Replies

1. 
   Piffin | Apr 05, 2003 05:26pm | #1

   Yes and maybe.

   Tell him [don't ask] that you need a copy of his insurance certificates before he starts.

   .

   Excellence is its own reward!

2. 
   xMikeSmith | Apr 05, 2003 05:26pm | #2

   real simple, ask him to have his agent send you a Certifcate of Insurance.. it will list all of the policies in effect.. if there is no WC listed.. there is no WC..

    don't take a copy from him.. have his agent send it to you

   Mike Smith   Rhode Island : Design / Build / Repair / Restore

3. 
   coonass | Apr 05, 2003 06:00pm | #3

   paulz,

   Call electric company to trim tree over powerline.

   KK

1. 
   bill_1010 | Apr 05, 2003 06:25pm | #4

   Calling the Utility companies to trim trees in the utility easement is a death sentance to the trees.  Youll only be needing to call a tree removal service soon since the tree butchers of the ultility company will kill the trees with their "trimming" 

   YOure better off hiring qualified arborist then getting free tree killing service from the utilities

1. 
   Job | Apr 05, 2003 08:08pm | #5

   The tree is sick, and tends to be leaning away from the power lines and right across my drive on my property, branches not close enuf to lines to bring in utility co. Tho' if it should fall the other way toward the lines in a  freak windstorm, it surely could hit the lines.  Wonder if I can get the utility to take it down at their expense? Will try that...

   Re Workers Comp insurance, I seem to recall something to the effect that a sole proprietor of a contracting biz does not require WC ins? True? We are in CT...But then this fellow, who may be hiring day guys for chipper work buglugging, does the high risk stuff himself, on his 75 or 100 feet bucket machine  Scary biz! Anyway, I'll ask his ins agent for evidence of coverage, and check with my ins agent about this whole issue.I can't believe the tree guy would riskl losing his costly equipment not carrying proper insurance, but maybe he's a gambler...

   Edited 4/5/2003 1:11:02 PM ET by paulz

1. 
   wallyo | Apr 05, 2003 09:13pm | #7

   The utility should be more then glad to take it down If you don't want it.  they will hack it other wise but the utility may  not allow anyone but there cutters near the lines period.

   You know your kite is caught in the power line call the uttility co.

2. 
   Piffin | Apr 05, 2003 09:35pm | #8

   In most states, the homeowner is ultimately responsible for injuries to anyone on his property.

   An individual can contract with said homeowner in such a way that releases the homeowner from liability if it is done actively. But if only implied, and that man dies falling out of a tree, his widow may still be able to make a claim agains you. And if he hires employees or subcontractors most atae laws require him to cover them for insurance but if he fails, the ball still falls on the property owner.

   You..

   Excellence is its own reward!

1. 
   SMXSteve | Apr 05, 2003 11:30pm | #11

   This may be a local thing but when I applied for my permits I was told that I should submit the names of any contractors to release me from liability. I never had a problem so I don't know how it would turn out but maybe something to  check into.

2. 
   Job | Apr 07, 2003 04:20pm | #18

   Piffin said:"In most states, the homeowner is ultimately responsible for injuries to anyone on his property."

   Shouldn't you have added the phrase  "due to homeowner's negligence" or "homeowner knew or should have known...such and such risk etc"?  How can a HO be liable for negligence or foolishness of the careless contractor, or for an act of God or defective equipment, etc etc? But then there is the classic case of the burglar who fell thru a skylight and sued HO for damages...and won!! Guess it depends on the judge's  or the jury's temper that day..."The law is an arss"(Dickens?)...So be safe, make sure there is WC and gen liability ins carried by the contractor before any work is done at the home, unless the HO is a tightwad gambler willing to risk it all by using low bidder with no insurance.  Thanks for all the comments and advice.

3. 
   KARLSTER | Apr 05, 2003 11:08pm | #9

   Can anyone clarify if I am missing something?

   I don't carry workers comp on myself as a sole proprietor here in CA.  My insurance agent tells me I am not required to. 

   Based on the posts I have read so far, I get the impression if I am working on a clients house and I injure myself I can hold him liable for all medical costs and lost income.  Can anyone clarify if I am missing something?

   It sounds as what the law requires and what a prudent homeowner might want are two seperate things?

   I know there have been several threads on this lately and as a consequence am interviewing a new insurance broker next week to see if he can be more helpful in educating me on my actual insurance needs.  The existing insurance broker has me bouncing from one rep to another and lately no one seems to know anything other than what my premiums are and when they are due.

   Another question on workers comp I will ask my agent next week but maybe someone here has the answer.  I was recently told by another sub on a job that you can specify each week how an individual employees labor was allocated, ie. so many hours caulking, so many hours doing heavy labor, so many hours running a saw, and be charged the appropriate WC rate for each task.

   I had previously been told that I would be charged the rate appropriate to the highest risk work that employee would be engaged in for the entire pay period.  In other words if I had office help that had to climb up a ladder to lend a hand for ten minutes putting a tarp on a roof then I should pay a roofers WC rate for the entire pay period rather than the much lower office help rate.

   thanks in advance for any information.

   Karl

1. 
   Scrapr | Apr 05, 2003 11:21pm | #10

   Karl,

       You are almost there w/workers comp deal. If you fail to separate the hours out for each individual task they all get rated at the highest rate the employee worked that period. For instance we have driving time and site time. Driving time is a lower rated category. So we add up how much site time on each employees daily timesheet and add up how much drive time.

        you need to keep what are called verifiable records. Good luck.

2. 
   RichBeckman | Apr 06, 2003 12:16am | #13

   It is my understanding that just because the law does not require a sole proprietor to carry work comp, that does not mean he or she shouldn't carry it nor does mean that a homeowner is smart to hire such a person (though it is done all the time).

   I'm beginning to think that in Indiana, you pay work comp at the highest rate the employee works at. If they work on a roof once in the year, all of their hours are roofing hours as far as billing is concerned. That is how one agent explained it to me. Another company's pamphlet explains:

   "If an employee is exposed to more than one job exposure, all the employee's payroll must be placed in the highest rated class. To avoid excess premium charges, you must keep a record of separation of hours and payroll for each employee. The employee can then be placed in the correct job classification according to their job responsibility."

   Sounds like if you don't keep good enough records, they will rate every one as a roofer if one employee spent one hour on a roof during the year.

   Rich Beckman

   Another day, another tool.

3. 
   villagehandyman | Apr 06, 2003 12:32am | #14

   i contract in calif. you dont carry work comp in your self. if you are licensed and work on some ones property they will not be resposable for you if you are not licensed and you work on someones property they are responsable just like anyone else who walks onto thair property if you are licensed then itis your own health insuance that will paythis is one reason why home owners should only have licenced profesionel working on the houseif your insurance co find out you hired unlicensed so called contractors who brought some employees that were not covered by workmans comp.they will not want to pay for any injury or damage

4. 
   archyII | Apr 06, 2003 03:49am | #15

   What about yourself?.  I thought the same thing.  My partner and I (a LLC) never had WC for our selves since we had health insurance that we thought would cover any injury.  A fellow uncovered person we know fell off of a ladder at a jobsite and broke his leg.  His health ins. would not cover the claim.  We checked our health coverage and found out that injuries on the job are not covered.

5. 
   KARLSTER | Apr 06, 2003 04:29am | #16

   Archy, I start to wonder why we pay for insurance when there seems to so frequently be a clause that limits the insurers payout.  I am beginning to think I need to be a lawyer to understand my policies limitations.

   It would come as a shock to find my health insurance doesn't cover on the job injuries as I buy it through the builders exchange.  I may as well check into it now that you have brought it up.

   The only medical bill I have had in recent years was a few stitches to a finger cut by a disc sander.  In that case there was no question as to whether or not it was covered.

   Karl

6. 
   xMikeSmith | Apr 06, 2003 04:39am | #17

   karl.. most health insurance is for non-job related injuries and illness..

   the 2d category is disability insurance... which can be for either or both..

    and the third is WC which is only for job-related illness & injury...

   so , theoretically, you really need all three..

   and if your state has licensing for contractors, there is usually a clause to the effect that home owners have no rights if they hire an unlicensed contractor..

   the question of liability of homeowners for injuries to  workers usually goes to the deep-pockets theory... if the worker is injured.. and has no coverage.. someone is going to pay.. in some states that could be the homeowner, especially if the state considers the hoimeowner the employer.. but this is why lawyers get paid...

   it is not a question that has a cut and dried answer. and certainly varies from state to state..

   as an employer, i carry  GL & WC,  if  a homeowner in Rhode Island  hires a Registered Contractor, and receives a Certificate of Insurance showing GL & WC are in effect.. he's about as safe as he could be in our litigous societyMike Smith   Rhode Island : Design / Build / Repair / Restore

2. 
   coonass | Apr 06, 2003 12:07am | #12

   WmP,

   That's not true where I live. There is still a lot of pride left in the South, just not much money.

   KK

4. 
   villagehandyman | Apr 05, 2003 08:17pm | #6

   you need to check his license number . if he is not licensed or insured and nowork comp on emlpoyees then you bear all liabilityyour home owners insurance may or maynot cover insuance companies dont like to pay if they can help it also check your limit on your insurance many homeowner policies have a 50000 maximum if someone falls out of a tree and is severly injured this might not be enought you will be responsable for the differance. in california if you hire anyone unlicensed to work on your home or property and they are injured your insurance will not cover them .

   there was a situation where home owner hired a guy to clean out the raingutters 10 dollares an hour he fell off the roof and landed on his head was disabled probably for life. home owner insurance covered nothing and cancelled thair policy. the guy who fell of the roof ended up owning the house and they are still paying his med bills

   there is a myth about not needing a licence if the job is under five hundred dollares labour and material thisis really not true if you hire anyone for anything you need to cover them with work comp and deduct taxes

5. 
   carlsperry | Apr 07, 2003 04:58pm | #19

       I have a neighbor of a past customer have this exact thing happen to them.  They hired a guy to trim trees and one of his workers got seriously hurt.  Touched a live wire and was sent flying to the ground.  Broken legs, collar bone ect...   Worker was an illegal alien(sp?) and ended up sueing the HO. 

       Bottom line is you are liable for anything that happens on your property.  Your HO insurance would probably cover it, but they would either raise your rate to an super high amount or drop you.  They would also file a counter suit aginst the guys employer since they did not have the insurance.  Either way you would lose. 

      Basically the insurance industry has us by the short hairs.  We have to have it so they can pretty much charge whatever they want and get away with it.  It'slike the price of gas.  You have 2 choices pay for it or take the bus.    

1. 
   TommH | Apr 07, 2003 05:57pm | #20

   A property owner is not liable for injuries to employees of a contractor caused by dangers inherent in the work they are doing. Pelletier v. Sordini Sonstruction 262 Conn. 442. Unless you do something to actually cause the injury, there is no liability on your part. Generally, you would not be liable for damage to others caused by the contractor's negligence, unless it can be shown that you negligently hired an incompetent contractor. That having been said, it won't stop an enterprising ambulance chaser from suing you. Insist on proof of both w.c. insurance and, more importantly, liability insurance, minimum 1 million limits.

1. 
   Piffin | Apr 08, 2003 07:04am | #22

   I would suggest that a homeowners failure to insist on proof that his contractor has proper and legally required insurance constitutes prima facia evidence of negligence on th HOs part.

   Who want's to spend ten thousand in legal fees to find out how right he is when he can simply ask for proof of insurance up front..

   Excellence is its own reward!

1. 
   TommH | Apr 08, 2003 05:02pm | #23

   I agree 100%. I just wanted to dispell the notion that a homeowner is automatically responsible for injuries to the contractor's employees if there is no w.c. insurance or is liable to 3rd parties for the contractor's negligence (at least under Ct. law where paulz is from).BTW, the case I cited was recently decided by the Ct. Supreme Court and applies primarily to g.c.'s; it virtually eliminates any liability on tha part of the g.c. for injuries to employees of subs. Needless to say, the trial lawyers are unhappy and are busy lobbying the legislature to change the law.

1. 
   SHazlett | Apr 08, 2003 05:19pm | #24

    A certificate of insurance from the contractors insurance company MAY NOT show workers comp in some states.

   For example----here in Ohio workers comp. is run by the state .The agent who handles my business liability insurance,truck insurance etc. Has zero idea if I carry workers comp----thats the states piece of action. So every proposal I write goes in an info packet along with product lit. etc., there is a copy of my liability insurance cert. AND a seperate copy of my workers comp. cert.. I supply this up front before the prospect ever asks for it.

2. 
   canuckguy | Apr 08, 2003 06:09pm | #25

   " Ya don't need insurance till ya need it" Yogi Berra

   Sounds like it can be very tough doing business south of the border. Here in Ontario it is a bit simpler. All workers in the province are automatically covered by the gov. if injured on the job. The business owner must ensure the worker follows the regs. as set out in one, many or all of the Occupational Health and Safety Acts of the province. If in the case "management" does not ensure that they and the worker adhere to the regulations in the act(s) the individuals responsible (owners, mangement, supervisors) can be charged by the Crown attorney (D.A.).  If found guilty they can be fined and or sent to prison.

   That keeps it all simple, lol. We started to work under this legislation in 1978. It took until the mid 80's for heavy industry and commercial construction to catch on. Now the authorities are taking a close look at the "small operators". This is causing many to retire or close the door. Anyone buying a pickup, throwing a ladder in the back and calling themselves a contractor is "gambling" with a prison sentence if they are not in compliance with the regs. in the act(s).

   This of course this has sent construction costs soaring, considering one need send their tradesmen to classes for training on such things as hazardous material awareness for example. I could write a book about "due dilligence" management and supervision, cover your butt theory of management, actually I did.

2. 
   Job | Apr 07, 2003 07:12pm | #21

   Siding guy:  What was the outcome of the lawsuit vs HO? Did HO's insurance defend and pay?