{"id":892476,"date":"2017-07-05T16:58:04","date_gmt":"2017-07-05T22:58:04","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.myconstructionexpert.com\/blog\/?p=892476"},"modified":"2017-07-05T16:58:04","modified_gmt":"2017-07-05T22:58:04","slug":"ninth-circuit-holds-despite-known-damage-exclusion-insurer-duty-oregon-law-indemnify-defend-contractor-property-damage-resulted-contractors-n","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.myconstructionexpert.com\/blog\/ninth-circuit-holds-despite-known-damage-exclusion-insurer-duty-oregon-law-indemnify-defend-contractor-property-damage-resulted-contractors-n\/","title":{"rendered":"Ninth Circuit Holds That Despite \u2018Known Damage\u2019 Exclusion Insurer Had Duty Under Oregon Law to Indemnify and Defend Contractor When Property Damage Resulted From Contractor\u2019s Negligent Repair of a Prior Negligent Act"},"content":{"rendered":"<p>Alex Corey | <a href=\"https:\/\/constructlaw.com\/2017\/06\/22\/ninth-circuit-holds-that-despite-known-damage-exclusion-insurer-had-duty-under-oregon-law-to-indemnify-and-defend-contractor-when-property-damage-resulted-from-contractors-n\/\" target=\"_blank\">Constructlaw<\/a> | June 22, 2017<\/p>\n<p><strong><em>Alkemade v. Quanta Indem. Co.<\/em>, 2017 U.S. App. LEXIS 6896 (9th Cir. Apr. 20, 2017)<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>In 1994, Adrianus and Rachelle Alkemade (the \u201cAlkemades\u201d) bought a house from Meltebeke Built Paradise Homes (\u201cMeltebeke\u201d). The home was built on expanding soils, causing significant structural damage. \u00a0Meltebeke repaired the existing damage and hired an engineering firm to install a helical pier foundation, which would have prevented any further damage to the home.\u00a0 However, the helical pier foundation was also installed negligently, afflicting the home with the same type of structural damage as before.<\/p>\n<p>Alkemades sued Meltebeke for negligent supervision of the helical piers installation. Meltebeke entered a settlement agreement with Alkemades in which Meltebeke assigned to Alkemades the right to sue its insurers, Quanta and GFIC, who refused to defend Meltebeke on grounds that its knowledge of the damage caused by the original, defective construction prevented coverage under a known damages provision in Meltebeke\u2019s policies (the \u201cPolicies\u201d). \u00a0Alkemades subsequently sued the issuers for breach of contract in the U.S. District Court for the District of Oregon for their failure to defend and indemnify Meltebeke. \u00a0The insurers moved for summary judgment.<\/p>\n<p>The Policies excluded coverage for damage known by the insured, in whole or in part, that occurred before the policy period began. If such damage was known to the insured, then any \u201cany continuation, change or resumption\u201d of that damage was also deemed known, and excluded. \u00a0<span id=\"more-1957\"><\/span><\/p>\n<p>The insurers argued that \u201cthe helical piers were simply one more in a long line of unsuccessful attempted remedial fixes to the known property damage resulting from expanding soils.\u201d In other words, the property damage sustained after the installation of the helical piers was a \u201ccontinuation, change, or resumption\u201d of the previously known property damage.\u00a0 Therefore, the known damages provisions excluded coverage. \u00a0The District Court found this interpretation reasonable and granted summary judgment for the insurer\u2019s favor.<\/p>\n<p>On appeal, Alkemades argued that damage caused by Meltebeke\u2019s first negligent act does not \u201ccontinue, change or resume\u201d when later damage is sustained after a repair that would have fixed the problem absent a second negligent act. The Ninth Circuit evaluated Alkemades\u2019 argument in light of Oregon law, which provides that if the insured offers a competing plausible and reasonable interpretation of the policy, that interpretation governs regardless of whether the insurer offers a different interpretation that is also plausible and reasonable.<\/p>\n<p>The Ninth Circuit reasoned that the Policies\u2019 phrase \u201ccontinuation, change, or resumption\u201d modified \u201cdamage previously known,\u201d a reasonable interpretation is that both the previously known damage and the later damage must share a cause. Because it was possible that the later damage was due to the negligently installed helical pier, and not the original negligent construction, the Court determined that it was plausible to treat the later damage separately.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Alex Corey | Constructlaw | June 22, 2017 Alkemade v. Quanta Indem. Co., 2017 U.S. App. LEXIS 6896 (9th Cir. Apr. 20, 2017) In 1994, Adrianus and Rachelle Alkemade (the \u201cAlkemades\u201d) bought a house from Meltebeke Built Paradise Homes (\u201cMeltebeke\u201d). The home was built on expanding soils, causing significant structural damage. \u00a0Meltebeke repaired the existing&hellip; <a class=\"more-link\" href=\"https:\/\/www.myconstructionexpert.com\/blog\/ninth-circuit-holds-despite-known-damage-exclusion-insurer-duty-oregon-law-indemnify-defend-contractor-property-damage-resulted-contractors-n\/\">Continue reading <span class=\"screen-reader-text\">Ninth Circuit Holds That Despite \u2018Known Damage\u2019 Exclusion Insurer Had Duty Under Oregon Law to Indemnify and Defend Contractor When Property Damage Resulted From Contractor\u2019s Negligent Repair of a Prior Negligent Act<\/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":false,"_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":[4,3,9721],"tags":[9895,57,478,10183,10184,320,56],"class_list":["post-892476","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-construction-defects","category-insurance-claims","category-property-damage","tag-advise-consult","tag-duty-to-defend-2","tag-duty-to-indemnify","tag-known-damage-exclusion","tag-negligent-repair","tag-oregon","tag-property-damage","entry"],"jetpack_publicize_connections":[],"yoast_head":"<!-- This site is optimized with the Yoast SEO plugin v25.0 - https:\/\/yoast.com\/wordpress\/plugins\/seo\/ -->\n<title>Ninth Circuit Holds That Despite \u2018Known Damage\u2019 Exclusion Insurer Had Duty Under Oregon Law to Indemnify and Defend Contractor When Property Damage Resulted From Contractor\u2019s Negligent Repair of a Prior Negligent Act - Advise &amp; Consult, Inc.<\/title>\n<meta name=\"description\" content=\"the Policies\u2019 phrase \u201ccontinuation, change, or resumption\u201d modified \u201cdamage previously known,\u201d interpretation is that all property damage must share a cause\" \/>\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\/ninth-circuit-holds-despite-known-damage-exclusion-insurer-duty-oregon-law-indemnify-defend-contractor-property-damage-resulted-contractors-n\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Ninth Circuit Holds That Despite \u2018Known Damage\u2019 Exclusion Insurer Had Duty Under Oregon Law to Indemnify and Defend Contractor When Property Damage Resulted From Contractor\u2019s Negligent Repair of a Prior Negligent Act - Advise &amp; Consult, Inc.\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:description\" content=\"the Policies\u2019 phrase \u201ccontinuation, change, or resumption\u201d modified \u201cdamage previously known,\u201d interpretation is that all property damage must share a cause\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.myconstructionexpert.com\/blog\/ninth-circuit-holds-despite-known-damage-exclusion-insurer-duty-oregon-law-indemnify-defend-contractor-property-damage-resulted-contractors-n\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"Advise &amp; Consult, Inc.\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:publisher\" content=\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/Advise-Consult-Inc-126949043996790\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"2017-07-05T22:58:04+00:00\" \/>\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=\"2 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\/\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.myconstructionexpert.com\/blog\/ninth-circuit-holds-despite-known-damage-exclusion-insurer-duty-oregon-law-indemnify-defend-contractor-property-damage-resulted-contractors-n\/#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.myconstructionexpert.com\/blog\/ninth-circuit-holds-despite-known-damage-exclusion-insurer-duty-oregon-law-indemnify-defend-contractor-property-damage-resulted-contractors-n\/\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.myconstructionexpert.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/0a11abe008083d5fb19c2b0feefe7bd7\"},\"headline\":\"Ninth Circuit Holds That Despite \u2018Known Damage\u2019 Exclusion Insurer Had Duty Under Oregon Law to Indemnify and Defend Contractor When Property Damage Resulted From Contractor\u2019s Negligent Repair of a Prior Negligent Act\",\"datePublished\":\"2017-07-05T22:58:04+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.myconstructionexpert.com\/blog\/ninth-circuit-holds-despite-known-damage-exclusion-insurer-duty-oregon-law-indemnify-defend-contractor-property-damage-resulted-contractors-n\/\"},\"wordCount\":498,\"commentCount\":0,\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.myconstructionexpert.com\/blog\/#organization\"},\"keywords\":[\"Advise &amp; Consult\",\"duty to defend\",\"Duty to Indemnify\",\"Known Damage Exclusion\",\"Negligent Repair\",\"Oregon\",\"property damage\"],\"articleSection\":[\"Construction Defects\",\"Insurance Claims\",\"Property Damage\"],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"CommentAction\",\"name\":\"Comment\",\"target\":[\"https:\/\/www.myconstructionexpert.com\/blog\/ninth-circuit-holds-despite-known-damage-exclusion-insurer-duty-oregon-law-indemnify-defend-contractor-property-damage-resulted-contractors-n\/#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.myconstructionexpert.com\/blog\/ninth-circuit-holds-despite-known-damage-exclusion-insurer-duty-oregon-law-indemnify-defend-contractor-property-damage-resulted-contractors-n\/\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.myconstructionexpert.com\/blog\/ninth-circuit-holds-despite-known-damage-exclusion-insurer-duty-oregon-law-indemnify-defend-contractor-property-damage-resulted-contractors-n\/\",\"name\":\"Ninth Circuit Holds That Despite \u2018Known Damage\u2019 Exclusion Insurer Had Duty Under Oregon Law to Indemnify and Defend Contractor When Property Damage Resulted From Contractor\u2019s Negligent Repair of a Prior Negligent Act - Advise &amp; Consult, Inc.\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.myconstructionexpert.com\/blog\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2017-07-05T22:58:04+00:00\",\"description\":\"the Policies\u2019 phrase \u201ccontinuation, change, or resumption\u201d modified \u201cdamage previously known,\u201d interpretation is that all property damage must share a cause\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\/\/www.myconstructionexpert.com\/blog\/ninth-circuit-holds-despite-known-damage-exclusion-insurer-duty-oregon-law-indemnify-defend-contractor-property-damage-resulted-contractors-n\/\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.myconstructionexpert.com\/blog\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.myconstructionexpert.com\/blog\/\",\"name\":\"Advise &amp; 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":"Ninth Circuit Holds That Despite \u2018Known Damage\u2019 Exclusion Insurer Had Duty Under Oregon Law to Indemnify and Defend Contractor When Property Damage Resulted From Contractor\u2019s Negligent Repair of a Prior Negligent Act - Advise &amp; Consult, Inc.","description":"the Policies\u2019 phrase \u201ccontinuation, change, or resumption\u201d modified \u201cdamage previously known,\u201d interpretation is that all property damage must share a cause","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\/ninth-circuit-holds-despite-known-damage-exclusion-insurer-duty-oregon-law-indemnify-defend-contractor-property-damage-resulted-contractors-n\/","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Ninth Circuit Holds That Despite \u2018Known Damage\u2019 Exclusion Insurer Had Duty Under Oregon Law to Indemnify and Defend Contractor When Property Damage Resulted From Contractor\u2019s Negligent Repair of a Prior Negligent Act - Advise &amp; Consult, Inc.","og_description":"the Policies\u2019 phrase \u201ccontinuation, change, or resumption\u201d modified \u201cdamage previously known,\u201d interpretation is that all property damage must share a cause","og_url":"https:\/\/www.myconstructionexpert.com\/blog\/ninth-circuit-holds-despite-known-damage-exclusion-insurer-duty-oregon-law-indemnify-defend-contractor-property-damage-resulted-contractors-n\/","og_site_name":"Advise &amp; Consult, Inc.","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/Advise-Consult-Inc-126949043996790\/","article_published_time":"2017-07-05T22:58:04+00:00","author":"admin","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_creator":"@adviseconsult","twitter_site":"@adviseconsult","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"admin","Est. reading time":"2 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.myconstructionexpert.com\/blog\/ninth-circuit-holds-despite-known-damage-exclusion-insurer-duty-oregon-law-indemnify-defend-contractor-property-damage-resulted-contractors-n\/#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.myconstructionexpert.com\/blog\/ninth-circuit-holds-despite-known-damage-exclusion-insurer-duty-oregon-law-indemnify-defend-contractor-property-damage-resulted-contractors-n\/"},"author":{"name":"admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.myconstructionexpert.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/0a11abe008083d5fb19c2b0feefe7bd7"},"headline":"Ninth Circuit Holds That Despite \u2018Known Damage\u2019 Exclusion Insurer Had Duty Under Oregon Law to Indemnify and Defend Contractor When Property Damage Resulted From Contractor\u2019s Negligent Repair of a Prior Negligent Act","datePublished":"2017-07-05T22:58:04+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.myconstructionexpert.com\/blog\/ninth-circuit-holds-despite-known-damage-exclusion-insurer-duty-oregon-law-indemnify-defend-contractor-property-damage-resulted-contractors-n\/"},"wordCount":498,"commentCount":0,"publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.myconstructionexpert.com\/blog\/#organization"},"keywords":["Advise &amp; Consult","duty to defend","Duty to Indemnify","Known Damage Exclusion","Negligent Repair","Oregon","property damage"],"articleSection":["Construction Defects","Insurance Claims","Property Damage"],"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"CommentAction","name":"Comment","target":["https:\/\/www.myconstructionexpert.com\/blog\/ninth-circuit-holds-despite-known-damage-exclusion-insurer-duty-oregon-law-indemnify-defend-contractor-property-damage-resulted-contractors-n\/#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.myconstructionexpert.com\/blog\/ninth-circuit-holds-despite-known-damage-exclusion-insurer-duty-oregon-law-indemnify-defend-contractor-property-damage-resulted-contractors-n\/","url":"https:\/\/www.myconstructionexpert.com\/blog\/ninth-circuit-holds-despite-known-damage-exclusion-insurer-duty-oregon-law-indemnify-defend-contractor-property-damage-resulted-contractors-n\/","name":"Ninth Circuit Holds That Despite \u2018Known Damage\u2019 Exclusion Insurer Had Duty Under Oregon Law to Indemnify and Defend Contractor When Property Damage Resulted From Contractor\u2019s Negligent Repair of a Prior Negligent Act - Advise &amp; Consult, Inc.","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.myconstructionexpert.com\/blog\/#website"},"datePublished":"2017-07-05T22:58:04+00:00","description":"the Policies\u2019 phrase \u201ccontinuation, change, or resumption\u201d modified \u201cdamage previously known,\u201d interpretation is that all property damage must share a cause","inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.myconstructionexpert.com\/blog\/ninth-circuit-holds-despite-known-damage-exclusion-insurer-duty-oregon-law-indemnify-defend-contractor-property-damage-resulted-contractors-n\/"]}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/www.myconstructionexpert.com\/blog\/#website","url":"https:\/\/www.myconstructionexpert.com\/blog\/","name":"Advise &amp; 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\/p2ztG6-3KaM","jetpack_likes_enabled":true,"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.myconstructionexpert.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/892476","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=892476"}],"version-history":[{"count":1,"href":"https:\/\/www.myconstructionexpert.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/892476\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":892477,"href":"https:\/\/www.myconstructionexpert.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/892476\/revisions\/892477"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.myconstructionexpert.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=892476"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.myconstructionexpert.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=892476"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.myconstructionexpert.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=892476"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}