Liability in storms

R

ronp

Member
Member
Joined
Sep 18, 2006
RO Number
23477
Messages
758
Maybe some of you in the Gulf have experience with this. We have the item in 2 other threads about the guy attempting to hold a boat hostage for damage to his property.

If stuff floats away from where it was stored due to flood waters, and damages someone else's property, what ultimately happens most of the time? Does the injured party have to prove negligence of some kind in how the item was secured? Is it like a tree, where God grew it and God knocked it down, so the "owner" is not particularly responsible unless he knew it was in bad shape before the storm?

I know of several cases of this. I know just let the insurance companies work it out, but I'm curious how some of these will really work out in the end.
 
Ron:
I am in the insurance biz and deal with negligence cases of all kinds. While different states have different laws relating to negligence, the general rule is that the burden is always on the damaged party to prove negligence. Your tree analogy is totally correct. In the case of the storm here in NY the same thing applies. When a 9 to 12 foot surge causes a boat to float away and it lands in someones pool, or if other stuff floats away and causes damage, the "act of nature" rule would certainly apply. The damaged party cannot just make an allegation that the stuff was not properly secured, he needs to show some sort of proof. And in this case the evidence is overwhelming that even the most securly tied or drydocked boat could have broken free even if extrodinary measures are taken to secure them.

However if the same thing happened during a usual thunderstorm, without the catastrophic conditions that we just had, then the boat owner would be more on the hook, even if the damaged party has no definitive proof. In the case of the guy with the boat in a pool, I doubt very much that the insurance company for the boat owner will consider anything more than a nuisance value settlement. If this case were to go to trial, with a jury of Long Islanders who all lived thru the storm and the aftermath, I feel that the jury would be very reluctant to find any negligence at all. Many guys on this forum posted prior to the storm about the measures that were taken to secure their boats....some even posted pictures.....stuff like that is very good evidence.

Tom F.
 
Now Tom, this didn't happen to me, but I know someone who claims to have warned the owner of a tree that it was not a safe tree. They said that the owner was warned "some time ago". I don' know if that "some time ago" was a year ago or last week. The tree, in fact, hit their house during the storm. What happens here?

For future reference, what is the best way to deal with a neighbor's tree that should be cut down but the neighbor refuses? Do you notify your insurance company? White a letter? I would think there is a risk that the insurance company would just drop the insured to eliminate the possibility of a future claim.
 
Also, when the insurance companies try to "work it out after the fact" it rarely results in trials. Most insurance companies are members of an arbitration group. Each company pays the damages to their own policyholder and then they try to negotiate a settlement with each other. If they cannot reach an agreement then the case goes to binding arbitration. The arbitrators are people also in the insurance biz from neutral comapnies, and they make the decision. Same rules of proof would apply
 
Stephen,
I will be living this tree scenario for many weeks/months. Neighbor 1 says he warned neighbor 2 verbally. Neighbor 2 denies ever being warned. If neighbor 1 feels very strongly that a neighbors tree presents a hazzard he should send his neighbor a registered letter. However just because a tree is very big and overgrows onto the neighbors property is not reason enough for someone to take a tree down unless it is obviously dead or dying. In that case the insurance companies will go the arbitration route as described in my prior post.

In this kind of stuff, as in all aspects of law, there is nothing concrete....just general principles.
 
Soo who does pay for the damage to the neighbor's property - who pays their insurance deductible? What if the damaged neighbor sues for the deductible in small claims court?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top