Need help wording a legal document...

B

busyguy

New member
I install cabinets for a living, and go to school full time. Every once in a while i get side jobs. Being unlicensed and uninsured(and slightly ocd!!), i am VERY nervous about any liability to myself. Basically, i don't want to be responsible for doing extensive fire or electrical damage to a persons house, caused by a screw puncturing electrical wires. Although the possibility of causing terrible damage by hitting a wire is low, the thought of getting sued for 500 grand for doing a 2k. dollar job scares the crap outa me. Thats basically the only possible liablitly i can think of(punctured wires/pipes)SO, here's what i have so far to "protect" myself.



Before starting any work, i get them to sign this.



By signing below i release the cabinet installers from any and all liability for fire, electrical, and/or flood damage caused by damage/punctured electrical wiring or plumbing. I am also fully aware that they are unlicensed and unisured.



Providing a screw punctured a wire and somehow burned a house down, would that actually free me of liability? Also, is there a better way to phrase that so, 1. i don't sound like an idiot 2. It is more legally strong



thanks a lot guys!! I know theres a few very smart people on here...hopefully a couple will have better ideas or at least know the law and what holds in court.
 
I would think homeowner's insurance would cover accidental stuff like that, but don't ever think that someone signing a flimsy document like that can prevent a lawsuit that could wipe you out. If I were going to do work in anyone's home (most people's largest investment in life) I would be insured, bonded, licensed, and whatever else before I turned one screw. People are way too lawsuit happy these days.
 
I would like to be insured, bonded, and licensed. BUT, it takes 4 years of "SUPERVISOR" experience to get a licence. Despite growing up around this stuff my entire life, and knowing more/doing better work than most licensed installers, i only have 3 years experience, and therefore not qualified.



Being unlicensed, i doubt anyone will insure me. In the meantime i would like to make extra money on the side to pay for school/living. I would also like to cover myself.



I'm not argueing with you, but how is someone signing a document saying they release me of liability, "flimsy". Again, i like to hear all perspectives, so please share.

thanks!
 
I'm not slamming the document, but I am saying that I don't think it's sufficient to really protect you. I could be wrong...
 
busyguy said:
I'm not argueing with you, but how is someone signing a document saying they release me of liability, "flimsy". Again, i like to hear all perspectives, so please share.

thanks!
Click to expand...



Although I'm not a lawyer, I do know that releases often aren't worth the paper they're written on. A good lawyer can identify all kinds of reasons to invalidate a release.



Duress is one example. If a homeowner complains that you made them sign the release on the day you showed up to do the work and refused to start without it, that might be interpreted as signing under duress.



A release might be invalidated because you're requiring a customer to sign away rights that the law doesn't consider as waivable.



In some cases, the release may be invalidated by occuring within an illegal context. Food for thought - if a contractor is operating in violation of the laws that require registration and licensure, how can he/she use a release to acquire legal protection while in the conduct of an illegal business?



Bottom line, I think you're a.) worrying about this too much relative to the risk, and b) trying to get free advice that, for all practical purposes, is going to be worth exactly what you've paid.
 
A homeowner signing the document because work won't otherwise be preformed doesn't qualify it as duress. However, I do agree with the fact that the general public seems to think that a waiver will protect them. As someone stated earlier they usually aren't worth the paper they are printed on.



Looking at what you posted you basically want to protect yourself from negligence. However, you should consider that you will be held responsible for the damages because of the following four points.



1. You owe a duty of care to the homeowner. By being contracted you are responsible for the installation of the goods and for ensuring it is done to industry standards and in a safe manner.



2. You breached the duty of care. You would breach it because someone with reasonable care would ensure that the method of installation doesn't cause a fire or other type of damage.



3. Your breach caused loss. Your actions resulted on the loss, in other words, your actions resulted in the fire.



4. The loss was foreseeable. As a contractor, and as you have posted here, you know that there is a risk of fire, and other loss.



The amount that you would have to pay would depend if the homeowner did anything to contribute to the loss. So this takes me to the final point.



5. Did the homeowner contribute to the severity of the loss?



I'm sure homeowner's insurance would cover it, but you could still be held responsible and the homeowner could seek punitive damages if you were really sloppy and negligent.



My 2 cents.
 
Remember this, no one can sign their rights away.



If you screw-up, they have every rght to seek damages from you. If you get in front of a judge and inform them that you are an unlicensed contractor, they will tell you that you shouldn't have been doing the work.



Also, if you provide the work and someone doesn't pay, you have no legitimate course of action in a court of law. The judge would tell you should be licensed and they can't award you money for work that should have been done by a licensed professional.



There was a case where a licensed contractor did $2000 worth of work on a roof but the house owner was unsatisfied with the work. She decided not to pay. Contractor sued. Judge actually contacted the licesnig board and found out the contractor was not licensed due to the fact that he changed his company's name without relicensing. Judge was unable to award him his money because he was actually breaking the law by performing work that should be performed by a licensed cotractor.



Just throwing that out there.



JJ
 
If there was damage to your customer's home and it was determined that you were the cause. The homeowner's insurance would probably pay the homeowner and then the homeowner's insurance company would no doubt file suit with you to collect the damages they paid the homeowner. Admittedly the risk for you is low but the consequences could be devastating to you and that's why there's an insurance industry.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top