Covering Yourself against Existing Damage

[ps9]

Neighbour has had a tree dismantled just beyond our boundary wall. Had a chat with the climber & guys in the morning when they started. All seems good.

 

Later in the day I notice there's a hole in our shed roof directly below where the tree's been taken down so give him a call to discuss. He confidently lets me know that it was pre-existing damage and he noticed it straight away when he started the job.

 

If you were aware of pre-existing damage below where you were working, how many of you would take a quick photo to cover yourselves?

[Oldfeller]

38 minutes ago, ps9 said:

Neighbour has had a tree dismantled just beyond our boundary wall. Had a chat with the climber & guys in the morning when they started. All seems good.

 

Later in the day I notice there's a hole in our shed roof directly below where the tree's been taken down so give him a call to discuss. He confidently lets me know that it was pre-existing damage and he noticed it straight away when he started the job.

 

If you were aware of pre-existing damage below where you were working, how many of you would take a quick photo to cover yourselves?

Personally I would have talked to you before any work commenced, however, you should be able to inspect the damaged roof and it will be obvious if it's old damage or fresh, have you noticed any leaks in the roof prior to the tree work.

put a few photos up, it may help.

or alternatively if your just another bot we'll never hear from you again. 

[Mick Dempsey]

What sort of roofing material is it?

[Rich Rule]

I take photos of nearly all damage that looks like it could be pinned on me.  
 

You could say once bitten twice shy.

 

I have had many accuse me of damage only to see red when I show them pictures of the damage before I have even started.

 

Ranging from simple roof tiles to a rebuild of a block of nine garages.

[AHPP]

56 minutes ago, Rich Rule said:

rebuild of a block of nine garages.

That sounds like a story!

[Mick Dempsey]

There was a story on here that I can never find, but I swear it’s true.

 

A firm were contracted to take a tree down over a garage with an already fooked tarred fabric roof, you know the stuff, forget its name.

Anyway they turn up at nine, pissing down and windy, look at it for a bit, think better of it and go and do something else.

At 1pm the boss gets a call (the client had left for work and had not returned to the site) “your blokes have left my garage roof in a right state, holes and rips all over, I will need your insurance so it can be replaced!”

 

He just put the phone down when he was told they hadn’t even done the tree.

 

They are out there folks, I always (well try to) take photos of already damaged stuff.

 

Not suggesting that’s the case with the OP.

Edited April 28 by Mick Dempsey
Felt.

[Rich Rule]

@AHPP
 

Haha, one of the reasons I know having public liability insurance as a freelancer is a pointless waste of money.

 

A friend was removing a large pine tree that was causing subsidence to a block of nine garages in Beckenham.  He asked for help on the ground d as he had a lift in as the tree was unstable.  He asked me to shift a couple of sheets of ply wood to cover the asbestos roofing.  As I was up there one of the beams gave way and I ended up laid in the bottom of a garage with the roof around me.  The owner of the garage tried to make my mate pay for the rebuild of the garages and threatens to sue him.  He obviously tried to claim on my insurance which they said no as I was working freelance so essentially working under his instruction.

 

My mate was pretty stressed and after a few months of threatened legal action I suggested he pay a building surveyor to assess the damage.  There were old cracks in the walls, every doorway was pissed and the cracks were filled with expanding foam which had mold on it.

 

The BS looked at the it and just said she was was trying it on and produced the report that said the existing damage was long standing and that was the main reason the tree was being removed in the first place but the home owner was still trying to make him pay.

 

Lesson learned.  PLI is pointless as a labour only contractor and take pictures of the damage before hand.  
 

One that job I don’t take pictures as it was pretty obvious but the Home owner was a bitch and still tried to claim for a new block of garages.

 

 

 

 

[Joe Newton]

2 hours ago, Rich Rule said:

@AHPP
 

Haha, one of the reasons I know having public liability insurance as a freelancer is a pointless waste of money.

 

A friend was removing a large pine tree that was causing subsidence to a block of nine garages in Beckenham.  He asked for help on the ground d as he had a lift in as the tree was unstable.  He asked me to shift a couple of sheets of ply wood to cover the asbestos roofing.  As I was up there one of the beams gave way and I ended up laid in the bottom of a garage with the roof around me.  The owner of the garage tried to make my mate pay for the rebuild of the garages and threatens to sue him.  He obviously tried to claim on my insurance which they said no as I was working freelance so essentially working under his instruction.

 

My mate was pretty stressed and after a few months of threatened legal action I suggested he pay a building surveyor to assess the damage.  There were old cracks in the walls, every doorway was pissed and the cracks were filled with expanding foam which had mold on it.

 

The BS looked at the it and just said she was was trying it on and produced the report that said the existing damage was long standing and that was the main reason the tree was being removed in the first place but the home owner was still trying to make him pay.

 

Lesson learned.  PLI is pointless as a labour only contractor and take pictures of the damage before hand.  
 

One that job I don’t take pictures as it was pretty obvious but the Home owner was a bitch and still tried to claim for a new block off garages.

 

 

 

 

Sounds like the Occupiers Liability Act (1957) could've put the owner in more hot water than you mate. 

 

In my experience, i can't fault arborisk. They flat out told me i don't need cover for freelancing. 

[Rich Rule]

15 minutes ago, Joe Newton said:

Sounds like the Occupiers Liability Act (1957) could've put the owner in more hot water than you mate. 

 

In my experience, i can't fault arborisk. They flat out told me i don't need cover for freelancing. 

 

That insurance company I 'Trusted" were told exactly the capacity of work I did at the time.  Freelance only.

 

They still took my money for 3 years and when there was a potential claim just point blank said no.  They then tried to strong arm me saying it was illegal to operate without the PLI when I cancelled.

 

A bunch of barrow boys who were more suited to selling Brussel sprouts on an East London market.

 

 

[Mick Dempsey]

9 hours ago, Rich Rule said:

@AHPP
 

Haha, one of the reasons I know having public liability insurance as a freelancer is a pointless waste of money.

 

A friend was removing a large pine tree that was causing subsidence to a block of nine garages in Beckenham.  He asked for help on the ground d as he had a lift in as the tree was unstable.  He asked me to shift a couple of sheets of ply wood to cover the asbestos roofing.  As I was up there one of the beams gave way and I ended up laid in the bottom of a garage with the roof around me.  The owner of the garage tried to make my mate pay for the rebuild of the garages and threatens to sue him.  He obviously tried to claim on my insurance which they said no as I was working freelance so essentially working under his instruction.

 

My mate was pretty stressed and after a few months of threatened legal action I suggested he pay a building surveyor to assess the damage.  There were old cracks in the walls, every doorway was pissed and the cracks were filled with expanding foam which had mold on it.

 

The BS looked at the it and just said she was was trying it on and produced the report that said the existing damage was long standing and that was the main reason the tree was being removed in the first place but the home owner was still trying to make him pay.

 

Lesson learned.  PLI is pointless as a labour only contractor and take pictures of the damage before hand.  
 

One that job I don’t take pictures as it was pretty obvious but the Home owner was a bitch and still tried to claim for a new block of garages.

 

 

 

 

Often wondered what it was that triggers you whenever this subject comes up.