I've made arrangements to have my water main replaced by a licensed
plumbing contractor in CA. I just met him last night and the work isn't
going to start for a week, so I can back out of this if I call him today
or tomorrow easily enough. I have another decent bid and I could go with
them (a pretty large company).

I just looked up his license and he's a sole owner and it says "This
license is exempt from having workers compensation insurance; they
certified that they have no employees at this time."

He said he'd try to hire a tough competent guy to help with the
trenching. What happens if that guy is hurt on the job? Am I going to be
liable?

TIA for information.

Dan

Essentially they are both covered by your homeowners policy




"Dan_Musicant" wrote in message
...
I've made arrangements to have my water main replaced by a licensed
plumbing contractor in CA. I just met him last night and the work isn't
going to start for a week, so I can back out of this if I call him today
or tomorrow easily enough. I have another decent bid and I could go with
them (a pretty large company).

I just looked up his license and he's a sole owner and it says "This
license is exempt from having workers compensation insurance; they
certified that they have no employees at this time."

He said he'd try to hire a tough competent guy to help with the
trenching. What happens if that guy is hurt on the job? Am I going to be
liable?

TIA for information.

Dan

Dan_Musicant wrote:
I've made arrangements to have my water main replaced by a licensed
plumbing contractor in CA. I just met him last night and the work
isn't going to start for a week, so I can back out of this if I call
him today or tomorrow easily enough. I have another decent bid and I
could go with them (a pretty large company).

I just looked up his license and he's a sole owner and it says "This
license is exempt from having workers compensation insurance; they
certified that they have no employees at this time."

He said he'd try to hire a tough competent guy to help with the
trenching. What happens if that guy is hurt on the job? Am I going to
be liable?

TIA for information.

Dan

You need to check with your state. They don't all have the same rules.
It has happened around here that the home owner ended up with the bill.

--
Joseph Meehan

Dia 's Muire duit

On Wed, 03 Jan 2007 12:35:22 -0800, Dan_Musicant
wrote:

I've made arrangements to have my water main replaced by a licensed
plumbing contractor in CA. I just met him last night and the work isn't
going to start for a week, so I can back out of this if I call him today
or tomorrow easily enough. I have another decent bid and I could go with
them (a pretty large company).

I just looked up his license and he's a sole owner and it says "This
license is exempt from having workers compensation insurance; they
certified that they have no employees at this time."

He said he'd try to hire a tough competent guy to help with the
trenching. What happens if that guy is hurt on the job? Am I going to be
liable?

TIA for information.

Dan

imho:

If he states one thing to one official and then another to you, could
be truthful? Based on that, you might want to rethink about the
situation. Have him furnish paper work proving his current
insurances, he might have upgraded since he started working. If not,
use common sense.

Not a Lawyer, or a legal offical.

tom @ www.MeetANewFriend.com

"RBM" rbm2(remove wrote in message
...
Essentially they are both covered by your homeowners policy


Even more essential, you are screwed if there is a major clam. He should
also have liability insurance.

He's probably required to have liability, but if he works alone, isn't
always required


"Edwin Pawlowski" wrote in message
news:fbVmh.536$Lh.212@trndny09...

"RBM" rbm2(remove wrote in message
...
Essentially they are both covered by your homeowners policy


Even more essential, you are screwed if there is a major clam. He should
also have liability insurance.

Sorry, screwed that up. He probably is required to have liability, but if he
works alone, isn't always required to have workers comp


"RBM" rbm2(remove wrote in message
...
He's probably required to have liability, but if he works alone, isn't
always required


"Edwin Pawlowski" wrote in message
news:fbVmh.536$Lh.212@trndny09...

"RBM" rbm2(remove wrote in message
...
Essentially they are both covered by your homeowners policy


Even more essential, you are screwed if there is a major clam. He should
also have liability insurance.

I think you hit the nail on the head, when an accident happens, everyone
gets sued


wrote in message
...
On Wed, 03 Jan 2007 12:35:22 -0800, Dan_Musicant
wrote:

I've made arrangements to have my water main replaced by a licensed
plumbing contractor in CA. I just met him last night and the work isn't
going to start for a week, so I can back out of this if I call him today
or tomorrow easily enough. I have another decent bid and I could go with
them (a pretty large company).

I just looked up his license and he's a sole owner and it says "This
license is exempt from having workers compensation insurance; they
certified that they have no employees at this time."

He said he'd try to hire a tough competent guy to help with the
trenching. What happens if that guy is hurt on the job? Am I going to be
liable?

TIA for information.

Dan

As soon as he hires a guy he is working outside the scope of his
license. I am a SP myself and the only way I can hire labor is to get
it from another licensed, bonded, insured company unless I want to
expose myself to lawyers and possible sanctions from the state.
99% of the time nothing bad really happens and you get away with it
but you must be prepared for that 1%.
If his labor is also licensed as an SP you have reduced liability but
we are in a country where anyone can sue anybody for damn near
anything.

On Wed, 3 Jan 2007 15:43:56 -0500, "RBM" rbm2(remove
wrote:

:Essentially they are both covered by your homeowners policy

Don't have one. I have fire insurance but because my house needs major
improvements my insurance broker refuses to write me a general
homeowner's policy.

Dan

:"Dan_Musicant" wrote in message
.. .
: I've made arrangements to have my water main replaced by a licensed
: plumbing contractor in CA. I just met him last night and the work isn't
: going to start for a week, so I can back out of this if I call him today
: or tomorrow easily enough. I have another decent bid and I could go with
: them (a pretty large company).
:
: I just looked up his license and he's a sole owner and it says "This
: license is exempt from having workers compensation insurance; they
: certified that they have no employees at this time."
:
: He said he'd try to hire a tough competent guy to help with the
: trenching. What happens if that guy is hurt on the job? Am I going to be
: liable?
:
: TIA for information.
:
: Dan
:

That being the case, I would avoid anyone without the full compliment of
insurances


"Dan_Musicant" wrote in message
...
On Wed, 3 Jan 2007 15:43:56 -0500, "RBM" rbm2(remove
wrote:

:Essentially they are both covered by your homeowners policy

Don't have one. I have fire insurance but because my house needs major
improvements my insurance broker refuses to write me a general
homeowner's policy.

Dan

:"Dan_Musicant" wrote in message
.. .
: I've made arrangements to have my water main replaced by a licensed
: plumbing contractor in CA. I just met him last night and the work isn't
: going to start for a week, so I can back out of this if I call him
today
: or tomorrow easily enough. I have another decent bid and I could go
with
: them (a pretty large company).
:
: I just looked up his license and he's a sole owner and it says "This
: license is exempt from having workers compensation insurance; they
: certified that they have no employees at this time."
:
: He said he'd try to hire a tough competent guy to help with the
: trenching. What happens if that guy is hurt on the job? Am I going to
be
: liable?
:
: TIA for information.
:
: Dan
:

wrote:

we are in a country where anyone can sue anybody for damn near
anything.

Foe sure, here is an example where a reckless hooftie is suing the
police because they chased him when he was driving his quad on city streets:

http://www.power-of-attorneys.com/st...suit_month.asp

"Dan_Musicant" wrote in message
...
I've made arrangements to have my water main replaced by a licensed
plumbing contractor in CA. I just met him last night and the work isn't
going to start for a week, so I can back out of this if I call him today
or tomorrow easily enough. I have another decent bid and I could go with
them (a pretty large company).

I just looked up his license and he's a sole owner and it says "This
license is exempt from having workers compensation insurance; they
certified that they have no employees at this time."

He said he'd try to hire a tough competent guy to help with the
trenching. What happens if that guy is hurt on the job? Am I going to be
liable?

TIA for information.

Dan

Good grief, Dan! I hate the words "should" and "probably" and the likes.

With all the frivolous litigations going on, your state being one of the
leaders, (no offense), why would you want to even mess with someone you have
any doubts about?

To save some money perhaps?

Imagine the worst thing that can happen. Someone gets killed. You think
ANYONE is going to give you a walk? I doubt it.

Take everything you own. Pile it in the house. Spread five gallons of gas
on it. If there is an accident, that's what's gonna happen to all your
stuff.

Insist that your CONTRACTOR'S INSURANCE CARRIER send DIRECTLY TO YOU a copy
of their current in force policy. Don't accept it from your contractor, as
they can be and are faked easily.

This is a big deal. Do it right. Your ass is the only one on the line you
should be concerned about.

Steve

"Dan_Musicant" wrote in message
...
I've made arrangements to have my water main replaced by a licensed
plumbing contractor in CA. I just met him last night and the work isn't
going to start for a week, so I can back out of this if I call him today
or tomorrow easily enough. I have another decent bid and I could go with
them (a pretty large company).

I just looked up his license and he's a sole owner and it says "This
license is exempt from having workers compensation insurance; they
certified that they have no employees at this time."

He said he'd try to hire a tough competent guy to help with the
trenching. What happens if that guy is hurt on the job? Am I going to be
liable?

TIA for information.

Dan

I read all the post to date.

To answer your question. Maybe.

If he hires another licensed insured contractor and they both waive
worker-comp rights in the interest to freely contract for work under the
uniform commercial code. Then where I am your butt would be covered. In
the People Republic of CA, I don't have a clue.

By the same measurement, here, if he hired an unlicensed person without your
consent or knowledge you would be covered.

Since you do not have a homeowner's policy to fall back on, I suggest you
proceed with extreme caution and CYA.

Colbyt

If you value your house
do not hire uninsured contractors
if they get hurt on your property (with no homeowners insurance) they
will sue you for your property.
or let them do the job and fire them before they hit the ground (while
falling).

I would cancel the contract within 3 days.
Hire someone reputable with all insurances.



"Dan_Musicant" wrote in message
...
| On Wed, 3 Jan 2007 15:43:56 -0500, "RBM" rbm2(remove
| wrote:
|
| :Essentially they are both covered by your homeowners policy
|
| Don't have one. I have fire insurance but because my house needs major
| improvements my insurance broker refuses to write me a general
| homeowner's policy.
|
| Dan
|
| :"Dan_Musicant" wrote in message
| .. .
| : I've made arrangements to have my water main replaced by a licensed
| : plumbing contractor in CA. I just met him last night and the work
isn't
| : going to start for a week, so I can back out of this if I call him
today
| : or tomorrow easily enough. I have another decent bid and I could go
with
| : them (a pretty large company).
| :
| : I just looked up his license and he's a sole owner and it says
"This
| : license is exempt from having workers compensation insurance; they
| : certified that they have no employees at this time."
| :
| : He said he'd try to hire a tough competent guy to help with the
| : trenching. What happens if that guy is hurt on the job? Am I going
to be
| : liable?
| :
| : TIA for information.
| :
| : Dan
| :
|

"wildo" wrote in message
...
If you value your house
do not hire uninsured contractors
if they get hurt on your property (with no homeowners insurance) they
will sue you for your property.
or let them do the job and fire them before they hit the ground (while
falling).

I would cancel the contract within 3 days.
Hire someone reputable with all insurances.

It's not always possible to get worker's comp insurance. For example,
here in Georgia no one writes worker's comp for sole proprieters.

Dan_Musicant wrote:
I've made arrangements to have my water main replaced by a licensed
plumbing contractor in CA. I just met him last night and the work isn't
going to start for a week, so I can back out of this if I call him today
or tomorrow easily enough. I have another decent bid and I could go with
them (a pretty large company).

I just looked up his license and he's a sole owner and it says "This
license is exempt from having workers compensation insurance; they
certified that they have no employees at this time."

He said he'd try to hire a tough competent guy to help with the
trenching. What happens if that guy is hurt on the job? Am I going to be
liable?

TIA for information.

Dan

You might not be liable, but that might not be determined until someone
sues and you litigate. I am all for hiring contractors who are equipped
to do the job, which means adequate tools and equipment. A contractor
who has to "try to hire a tough competent guy" is not equipped to do
your work. There is a big difference between cheap and economical, and
some folks never figure out the difference.

We had a painter hired by our condo assn. to do some small exterior
paint jobs. He knocked on my door and asked to borrow a paint brush! He
hit up another resident for lunch money!

I, personally, would not bid on a job I was not prepared to complete.
Life is too short. There is probably a contractor with a fleet of
trucks and a yard full of heavy equipment. Why not hire the folks with
experience?

On Thu, 4 Jan 2007 03:59:29 -0500, "wildo"
wrote:

:If you value your house
:do not hire uninsured contractors
:if they get hurt on your property (with no homeowners insurance) they
:will sue you for your property.
r let them do the job and fire them before they hit the ground (while
:falling).
:
:I would cancel the contract within 3 days.
:Hire someone reputable with all insurances.

I didn't sign anything. It was a handshake deal and we agreed that
unless I call and cancel (within a day or two), he'd just assume the
deal was on and he'd show up next Wednesday (6 days away now).

I called him last night and left a message that there is something I
have to ask him. He hasn't returned the call (it's about 18 hours
later). I have a mind to call the company who is doing my sewer laterals
and ask if they'll do the job the way I want it done and just go with
them. They've treated me very well, all in all, I feel. Then I'll call
this uninsured guy and just say I have to pass on it. Thanks.

On Thu, 04 Jan 2007 12:16:19 GMT, Norminn wrote:

an_Musicant wrote:
: I've made arrangements to have my water main replaced by a licensed
: plumbing contractor in CA. I just met him last night and the work isn't
: going to start for a week, so I can back out of this if I call him today
: or tomorrow easily enough. I have another decent bid and I could go with
: them (a pretty large company).
:
: I just looked up his license and he's a sole owner and it says "This
: license is exempt from having workers compensation insurance; they
: certified that they have no employees at this time."
:
: He said he'd try to hire a tough competent guy to help with the
: trenching. What happens if that guy is hurt on the job? Am I going to be
: liable?
:
: TIA for information.
:
: Dan
:
:You might not be liable, but that might not be determined until someone
:sues and you litigate. I am all for hiring contractors who are equipped
:to do the job, which means adequate tools and equipment. A contractor
:who has to "try to hire a tough competent guy" is not equipped to do
:your work. There is a big difference between cheap and economical, and
:some folks never figure out the difference.
:
:We had a painter hired by our condo assn. to do some small exterior
aint jobs. He knocked on my door and asked to borrow a paint brush! He
:hit up another resident for lunch money!
:
:I, personally, would not bid on a job I was not prepared to complete.
:Life is too short. There is probably a contractor with a fleet of
:trucks and a yard full of heavy equipment. Why not hire the folks with
:experience?

I think this guy pretty much has the experience. The toughest aspect of
this job (everything else appears to be very easy) is going to be
tunneling under the sidewalk to run copper tubing from the meter under
my front lawn. Even the big plumbing company who are doing my sewer
laterals said they thought that might be tough. The reason is that the
water meter is RIGHT next to a pretty large tree, and there are sure to
be roots pretty thick in there. So, they anticipate running directly
from the meter AWAY from the tree trunk for a few feet, and THEN under
the sidewalk. Still, you can't see what's under there and it could be
tough.

I asked the uninsured guy how you get pipe under the sidewalk and he
described in detail the device used. I didn't ask him if he owns it or
is going to borrow or rent it.

I think he'd probably do a very good job. I'm just concerned about the
insurance angle on this. I don't want to expose myself to risk and as
people are saying in this thread, unless I have some solid assurances I
should assume I'm taking quite a risk in hiring this guy. His bid is
only $100 under the big company's ($2200 vs. $2399), although he says
he'll use 3/4" L copper under the house. I may ask the big company if
they will do that. Or, I may just accept 3/4" M under there.

On Jan 3, 3:35 pm, Dan_Musicant wrote:
I've made arrangements to have my water main replaced by a licensed
plumbing contractor in CA. I just met him last night and the work isn't
going to start for a week, so I can back out of this if I call him today
or tomorrow easily enough. I have another decent bid and I could go with
them (a pretty large company).

I just looked up his license and he's a sole owner and it says "This
license is exempt from having workers compensation insurance; they
certified that they have no employees at this time."

He said he'd try to hire a tough competent guy to help with the
trenching. What happens if that guy is hurt on the job? Am I going to be
liable?

You would be, yes.

Have the plumber hire a sub and provide the necessary proofs of
insurance. Or, hire a general laborer from a temp employment agency
(some of them specialize in construction help). Then the temp agency
has the necessary workmen's comp covered. Still get proof.

R

On 4 Jan 2007 14:35:14 -0800, "RicodJour"
wrote:

:
:
:On Jan 3, 3:35 pm, Dan_Musicant wrote:
: I've made arrangements to have my water main replaced by a licensed
: plumbing contractor in CA. I just met him last night and the work isn't
: going to start for a week, so I can back out of this if I call him today
: or tomorrow easily enough. I have another decent bid and I could go with
: them (a pretty large company).
:
: I just looked up his license and he's a sole owner and it says "This
: license is exempt from having workers compensation insurance; they
: certified that they have no employees at this time."
:
: He said he'd try to hire a tough competent guy to help with the
: trenching. What happens if that guy is hurt on the job? Am I going to be
: liable?
:
:You would be, yes.
:
:Have the plumber hire a sub and provide the necessary proofs of
:insurance. Or, hire a general laborer from a temp employment agency
some of them specialize in construction help). Then the temp agency
:has the necessary workmen's comp covered. Still get proof.
:
:R

I just talked to the plumber and he said he would do just that. Problem
is he didn't answer my call for almost 24 hours, so I'd called the other
bidder and made arrangements with him instead. It's $100 more, but I
know he's properly insured and he will also start the work tomorrow
instead of in 6 days. Either one would do the same job using the same
materials, as I make out from conversations with them.

Dan

clipped

I just talked to the plumber and he said he would do just that. Problem
is he didn't answer my call for almost 24 hours, so I'd called the other
bidder and made arrangements with him instead. It's $100 more, but I
know he's properly insured and he will also start the work tomorrow
instead of in 6 days. Either one would do the same job using the same
materials, as I make out from conversations with them.

Dan


No written bid? You saw his proof of insurance?

On Jan 4, 7:35 pm, Dan_Musicant wrote:
On 4 Jan 2007 14:35:14 -0800, "RicodJour"
wrote:

:
:
:On Jan 3, 3:35 pm, Dan_Musicant wrote:
: I've made arrangements to have my water main replaced by a licensed
: plumbing contractor in CA. I just met him last night and the work isn't
: going to start for a week, so I can back out of this if I call him today
: or tomorrow easily enough. I have another decent bid and I could go with
: them (a pretty large company).
:
: I just looked up his license and he's a sole owner and it says "This
: license is exempt from having workers compensation insurance; they
: certified that they have no employees at this time."
:
: He said he'd try to hire a tough competent guy to help with the
: trenching. What happens if that guy is hurt on the job? Am I going to be
: liable?
:
:You would be, yes.
:
:Have the plumber hire a sub and provide the necessary proofs of
:insurance. Or, hire a general laborer from a temp employment agency
some of them specialize in construction help). Then the temp agency
:has the necessary workmen's comp covered. Still get proof.
:
:R

I just talked to the plumber and he said he would do just that. Problem
is he didn't answer my call for almost 24 hours, so I'd called the other
bidder and made arrangements with him instead. It's $100 more, but I
know he's properly insured and he will also start the work tomorrow
instead of in 6 days. Either one would do the same job using the same
materials, as I make out from conversations with them.

Dan

On Jan 4, 7:35 pm, Dan_Musicant wrote:
On 4 Jan 2007 14:35:14 -0800, "RicodJour"
wrote:
:
:On Jan 3, 3:35 pm, Dan_Musicant wrote:
: I've made arrangements to have my water main replaced by a licensed
: plumbing contractor in CA. I just met him last night and the work isn't
: going to start for a week, so I can back out of this if I call him today
: or tomorrow easily enough. I have another decent bid and I could go with
: them (a pretty large company).
:
: I just looked up his license and he's a sole owner and it says "This
: license is exempt from having workers compensation insurance; they
: certified that they have no employees at this time."
:
: He said he'd try to hire a tough competent guy to help with the
: trenching. What happens if that guy is hurt on the job? Am I going to be
: liable?
:
:You would be, yes.
:
:Have the plumber hire a sub and provide the necessary proofs of
:insurance. Or, hire a general laborer from a temp employment agency
some of them specialize in construction help). Then the temp agency
:has the necessary workmen's comp covered. Still get proof.
:
:R

I just talked to the plumber and he said he would do just that. Problem
is he didn't answer my call for almost 24 hours, so I'd called the other
bidder and made arrangements with him instead. It's $100 more, but I
know he's properly insured and he will also start the work tomorrow
instead of in 6 days. Either one would do the same job using the same
materials, as I make out from conversations with them.

Three things, Dan.
- The difference between $2200 and $2399 is two hundred bucks, not one
hundred bucks.
- Contracting businesses may pay their employees, if any, by the hour,
but the business itself is run by the day. The return phone call did
not come 24 hours later, it came the next day. Unless there is an
emergency a next day call is perfectly acceptable in just about
everybody's book. The guy is also a sole proprietor which may increase
or decrease his response time depending on how busy he is and what
juggling he has to do that day.
- You've probably burnt a bridge with that sole proprietor. Giving the
job to another guy because the first guy returned your call the next
day would be considered capricious by many, and he might not appreciate
what he considers to be your wasting his time.

R

The Streets wrote:

"wildo" wrote in message
...

If you value your house
do not hire uninsured contractors
if they get hurt on your property (with no homeowners insurance) they
will sue you for your property.
or let them do the job and fire them before they hit the ground (while
falling).

I would cancel the contract within 3 days.
Hire someone reputable with all insurances.


It's not always possible to get worker's comp insurance. For example,
here in Georgia no one writes worker's comp for sole proprieters.




It used to be that way here in Massachusetts, but unless I'm remembering
wrongly a few years ago they started letting unincorporated sole
proprietors buy it on themselves.

And about the same time they let majority owners/officers of businesses
opt-out of having to carry it on themselves here.

I bet they would issue worker's comp insurance in Georgia if the sole
proprietor forms an S-corporation with him/herself as the only employee.

That's the way sole proprietors who needed it for customers who required
it in order to do business with them used to do it here.


Jeff

--
Jeffry Wisnia
(W1BSV + Brass Rat '57 EE)
The speed of light is 1.8*10^12 furlongs per fortnight.

Jeff Wisnia wrote:
The Streets wrote:

"wildo" wrote in message
...

If you value your house
do not hire uninsured contractors
if they get hurt on your property (with no homeowners insurance)
they will sue you for your property.
or let them do the job and fire them before they hit the ground
(while falling).

I would cancel the contract within 3 days.
Hire someone reputable with all insurances.


It's not always possible to get worker's comp insurance. For
example, here in Georgia no one writes worker's comp for sole
proprieters.


It used to be that way here in Massachusetts, but unless I'm
remembering wrongly a few years ago they started letting
unincorporated sole proprietors buy it on themselves.

And about the same time they let majority owners/officers of
businesses opt-out of having to carry it on themselves here.

I bet they would issue worker's comp insurance in Georgia if the sole
proprietor forms an S-corporation with him/herself as the only
employee.
That's the way sole proprietors who needed it for customers who
required it in order to do business with them used to do it here.


Jeff

Insurance needs to be carried by the contractor. Always ask for proof of
insurance and proof that you are not responsible for their problems.
Workmen's comp isn't the onl insurance available. No insurance, no job.
Any contractor should be willing to give you verifiable insurance evidence.

Pop`

On Wed, 03 Jan 2007 16:07:37 -0500, Tom The Great
wrote:

On Wed, 03 Jan 2007 12:35:22 -0800, Dan_Musicant
wrote:

I've made arrangements to have my water main replaced by a licensed
plumbing contractor in CA. I just met him last night and the work isn't
going to start for a week, so I can back out of this if I call him today
or tomorrow easily enough. I have another decent bid and I could go with
them (a pretty large company).

I just looked up his license and he's a sole owner and it says "This
license is exempt from having workers compensation insurance; they
certified that they have no employees at this time."

He said he'd try to hire a tough competent guy to help with the
trenching. What happens if that guy is hurt on the job? Am I going to be
liable?

TIA for information.

Dan

imho:

If he states one thing to one official and then another to you, could
be truthful? Based on that, you might want to rethink about the
situation. Have him furnish paper work proving his current
insurances, he might have upgraded since he started working. If not,
use common sense.

Not a Lawyer, or a legal offical.

tom @ www.MeetANewFriend.com


imho:

Just thought of something, it is possible that your plumber will 'get'
a person from a temp service. I belived they come with their own
workman's comp, since the temp help isn't hired, but leased. Kindof.
Like I said, get all the paperwork ahead of time, and verify it.

tom

On Fri, 05 Jan 2007 04:34:24 GMT, Norminn wrote:

:clipped
:
: I just talked to the plumber and he said he would do just that. Problem
: is he didn't answer my call for almost 24 hours, so I'd called the other
: bidder and made arrangements with him instead. It's $100 more, but I
: know he's properly insured and he will also start the work tomorrow
: instead of in 6 days. Either one would do the same job using the same
: materials, as I make out from conversations with them.
:
: Dan
:
:
:No written bid? You saw his proof of insurance?
I got no written bid from the sole proprietor who I cancelled. I did get
a written bid from the other company, however I cancelled it about a
week ago. Now, I have told them to go ahead with the work, but I asked
for a couple of changes in minor details (an extra hose bibb, 3/4" L
copper under the house, and an assurance that they will install a
bonding jumper at the meter). When I see the guy I talked to I guess I
should have him make some notes on my signed bid. They are the same
folks who are doing the trenchless sewer lateral replacement for me. I
know they're insured. There guys have been around for around 50 years
and are a good sized company. The CSLB website says their insurance and
bonding is in good standing. Maybe I should ask them for proof of
insurance. Is that standard practice when hiring a contractor? Then you
call the insurance company and have a conversation?

On 4 Jan 2007 23:13:10 -0800, "RicodJour"
wrote:

:On Jan 4, 7:35 pm, Dan_Musicant wrote:
: On 4 Jan 2007 14:35:14 -0800, "RicodJour"
: wrote:
: :
: :On Jan 3, 3:35 pm, Dan_Musicant wrote:
: : I've made arrangements to have my water main replaced by a licensed
: : plumbing contractor in CA. I just met him last night and the work isn't
: : going to start for a week, so I can back out of this if I call him today
: : or tomorrow easily enough. I have another decent bid and I could go with
: : them (a pretty large company).
: :
: : I just looked up his license and he's a sole owner and it says "This
: : license is exempt from having workers compensation insurance; they
: : certified that they have no employees at this time."
: :
: : He said he'd try to hire a tough competent guy to help with the
: : trenching. What happens if that guy is hurt on the job? Am I going to be
: : liable?
: :
: :You would be, yes.
: :
: :Have the plumber hire a sub and provide the necessary proofs of
: :insurance. Or, hire a general laborer from a temp employment agency
: some of them specialize in construction help). Then the temp agency
: :has the necessary workmen's comp covered. Still get proof.
: :
: :R
:
: I just talked to the plumber and he said he would do just that. Problem
: is he didn't answer my call for almost 24 hours, so I'd called the other
: bidder and made arrangements with him instead. It's $100 more, but I
: know he's properly insured and he will also start the work tomorrow
: instead of in 6 days. Either one would do the same job using the same
: materials, as I make out from conversations with them.
:
:Three things, Dan.
:- The difference between $2200 and $2399 is two hundred bucks, not one
:hundred bucks.

Right, that was a typo and I didn't notice it until I'd already sent it.
I thought it a bit silly to correct it with a followup, but I will here
since you mention it, and it is a valid point. I meant to type $2300.

:- Contracting businesses may pay their employees, if any, by the hour,
:but the business itself is run by the day. The return phone call did
:not come 24 hours later, it came the next day. Unless there is an
:emergency a next day call is perfectly acceptable in just about
:everybody's book. The guy is also a sole proprietor which may increase
r decrease his response time depending on how busy he is and what
:juggling he has to do that day.
:- You've probably burnt a bridge with that sole proprietor. Giving the
:job to another guy because the first guy returned your call the next
:day would be considered capricious by many, and he might not appreciate
:what he considers to be your wasting his time.
:
:R

You're right, of course. When I first called him he called me back
within about 5 minutes. We had a verbal understanding that I might call
him within a day to cancel the job. Thus when I called him 24 hours
later and said I had something to ask him, I thought the fact that he
didn't return my call for almost another full day somewhat strange. He
knew I had another good bid. People in this thread said that with my
lack of a basic homeowner's policy I should be "extremely cautious."
Also, I feel that the plumbing company that I'm currently dealing with
has treated me rather well. Free inspection with camera, considerably
underbid the competitors and fixed a very problematical clogged drain
for free. Their bid was only $100 more than the sole proprietor, who was
evidently uninsured. I didn't feel good cancelling either, to be
truthful. Sometimes you can't win. My water main is broken and I'm
prevailing upon my neighbors and using their water. It's coming through
a couple of hoses and I'm wondering about how safe it is to drink.

I tried to be politic with the sole proprietor, and not burn my bridges.
Look, we never even signed a bid. It was so informal and the work was to
begin more than a week later. The man's busy, and he wasn't put out
beyond coming over and looking and talking to me at length about the
proposed job. On top of that, he lives close by so his travel wasn't
much. I don't think he will refuse to consider me for future work. He
doesn't seem like that kind of guy. Still I realize that cancelling the
job without having talked to him first doesn't leave me at the top of
his list of favorite potential customers.

Dan

"Dan_Musicant" wrote in message
Maybe I should ask them for proof of
insurance. Is that standard practice when hiring a contractor? Then you
call the insurance company and have a conversation?

Most insurance agents have a standard form they send out for proof of
insurance. That is all you should need.

"Edwin Pawlowski" wrote in message
. net...

"Dan_Musicant" wrote in message
Maybe I should ask them for proof of
insurance. Is that standard practice when hiring a contractor? Then you
call the insurance company and have a conversation?

Most insurance agents have a standard form they send out for proof of
insurance. That is all you should need.


Yes, no, maybe, and definitely.

When I was a steel erection contractor, the customer was sent a certificate
of insurance DIRECTLY from the agency where I had my policy. It was
unacceptable for the contractor to give the customer a "copy" of anything
regarding their insurance. It had to come from directly from the agency, or
it was not considered valid.

That being said, all jurisdictions are not the same. But, something
directly from the company who wrote the policy is definitely better than a
"copy" that a guy can make up on his home computer.

Steve

On Sun, 07 Jan 2007 19:10:30 GMT, "Edwin Pawlowski"
wrote:


"Dan_Musicant" wrote in message
Maybe I should ask them for proof of
insurance. Is that standard practice when hiring a contractor? Then you
call the insurance company and have a conversation?

Most insurance agents have a standard form they send out for proof of
insurance. That is all you should need.


imho:

That is all you need to 'start'. I've talked to agents that say they
get calls from customers asking about their insured, but arent' valid.
The work person pays the downpayment, and then never pays any
following installments, but still show their summary page.

Call, find out.

tom @ www.BlankHelp.com

"Steve B" writes:
"Dan_Musicant" wrote in message
...
I've made arrangements to have my water main replaced by a licensed
plumbing contractor in CA. I just met him last night and the work isn't
going to start for a week, so I can back out of this if I call him today
or tomorrow easily enough. I have another decent bid and I could go with
them (a pretty large company).

I just looked up his license and he's a sole owner and it says "This
license is exempt from having workers compensation insurance; they
certified that they have no employees at this time."

He said he'd try to hire a tough competent guy to help with the
trenching. What happens if that guy is hurt on the job? Am I going to be
liable?

TIA for information.

Dan

Good grief, Dan! I hate the words "should" and "probably" and the likes.

With all the frivolous litigations going on, your state being one of the
leaders, (no offense), why would you want to even mess with someone you have
any doubts about?

To save some money perhaps?

Imagine the worst thing that can happen. Someone gets killed. You think
ANYONE is going to give you a walk? I doubt it.

Take everything you own. Pile it in the house. Spread five gallons of gas
on it. If there is an accident, that's what's gonna happen to all your
stuff.

Insist that your CONTRACTOR'S INSURANCE CARRIER send DIRECTLY TO YOU a copy
of their current in force policy. Don't accept it from your contractor, as
they can be and are faked easily.

I know that technically that is the right thing and I would do that
for a big project. But do people really do that for every small job?
Presumably the liability from a fall is the same whether fixing one
shingle or redoing the whole roof? Just it seems to me that it is hard
enough sometimes getting someone even without doing that...

What happens with so-called "handy men"? Even after spending mega
bucks on big projects, my folks who are now getting on in age use a
handy man for the small things. Presumably, the same liability would
apply if he fell off a ladder or shocked himself, etc. Right?

Damn this litigous society. If someone you hired (who defacto is
claiming expertise in such services hurts himself), he should be 100%
responsible unless you were grossly negligent. Even then, as a
professional I would expect him to recognize such dangers in advance
and take precautions unless again you were grossly negligent and the
dangers were completely hidden and undisclosed. If he chooses not to
buy insurance that should be his fault. end of soapbox

This is a big deal. Do it right. Your ass is the only one on the line you
should be concerned about.

Steve

On Thu, 18 Jan 2007 06:10:23 GMT, blueman3333 wrote:

amn this litigous society. If someone you hired (who defacto is
:claiming expertise in such services hurts himself), he should be 100%
:responsible unless you were grossly negligent. Even then, as a
rofessional I would expect him to recognize such dangers in advance
:and take precautions unless again you were grossly negligent and the
:dangers were completely hidden and undisclosed. If he chooses not to
:buy insurance that should be his fault. end of soapbox

This makes real sense to me. I eventually went with the fully insured
party, a pretty big plumbing company. I could have had the job done for
30% less by uninsured people. I could have had the job done for 5% less
by a competent plumber who would have hired an insured helper, if I'd
been patient enough. However, I was using the neighbor's water and
wanted to get on with the project.

I could have called I guy I met recently who would probably have done
the work for less than 50% of what I'm paying and he probably isn't
insured. However, I'm confident he's no cheat or crook. I'm not one to
play it straight all the time but this time I did. People in this NG
told me to, so I figured maybe I should.

After watching the guys do the work I realize I could have done it all
myself. However, hindsight is 20-20, and I didn't know I was capable of
the job until I WATCHED it being done from beginning to end, more or
less. If I had to have the job done today, I'd do it myself and for
around 20% the cost (i.e. materials). I watched them trenching and it
looked totally easy. I have the shovels and could have borrowed any
other tools needed, although I think I have all those too.

Dan