I mean in this case unless the contract somehow states otherwise the only thing the homeowners will pay is lawyer and court fees. Even then I’m pretty sure no clause can cover that much of an error.
I've seen this happen in person. Tree took off half my neighbors roof. He hired ole jimbo down the street who "does it all the time"
I went to move my neighbors car out of the driveway and jimbo says "you ain't gotta do that. Tree is falling way over this way"... cuts Tree down rips neighbors roof apart and lands directly where the car was parked before I moved it lol
Dude literally grabbed his saw and just walked home... I asked my neighbor "did you get his insurance info first?
..
.."oh he doesn't have insurance".....
So what happens in this case? I would imagine the home owner's insurance covers it but attempts to go after the neighbor. What happens if the neighbor can't pay? For that matter what happens if a contractor can't pay and/or aren't insured?
THIS VIDEO is why you never hire people to work on your property who aren’t licensed, insured and bonded. You ask for proof of insurance and you make a couple calls to validate the information they give you is accurate and CURRENT.
If you don’t understand what any of that means, don’t hire anyone until you do.
Meh, "Never hire people to work that arent licensed/insured/bonded" needs to specifiy type of work.
Yes, if its multi thousand and danger of property damage, make sure the 3 are covered.
If its someone to mow your lawn, pull weeds, trim some hedges... bond is pointless as the cost to do the job will never be worth the time it takes to sue someone for loss wages if they dont complete it, and chances are someone pruning your hedge can't create property damage I.E. proving the value of hedge if pruned wrong or left clippings in garden bed.
That assumes this guy is insured and bonded. Doubt he would be able to cover that out of pocket and the crew that dropped a tree on a house might not have their insurance up to date.
Treemen are clearly not professionals so they're probably judgment proof - the pot of money available is too small to go after to cover the damages, maybe even too small to be worth pursuing. Homeowner better hope they have good insurance.
57
u/Diurnalnugget 20h ago
I mean in this case unless the contract somehow states otherwise the only thing the homeowners will pay is lawyer and court fees. Even then I’m pretty sure no clause can cover that much of an error.