Your lender will be a good source of information regarding insurance requirements. Generally, they require builders' risk, general liability, and workers' compensation insurance. You should also consider the risk of errors and omissions in the plans which could result in significant cost increases during construction. Talk with your architect or designer about whether they have errors and omissions insurance. Good luck with your project.

Very good. Most insurers know what those policies are, they aren't rare. You don't need a specialized agent. Unless you find an agent or broker who isn't licensed to sell those types of policies. (IE you call a health insurance agent..) We used (and still use) an American Family agent. It took all of about 2 minutes to set up our policies for our build. If you're worried, call around to a few brokers and see what they say. They'll search out the best agent or company for your needs.

There is a lot of misinformation and assumption here. Mennonites generally accept modern hospitals and don't mind benefiting from electricity. They are not against modern medicine or electricity, they don't reject modernity that way. They believe that easy access to those things remove individuals from the community and that people are actually better off when part of the community. A thesis that is difficult to argue with as there is a lot of evidence to support it. Mennonites would argue that they don't need forced insurance as their sense of community provides the same benefit and does so better and more efficiently than insurance. Insurance is a risk and cost sharing mechanism. It is only necessary because you wouldn't chip in to help a competitor of yours who lives a couple of blocks over. Worker's Compensation insurance uses the idea that jobs present a constant and somewhat calculable risk of injury to spread costs. In other words, if there is a one percent chance that a worker "falls off a roof, is paralyzed, and suffers chronic bedsores," worker's compensation insurance is going to group 100 employers together and have them all pay 1% of the cost. If a Mennonite worker "falls off a roof, is paralyzed, and suffers chronic bedsores," the entire community, even direct competitors, are going to offer financial support freely. Moreover, they are going to offer other support freely. There really is no cost advantage to them. You are being forced to pay insurance to support workers injured on the job and that is factored into your cost. A Mennonite is voluntarily supporting workers injured on the job and that is factored into their cost. In reality you get a tax deduction for the support you are forced to give and they don't, because they give freely of the money that they earned and paid taxes on. So the idea that they have a competitive advantage because of insurance just shows how many people don't really understand fungibility. The reality is that Mennonite communities use modern medicine and generally pay their medical bills in a timely manner. When one member of the community can't pay their bills other members will assist them and know if there is ever a time that they can't pay their bills the favor will get returned. The only real competitive advantage that Mennonites have is that they live much more frugally than most.

The same thing that happens with all other insurance. If an agent closes their office, they will arrange for a different agent to take over their policies. But you said previously..."the agent takes on additional liabilities when you pay for title insurance (unlike homeowners and other types of insurance)...required to cure many title issues without reimbursement from the underwriter....agent is unlikely to receive any compensation for their time... that is what their commission is for in the first place. " For other types of insurance, agents would gladly take over another's book of business because it is an ongoing source of income, and they don't assume "additional liabilities." But why would anyone take over a title insurance policy since they have no idea about the original title agent's quality of work AND must assume all of their liability/risk AND don't get the fat commission check? If the title agent misses something that they can’t correct, it is the title agent who is sued and the title agent’s errors and omissions insurance that pays out in that suit rather than the underwriter. Who sues the title agent? Who gets sued if the title agent moves, retires, dies? Also, you reported earlier, that "The title insurance fixed all that mess without bothering me and it required multiple court appearances to fix." and "The attorney fees to resolve the issue were greater than the property value." So it was not the title agent who had to fix the issues? It was not the title agent's "errors and omissions" insurance that paid for this?