# waiver for tree risk assessments



## Greenleaf (Apr 2, 2007)

Wondering if any of you would be willing to share what you use as a waiver of liability for conducting Danger Tree Assessments? I have generally only conducted danger tree assessments for silviculture purposes where the forest licensees assumed all liability for any operations following the assessment. In an urban environment there are a lot more loop holes to consider etc. that could leave you liable in the event that the owners don't follow your recommendations or a tree which you did not deem to be a hazard fails. Just want to cover my ass as best as possible....


----------



## Streyken (Apr 5, 2007)

Besides the usual "accuracy of information", etc., for risk assessments I also use :
5.	The information contained in this report covers only those items that were examined and reflect the condition of those items at the time of inspection. Any risk assessment is done on the basis of “normal conditions” and cannot take into account extreme or unusual conditions or circumstance which may occur. The inspection is limited to visual examination of accessible components without dissection, excavation, probing, or coring. There is no warranty or guarantee, expressed or implied, that problems or deficiencies of the plants or property in question may not arise in the future.

You may also need to carry "errors and omissions" insurance in addition to liability insurance, as they are very different. Errors and omissions is slightly more expensive than my liability insurance.


----------



## Mitchell (Apr 5, 2007)

*tree risk assessment*

As both of you work in bc, are you assessing based on the wild life and danger tree assessment course. I have that course and have written letters based on that. I do like the idea of writting in discliamers thanks.


----------



## Streyken (Apr 5, 2007)

I did the one put on by PNW ISA. A lot of the same stuff is covered, but the focus is more on urban areas. It's starting to become a requirement for some of the municipalities around here.


----------



## toscottm (Apr 20, 2007)

*Liability Waiver: Hazard Assessments*

Greenleaf, Streyken & Mitchell,

Read your posts regarding a 'waiver of liability' for hazard assessements. 

While it is always best to arm yourself as best possible for potential liability defence, do also recognize that a waiver doesn't stop someone from suing you. It merely is a defensive tool. Should injury or damage arise, a victim can pursue you legally. They might base their case on matters alleged to be beyond the scope of the waiver. This is common in that waivers are only intended to void responsibility for those risks that can reasonably be assumed as something that was accepted willingly. Should you provide a hazard assessment and subsequently there is a tree failure resulting in injury or damage, you might be negligent. Recognize also that the 'non-assessment' is probably your greatest risk. Working in the arboriculture field presents the challenge that responsibility may arise (or just be alleged and therefore still cost you) for incidents whereby someone suggests that while you were servicing tree 'A', you should have noticed and warned about tree 'B'. 

The comment about the importance of errors & omissions insurance was a very good point. This should address three elements as there is a potential for liability arising from bodily injury, property damage and financial harm. Be sure to package this together as well to avoid insurers pointing fingers at one another.

If I may say so, my experience and knowledge is very strong in these respects. If you have any questions or concerns, please do not hesitate to contact me. There is much assistance and input that will be gladly shared.

Best Wishes!

Scott


----------



## Greenleaf (Apr 21, 2007)

I currently have the WDTA certification for both the sivliculture module and the parks and rec. However I've been thinking about taking the course offered by the PNW ISA. Streyken are the municipalities where you live only recognizing the PNW certification?

Thanks for the info Scott, I am most certain I'll have a few questions to run by you.


----------



## Streyken (Apr 21, 2007)

I can't say with certainty that this is the only cert. the municipalities will accept, but this course is listed as a possible contractor requirement in at least one municipality's tree preservation bylaw, can't remember which one (New Westminster???).

I believe the course was developed in conjunction with WorksafeBC after a golfer was struck and killed by a falling limb that should have been recognized. Since WorksafeBC recognizes this course, it's just easy for the municipalities to adopt it for compliance sake.


----------



## John Paul Sanborn (Apr 22, 2007)

Streyken said:


> The inspection is limited to visual examination of accessible components without dissection, excavation, probing, or coring.



I word it to the effect that it is a minimal, visual, non invasive examination. The client agreed to inspection of the stated defect(s) only, and declined a full aerial inspection of the tree. INT_______

The trunk and basal area was sounded with a mallet to compare resonance of all areas to each other, the client declined to have boring samples made to compare fiber color, texture and resistance.INT_____

There is risk of failure of any tree under extream conditions. The weather service uses stages of tree failure to determin unobserved wind conditions after sever storms.

The observed defect(s) slightly increases the risk of failure under normal conditions compared to a perfect tree of the species. The only way to totaly remove the risk of failure is to remove this tree, my professional opinion is that this is not needed at this time, though the defct should be re-evaluated every 3-5 years.

What I've found is that most people want to know if it will fall or not. When you say "it can" they get mad at having to pay for this opinion.

Also, I'm usually being called by buyers looking at cavities in trees, "I like the house, but..." I'm a prefered provider for one of the larger agencies in the MKE metro area so at least i do not get calls to estimate it for free so they can get a reduction on the closing.


----------



## jimmyq (Apr 23, 2007)

The PNW chapter course is actually the Certified tree risk assessor. Its for the urban rural interface and not the same as the wildlife danger tree cert. I think its city of richmond or vancouver that has it in the bylaw. and dont forget those business licences. I was told last week that the first thing the tree wardens ( in some cities) are doing when they receive a report now is to check for a business license for the company submitting the report, no license = rejected report.

FWIW, I had a hell of a time finding E & O insurance for writing reports, the lowest I found was a minimum premium of $2500 yearly. OUCH, I gotta charge more for my reports!


----------



## toscottm (Apr 23, 2007)

*Errors & Omissions: Insurance Premium*



jimmyq said:


> I had a hell of a time finding E & O insurance for writing reports, the lowest I found was a minimum premium of $2500 yearly. OUCH, I gotta charge more for my reports!



Jimmy,

Read your post about paying $2,500 for errors & omissions. Reading between the lines, I assume that this is also in addition to separate general liability insurance.

Sorry for the 'advertisement', however check out www.treesure.ca and give me a call (1-800-240-7055). We insure many of the leading arboriculture services in Canada on a specialty plan. The $2,500 you pay for errors & omissions is probably a 'one-off', thus why you are paying so much. Also, if it is a stand-alone coverage separate from your general liability there are likely grey areas that could be debated between insurers and cause you grief and adversity.

Best Wishes!

Scott


----------



## Streyken (Apr 23, 2007)

You're right Jimmyq, this is different from the wildlife danger tree cert. Some of the same things are covered, but the focus is definitely urban.



> This course was developed in consultation with the Workers’ Compensation Board of British Columbia (WCB), British Columbia Hydro, Wildlife and Danger Tree Committee of British Columbia, and numerous reviewers around North America. The course is administered by the Pacific Northwest Chapter of the International Society of Arboriculture (PNW-ISA).
> The need for the course was defined in British Columbia by a tree-caused fatality in 2000 which helped WCB focus attention on worker safety on golf courses and in urban areas. PNW-ISA approached WCB to explore ways to design and implement a training course for the assessment of trees in urban areas and in the urban/rural interface areas. These discussions resulted in a project, funded by WCB, PNW-ISA, and BC Hydro, to develop a completely new course and accreditation. The course design work was undertaken by Dr. Julian Dunster of Dunster & Associates Ltd.


----------



## jimmyq (Apr 24, 2007)

Topskott, yes, it was a one off, seperate from my general liability. I will try to give you a holler soon.

Streyken, indeed, I have the urban cert, not the wildlife danger tree, that made it no good for work on the Stanley Park hazard assessments this winter  but just fine for any of the city bylaw needs.


----------

