Logger Injury Question

just curious where you read that the insurance co won't defend me? Is it that cut and dry?

I believe he misunderstood what you were saying when you asked if there was coverage due to your understanding of Coverage A (Dwelling).
 
just curious where you read that the insurance co won't defend me? Is it that cut and dry?

Scratch that! Sorry, I wasn't reading closely enough and I read what you wrote thinking it was a part of the policy.
 
lol. a misunderstanding of a misunderstanding!

but what is the line between "controlling" a project and not? does the homeowner always become more liable by giving a general plan?

and i don't mind devil's advocate opinions.
 
lol. a misunderstanding of a misunderstanding!

but what is the line between "controlling" a project and not? does the homeowner always become more liable by giving a general plan?

and i don't mind devil's advocate opinions.

That can be such a gray area.

Were I to bet, I suspect the carrier is going to come in and try to make this go away. Seems like a lot of gray area here, and that is a recipe for legal expenses and a chance to mess up and face unlimited liability.

Again, that is just my suspicion.
 
"it doesn't mean what you think it means."

One of my favorite lines by Inigo Montoya.

Joe, don't take insurance advice from your mother in law. Ask your insurer what you should do and how you should respond to inquiries from the tree guy. They should have advised you already. If you own this land and it's not part of your "residence premises" and not an "insured location" (e.g., vacant non-farm land), then you might not have any liability coverage.
 
It is on the residence premises, ie within the 300x200 boundary the house is on. i own 6 acres of actual vacant land around that, thank god it did not happen there. time to get vacant land insurance.

Adjuster asked one question: "did he have his own tools" which he did. His hours were very erratic, he would arrive 11:30 and leave at 3, or not show at all. And his tools were always breaking down. i would have ditched him if i cared about the speed of the work.
 
Looked into this a bit, the question of homeowner control over a contractor is determined by New York State labor laws, specifically 200,240 and 241. Coordinating a contractor, telling him where to work on a given day, reviewing work and checking progress don't rise to the level of supervision necessary to assign liability. The owner would have to direct the "manner" in which the contractor carried out his work. Seems like it has to be pretty specific.

He texted me to get paid yesterday and was refusing to take any check or bank order in his own name, finally relented and showed up with his gf at a coffee shop. He did describe what happened in detail and it's clear he created a risky situation (which is obvious at the accident site). He should be shutting up for his own good but at least he's not lying. Then he began writhing in pain saying he's in too much pain to be there.

Of course he could say anything regarding my supervision and his "inexperience" might even work in his favor.
 
well i figured i'd post an update. insurance company did their investigation of the logger accident and determined i had no liability based on interviews with the injured logger and myself. they didn't even take photos of the accident site.

they sent him the medpay and told me if he sues just send the notice to them and they will defend me.

now i need to hire someone to clean up his mess but i wish they'd taken their own photos, for any possible future litigation. of course i have taken a lot myself but you'd think insurance co would want to document it themselves. i could be taking pics of anything.

cautiously relieved.
 
Back
Top