{"id":901875,"date":"2023-11-15T15:33:43","date_gmt":"2023-11-15T22:33:43","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.myconstructionexpert.com\/blog\/?p=901875"},"modified":"2023-11-15T15:33:46","modified_gmt":"2023-11-15T22:33:46","slug":"insurance-coverage-homeowners-policy-reside-at-residence","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.myconstructionexpert.com\/blog\/insurance-coverage-homeowners-policy-reside-at-residence\/","title":{"rendered":"There\u2019s No Place Like Home! Kansas Federal Court Holds Homeowner\u2019s Policy Coverage Requires Policyholder to Physically Reside at Residence"},"content":{"rendered":"\n<p>Vincent Passarelli | <a href=\"https:\/\/www.propertyinsurancelawobserver.com\/2023\/11\/09\/theres-no-place-like-home-kansas-federal-court-holds-homeowners-policy-coverage-requires-policyholder-to-physically-reside-at-residence\/\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noreferrer noopener nofollow\">Property Insurance Law Observer<\/a><\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>A federal court recently held that an insurer may deny coverage under a <a href=\"https:\/\/www.myconstructionexpert.com\/blog\/took-carrier-almost-year-make-coverage-determination-now-told-one-year-limitations-period-policy-ends-days-right\/\">homeowner\u2019s policy<\/a> for a \u201cresidence premises\u201d when the insured never actually lived at the premises. In\u00a0<em>Sina Davani v. Travelers Personal Insurance Company and Geico Insurance Agency, LLC<\/em>, Case No. 22-1244 (D. Kan. October 26, 2023), the District of Kansas granted defendant-insurer\u2019s motion for summary judgment holding that the plaintiff-insured never resided at the insured premises and residence in the context of an insurance contract requires an insured\u2019s physical presence at a certain location and an intent to remain at the location for an indefinite period of time.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>Plaintiff made an insurance claim to his insurer Travelers Personal Insurance Company (\u201cTravelers\u201d) after discovering damage resulting from a water leak at his property in Wichita, Kansas (the \u201cProperty\u201d). The policy provided coverage for Plaintiff\u2019s \u201cresidence premises\u201d which was defined in the policy as \u201c[t]he one family dwelling or unit where you reside . . . and which is shown as the \u2018residence premises\u2019 in the Declarations.\u201d The Declarations listed the Property as Plaintiff\u2019s residence premises. Travelers began its investigation of the claim and retained the assistance of its Special Investigations Unit when it appeared Plaintiff may not have resided at the Property. During the claim investigation, Plaintiff filed suit for breach of insurance contract. Travelers subsequently filed a motion for summary judgment seeking&nbsp; dismissal of Plaintiff\u2019s Complaint.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<figure class=\"wp-block-image\"><a href=\"https:\/\/www.propertyinsurancelawobserver.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/11\/2023\/11\/shutterstock_1687058953.jpg\"><img decoding=\"async\" src=\"https:\/\/www.propertyinsurancelawobserver.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/11\/2023\/11\/shutterstock_1687058953.jpg\" alt=\"\" class=\"wp-image-2291\"\/><\/a><\/figure>\n\n\n\n<p>Travelers argued Plaintiff\u2019s claim was clearly precluded because the policy unambiguously required that Plaintiff reside at the Property at the time of the claimed loss. Plaintiff conceded that he was not living at the Property at the time of loss, but argued that a reasonable insured could interpret the phrase \u201cresidence premises\u201d in the policy to include a property that the insured may not currently reside in, but could use as a residence. Plaintiff also argued that because the policy contained certain exclusions for properties that are unoccupied for more than 60 days, the policy impliedly provides coverage for properties unoccupied for less than 60 days. Applying Kansas law regarding the interpretation of insurance contracts, the Court held that the policy\u2019s definition of \u201cresidence premises\u201d was not ambiguous and require actual residency. Further, citing to the Kansas Court of Appeals decision in&nbsp;<em>Teter v. Corley<\/em>, 2 Kan. App. 2d 540, 542, 584 P.2d 651, 653 (1978), the Court held that in the context of insurance contracts, residence requires an insured\u2019s physical presence at a certain location and an intent to remain at the location for an indefinite period of time. Lastly, the Court found Plaintiff\u2019s vacancy argument unavailing because Plaintiff did not deny that he failed to move into and live in the Property within 60 days. Thus, the Court held that Plaintiff failed to meet his burden showing he was entitled to coverage.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>The District of Kansas\u2019 decision that an insured\u2019s actual residency at the insured property is required should encourage insurers to examine the definitions of \u201cresidence premises\u201d in their homeowner\u2019s policies to ensure that the definition conforms to the intended purpose of the policy. In addition, insurers should use clear and unambiguous language to guard against an argument that a policy does not require actual residency.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\n<hr class=\"wp-block-separator has-alpha-channel-opacity\"\/>\n\n\n\n<p><strong>When one of your cases is in need of a construction expert, estimates, insurance appraisal or umpire services in defect or insurance disputes &#8211; please call Advise &amp; Consult, Inc. at 888.684.8305, or email <a href=\"mailto:experts@adviseandconsult.net\">experts@adviseandconsult.net<\/a>.<\/strong><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Vincent Passarelli | Property Insurance Law Observer A federal court recently held that an insurer may deny coverage under a homeowner\u2019s policy for a \u201cresidence premises\u201d when the insured never actually lived at the premises. In\u00a0Sina Davani v. Travelers Personal Insurance Company and Geico Insurance Agency, LLC, Case No. 22-1244 (D. Kan. October 26, 2023),&hellip; <a class=\"more-link\" href=\"https:\/\/www.myconstructionexpert.com\/blog\/insurance-coverage-homeowners-policy-reside-at-residence\/\">Continue reading <span class=\"screen-reader-text\">There\u2019s No Place Like Home! Kansas Federal Court Holds Homeowner\u2019s Policy Coverage Requires Policyholder to Physically Reside at Residence<\/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":[9914],"tags":[9895,9264,23],"class_list":["post-901875","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-insurance-coverage","tag-advise-consult","tag-homeowners-policy","tag-insurance-coverage","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>There\u2019s No Place Like Home! Kansas Federal Court Holds Homeowner\u2019s Policy Coverage Requires Policyholder to Physically Reside at Residence - Advise &amp; Consult, Inc.<\/title>\n<meta name=\"description\" content=\"federal court held that insurer may deny coverage under a homeowner\u2019s policy for a \u201cresidence premises\u201d when insured never occupied premises\" \/>\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\/insurance-coverage-homeowners-policy-reside-at-residence\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"There\u2019s No Place Like Home! Kansas Federal Court Holds Homeowner\u2019s Policy Coverage Requires Policyholder to Physically Reside at Residence - Advise &amp; Consult, Inc.\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:description\" content=\"federal court held that insurer may deny coverage under a homeowner\u2019s policy for a \u201cresidence premises\u201d when insured never occupied premises\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.myconstructionexpert.com\/blog\/insurance-coverage-homeowners-policy-reside-at-residence\/\" \/>\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=\"2023-11-15T22:33:43+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2023-11-15T22:33:46+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/www.propertyinsurancelawobserver.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/11\/2023\/11\/shutterstock_1687058953.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=\"3 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\/\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.myconstructionexpert.com\/blog\/insurance-coverage-homeowners-policy-reside-at-residence\/#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.myconstructionexpert.com\/blog\/insurance-coverage-homeowners-policy-reside-at-residence\/\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.myconstructionexpert.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/0a11abe008083d5fb19c2b0feefe7bd7\"},\"headline\":\"There\u2019s No Place Like Home! Kansas Federal Court Holds Homeowner\u2019s Policy Coverage Requires Policyholder to Physically Reside at Residence\",\"datePublished\":\"2023-11-15T22:33:43+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2023-11-15T22:33:46+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.myconstructionexpert.com\/blog\/insurance-coverage-homeowners-policy-reside-at-residence\/\"},\"wordCount\":592,\"commentCount\":0,\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.myconstructionexpert.com\/blog\/#organization\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.myconstructionexpert.com\/blog\/insurance-coverage-homeowners-policy-reside-at-residence\/#primaryimage\"},\"thumbnailUrl\":\"https:\/\/www.propertyinsurancelawobserver.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/11\/2023\/11\/shutterstock_1687058953.jpg\",\"keywords\":[\"Advise &amp; Consult\",\"Homeowners Policy\",\"insurance coverage\"],\"articleSection\":[\"Insurance Coverage\"],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"CommentAction\",\"name\":\"Comment\",\"target\":[\"https:\/\/www.myconstructionexpert.com\/blog\/insurance-coverage-homeowners-policy-reside-at-residence\/#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.myconstructionexpert.com\/blog\/insurance-coverage-homeowners-policy-reside-at-residence\/\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.myconstructionexpert.com\/blog\/insurance-coverage-homeowners-policy-reside-at-residence\/\",\"name\":\"There\u2019s No Place Like Home! Kansas Federal Court Holds Homeowner\u2019s Policy Coverage Requires Policyholder to Physically Reside at Residence - Advise &amp; Consult, Inc.\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.myconstructionexpert.com\/blog\/#website\"},\"primaryImageOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.myconstructionexpert.com\/blog\/insurance-coverage-homeowners-policy-reside-at-residence\/#primaryimage\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.myconstructionexpert.com\/blog\/insurance-coverage-homeowners-policy-reside-at-residence\/#primaryimage\"},\"thumbnailUrl\":\"https:\/\/www.propertyinsurancelawobserver.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/11\/2023\/11\/shutterstock_1687058953.jpg\",\"datePublished\":\"2023-11-15T22:33:43+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2023-11-15T22:33:46+00:00\",\"description\":\"federal court held that insurer may deny coverage under a homeowner\u2019s policy for a \u201cresidence premises\u201d when insured never occupied premises\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\/\/www.myconstructionexpert.com\/blog\/insurance-coverage-homeowners-policy-reside-at-residence\/\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.myconstructionexpert.com\/blog\/insurance-coverage-homeowners-policy-reside-at-residence\/#primaryimage\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.propertyinsurancelawobserver.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/11\/2023\/11\/shutterstock_1687058953.jpg\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\/\/www.propertyinsurancelawobserver.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/11\/2023\/11\/shutterstock_1687058953.jpg\"},{\"@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":"There\u2019s No Place Like Home! Kansas Federal Court Holds Homeowner\u2019s Policy Coverage Requires Policyholder to Physically Reside at Residence - Advise &amp; Consult, Inc.","description":"federal court held that insurer may deny coverage under a homeowner\u2019s policy for a \u201cresidence premises\u201d when insured never occupied premises","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\/insurance-coverage-homeowners-policy-reside-at-residence\/","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"There\u2019s No Place Like Home! Kansas Federal Court Holds Homeowner\u2019s Policy Coverage Requires Policyholder to Physically Reside at Residence - Advise &amp; Consult, Inc.","og_description":"federal court held that insurer may deny coverage under a homeowner\u2019s policy for a \u201cresidence premises\u201d when insured never occupied premises","og_url":"https:\/\/www.myconstructionexpert.com\/blog\/insurance-coverage-homeowners-policy-reside-at-residence\/","og_site_name":"Advise &amp; Consult, Inc.","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/Advise-Consult-Inc-126949043996790\/","article_published_time":"2023-11-15T22:33:43+00:00","article_modified_time":"2023-11-15T22:33:46+00:00","og_image":[{"url":"https:\/\/www.propertyinsurancelawobserver.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/11\/2023\/11\/shutterstock_1687058953.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":"3 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.myconstructionexpert.com\/blog\/insurance-coverage-homeowners-policy-reside-at-residence\/#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.myconstructionexpert.com\/blog\/insurance-coverage-homeowners-policy-reside-at-residence\/"},"author":{"name":"admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.myconstructionexpert.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/0a11abe008083d5fb19c2b0feefe7bd7"},"headline":"There\u2019s No Place Like Home! Kansas Federal Court Holds Homeowner\u2019s Policy Coverage Requires Policyholder to Physically Reside at Residence","datePublished":"2023-11-15T22:33:43+00:00","dateModified":"2023-11-15T22:33:46+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.myconstructionexpert.com\/blog\/insurance-coverage-homeowners-policy-reside-at-residence\/"},"wordCount":592,"commentCount":0,"publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.myconstructionexpert.com\/blog\/#organization"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.myconstructionexpert.com\/blog\/insurance-coverage-homeowners-policy-reside-at-residence\/#primaryimage"},"thumbnailUrl":"https:\/\/www.propertyinsurancelawobserver.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/11\/2023\/11\/shutterstock_1687058953.jpg","keywords":["Advise &amp; Consult","Homeowners Policy","insurance coverage"],"articleSection":["Insurance Coverage"],"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"CommentAction","name":"Comment","target":["https:\/\/www.myconstructionexpert.com\/blog\/insurance-coverage-homeowners-policy-reside-at-residence\/#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.myconstructionexpert.com\/blog\/insurance-coverage-homeowners-policy-reside-at-residence\/","url":"https:\/\/www.myconstructionexpert.com\/blog\/insurance-coverage-homeowners-policy-reside-at-residence\/","name":"There\u2019s No Place Like Home! Kansas Federal Court Holds Homeowner\u2019s Policy Coverage Requires Policyholder to Physically Reside at Residence - Advise &amp; Consult, Inc.","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.myconstructionexpert.com\/blog\/#website"},"primaryImageOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.myconstructionexpert.com\/blog\/insurance-coverage-homeowners-policy-reside-at-residence\/#primaryimage"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.myconstructionexpert.com\/blog\/insurance-coverage-homeowners-policy-reside-at-residence\/#primaryimage"},"thumbnailUrl":"https:\/\/www.propertyinsurancelawobserver.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/11\/2023\/11\/shutterstock_1687058953.jpg","datePublished":"2023-11-15T22:33:43+00:00","dateModified":"2023-11-15T22:33:46+00:00","description":"federal court held that insurer may deny coverage under a homeowner\u2019s policy for a \u201cresidence premises\u201d when insured never occupied premises","inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.myconstructionexpert.com\/blog\/insurance-coverage-homeowners-policy-reside-at-residence\/"]}]},{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.myconstructionexpert.com\/blog\/insurance-coverage-homeowners-policy-reside-at-residence\/#primaryimage","url":"https:\/\/www.propertyinsurancelawobserver.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/11\/2023\/11\/shutterstock_1687058953.jpg","contentUrl":"https:\/\/www.propertyinsurancelawobserver.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/11\/2023\/11\/shutterstock_1687058953.jpg"},{"@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\/p2ztG6-3MCn","jetpack_likes_enabled":true,"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.myconstructionexpert.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/901875","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=901875"}],"version-history":[{"count":2,"href":"https:\/\/www.myconstructionexpert.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/901875\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":901877,"href":"https:\/\/www.myconstructionexpert.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/901875\/revisions\/901877"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.myconstructionexpert.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=901875"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.myconstructionexpert.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=901875"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.myconstructionexpert.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=901875"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}