexpert.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/0a11abe008083d5fb19c2b0feefe7bd7","name":"admin","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.myconstructionexpert.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/b01e71b7acadd7657af782b7ad1a30cc?s=96&d=mm&r=pg","contentUrl":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/b01e71b7acadd7657af782b7ad1a30cc?s=96&d=mm&r=pg","caption":"admin"},"sameAs":["http:\/\/www.expertwitnessinconstruction.com"]}]}},"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack_shortlink":"https:\/\/wp.me\/p2ztG6-3JXq","jetpack_likes_enabled":true,"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.myconstructionexpert.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/891648","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.myconstructionexpert.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.myconstructionexpert.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.myconstructionexpert.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.myconstructionexpert.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=891648"}],"version-history":[{"count":1,"href":"https:\/\/www.myconstructionexpert.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/891648\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":891650,"href":"https:\/\/www.myconstructionexpert.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/891648\/revisions\/891650"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.myconstructionexpert.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=891648"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.myconstructionexpert.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=891648"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.myconstructionexpert.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=891648"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}