• Welcome to OGBoards 10.0, keep in mind that we will be making LOTS of changes to smooth out the experience here and make it as close as possible functionally to the old software, but feel free to drop suggestions or requests in the Tech Support subforum!

Liability question: paying someone to blow leaves off roof

DeacInVermont said:
I feel like this is why I pay a premium for umbrella liability insurance.
Click to expand...
Original poster here. I have umbrella insurance, which was pretty much my question, i.e. is that sufficient coverage w/o requiring the contractor to provide proof of insurance. And no I'm not trying to avoid paying more by using a so-called "unlicensed" contractor: the guy who offered to blow my roof off is a middle school teacher/coach who does lawns on the weekends and summers with his son; they laid sod at my house last year. Where I live you pretty much rely on guys who work out of their pick-ups, and in many cases do it as "side work" in addition to their "public" jobs. I've had guys do electrical, plumbing, lawn, painting and roof work at my house over the years, and I've never once asked them to provide proof of insurance; maybe they have it/who knows but as a single proprietor I doubt it in all cases. But climbing on my roof yesterdays got me thinking if that's something I need to require , or is my umbrella coverage sufficient protection. And the guys who have done work for me in the past probably would not sue me personally if injured, but their insurance company might well look to the homeowner policy first which is why I asked.
.
 
PhDeac said:
That’s the job. Lawyers get paid to make up an argument and defend the hell out of it.

I got a kick out of a lawyer saying they’re the only lawyer on this board to do some specific but not particularly unique lawyer shit.
Click to expand...
Look man, we're talking about a situation where I have some knowledge and experience and without fail it devolves into the same level of discourse it always does when discussing the legal profession. I don't know why that gives you a "kick," but I don't pretend to understand the intricacies of what you do for a living and think you look kind of foolish trying to simplify the legal profession like that.
 
DownEastDeac said:
. And no I'm not trying to avoid paying more by using a so-called "unlicensed" contractor: the guy who offered to blow my roof off is a middle school teacher/coach who does lawns on the weekends and summers with his son; they laid sod at my house last year.
.
Click to expand...
Oh fuck it is Mako - and he brought his mom. Teacher/coach and with his partner they "laid sod"
 
DownEastDeac said:
Original poster here. I have umbrella insurance, which was pretty much my question, i.e. is that sufficient coverage w/o requiring the contractor to provide proof of insurance. And no I'm not trying to avoid paying more by using a so-called "unlicensed" contractor: the guy who offered to blow my roof off is a middle school teacher/coach who does lawns on the weekends and summers with his son; they laid sod at my house last year. Where I live you pretty much rely on guys who work out of their pick-ups, and in many cases do it as "side work" in addition to their "public" jobs. I've had guys do electrical, plumbing, lawn, painting and roof work at my house over the years, and I've never once asked them to provide proof of insurance; maybe they have it/who knows but as a single proprietor I doubt it in all cases. But climbing on my roof yesterdays got me thinking if that's something I need to require , or is my umbrella coverage sufficient protection. And the guys who have done work for me in the past probably would not sue me personally if injured, but their insurance company might well look to the homeowner policy first which is why I asked.
.
Click to expand...

Your umbrella policy will kick in only if the underlying home insurance policy liability limits have been exhausted - BUT, this is only in the event that the loss is a covered peril under your underlying home insurance policy. The umbrella policy is likely a follow-form policy, so it has the same perils coverage as the home policy.

This is a pretty gray area in my mind (and I don't do any commercial insurance, so this is solely from a personal lines angle), because the person on your roof should have insurance, and that would cover them if they were to get into an accident while on your roof.
 
Last edited:
Deacsfan27 said:
Your umbrella policy will kick in only if the underlying home insurance policy liability limits have been exhausted, in which case it will then kick in - BUT, this is only in the event that the loss is a covered peril under your insurance policy. THe umbrella policy is likely a follow-form policy, so it has the same perils coverage as the home policy.

This is a pretty gray area in my mind (and I don't do any commercial insurance, so this is solely from a personal lines angle), because the person on your roof should have insurance, and that would cover them if they were to get into an accident while on your roof.
Click to expand...

If you use a company that’s insured instead of some dude…yes?
 
ConnorEl said:
If you use a company that’s insured instead of some dude…yes?
Click to expand...
Right - I just wouldn't let anybody on my roof to do work unless they have insurance/are professionals who know what they are doing.

Ladders are terrifying AF to begin with and lead to a ton of injuries/deaths annually. I know it sounds dumb and conservative, but it's super dangerous.
 
DownEastDeac said:
Original poster here. I have umbrella insurance, which was pretty much my question, i.e. is that sufficient coverage w/o requiring the contractor to provide proof of insurance. And no I'm not trying to avoid paying more by using a so-called "unlicensed" contractor: the guy who offered to blow my roof off is a middle school teacher/coach who does lawns on the weekends and summers with his son; they laid sod at my house last year. Where I live you pretty much rely on guys who work out of their pick-ups, and in many cases do it as "side work" in addition to their "public" jobs. I've had guys do electrical, plumbing, lawn, painting and roof work at my house over the years, and I've never once asked them to provide proof of insurance; maybe they have it/who knows but as a single proprietor I doubt it in all cases. But climbing on my roof yesterdays got me thinking if that's something I need to require , or is my umbrella coverage sufficient protection. And the guys who have done work for me in the past probably would not sue me personally if injured, but their insurance company might well look to the homeowner policy first which is why I asked.
.
Click to expand...
I love how American this is. God damn I love this country
 
Deacsfan27 said:
Right - I just wouldn't let anybody on my roof to do work unless they have insurance/are professionals who know what they are doing.

Ladders are terrifying AF to begin with and lead to a ton of injuries/deaths annually. I know it sounds dumb and conservative, but it's super dangerous.
Click to expand...
yeah I was talking to my landlord about this a couple weeks ago. They had some issues with the roof a few years back and the contractor helicoptered down and got his workers to parachute down to avoid ladders
 
wakelaw13 said:
Look man, we're talking about a situation where I have some knowledge and experience and without fail it devolves into the same level of discourse it always does when discussing the legal profession. I don't know why that gives you a "kick," but I don't pretend to understand the intricacies of what you do for a living and think you look kind of foolish trying to simplify the legal profession like that.
Click to expand...
So you are doubling down that undocumented workers are just as likely to sue as natural citizens.
and wondering why people say lawyers are stubborn AF
 
WindyCityDeac said:
So you are doubling down that undocumented workers are just as likely to sue as natural citizens.
and wondering why people say lawyers are stubborn AF
Click to expand...
You've really lost your way without wfu22fan around.

My opinion is that it does not make any meaningful difference in cases involving serious injuries but probably does act as a deterrence against pursuing claims for minor injuries. The point is that hiring an undocumented worker is not an effective way of avoiding legal liabilities.
 
wakelaw13 said:
Look man, we're talking about a situation where I have some knowledge and experience and without fail it devolves into the same level of discourse it always does when discussing the legal profession. I don't know why that gives you a "kick," but I don't pretend to understand the intricacies of what you do for a living and think you look kind of foolish trying to simplify the legal profession like that.
Click to expand...

I don’t pretend to know the intricacies of being a lawyer. But I doubt you’re the only lawyer here who knows anything about roof accidents. Don’t pretend that lawyers are some mysterious unknown profession though. That’s nonsense.
 
PhDeac said:
I don’t pretend to know the intricacies of being a lawyer. But I doubt you’re the only lawyer here who knows anything about roof accidents. Don’t pretend that lawyers are some mysterious unknown profession though. That’s nonsense.
Click to expand...
I didn't say any of that. I didn't say I'm the only one who "knows anything" about the subject or that it's a "mysterious" profession. But the more you discuss the profession, the more obvious it becomes how little you understand about it. That's what's nonsense.
 
All professors do is "profess" ideas to a captive audience with zero real-world consequences. It's ridiculous that anyone would pay significant money to be lectured to by a professor when they can just youtube videos for free.

See how stupid that sounds?
 
So who did you represent when you won these multiple lawsuits? The homeowner or the worker who fell off the roof?
 
wakelaw13 said:
On one hand, I'm probably the only person here who has tried (and won) multiple cases where someone was severely injured after falling off of a roof. On the other hand, we have your uninformed feelings. I just can't decide.
Click to expand...

Saying you didn’t say something you said or arguing the semantics is literally lawyering the shut out of the argument.
 
PhDeac said:
Saying you didn’t say something you said or arguing the semantics is literally lawyering the shut out of the argument.
Click to expand...
Thank you for posting my statement and proving that you got it wrong?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top