insurance Cost?

[Stumped_4_Life]

How, Much Per year do you guys pay for insurance for your business?

 

[vharrison2]

You wouldn't believe it, it is unbelievable. One good thing is that audits can be good once in a while...I got a $ 7000.00 refund for last year.

 

[Newfie]

How, Much Per year do you guys pay for insurance for your business?

For everything or just liability? a little over a grand for 500K of liabilty. Another 4K for coverage on 2 trucks,chipper,tractor,log trailer,etc.

 

[tophopper]

:Eye:

 

[begleytree]

@ 4k for 1 mil gen liability and full coverage on all my buisness and personal stuff too.
trucks chippers trailers pickups wifes car 75 camaro boats ect. All ya gotta say is you run at least one estimate a year with the personal stuff, and no prob putting it all one one, saves money too.
-Ralph

 

[topndrop]

We pay around $5000 / yr. for 1 Mil Property and Liability, more for the C-50, Dump truck and F250 (Our chipper is presently down for a new motor and we rent as needed.) We also have Fire, Theft and Flood insurance (not sure what that runs per year).

 

[old dude]

inurance costs?

Wellllllllllll-------
The fact of the matter is that public libility insurance is by and large redundant. Your clients homeowners insurance already covers loss due to falling objects--the main reason for liability insurance to begin with. What your doing is paying premiums to relieve your clients insurance man of a risk that he(his company) has already contracted to cover.
Old Dude

 

[Ekka]

Wellllllllllll-------
The fact of the matter is that public libility insurance is by and large redundant. Your clients homeowners insurance already covers loss due to falling objects--the main reason for liability insurance to begin with. What your doing is paying premiums to relieve your clients insurance man of a risk that he(his company) has already contracted to cover.
Old Dude

Be carefull, that is definately not the case here, and that wouldn't be unique to Australia either.

Some policies only cover defined events, fire, storm etc ... nothing accidental. If what you are saying is true then why don't the customers just do it themselves and fell the tree straight into the house ... even better if they fell it into a part of the house that needs repairs, then just pay your excess and have everything fixed up including the removal of the tree.

What about the personal damage side of things. What if you were stump grinding and a stone blinded a child for life?

You would have to be crazy to do this job without liability insurance, and foolish to consider that a householders policy might cover you.

 

[WMTP]

I pay a little over $1300 a year on 1million liability.$3500 a year on equipment ins.

 

[Newfie]

Wellllllllllll-------
The fact of the matter is that public libility insurance is by and large redundant. Your clients homeowners insurance already covers loss due to falling objects--the main reason for liability insurance to begin with. What your doing is paying premiums to relieve your clients insurance man of a risk that he(his company) has already contracted to cover.
Old Dude

WELLLLLL, I hope you never have a mishap, because the first thing the clients insurance company will do after they pay the claim and cancel your clients coverage is to come after you and sue your liability carrier and in lieu of that, you.

 

[old dude]

Insurance thing

Granted-- the (clients) homeowners policy may indeed increase in premium payments and may even be cancelled altogether. But because the insurance companies want to look for a way out of their policy relationships--- why should that mean that I should pay huge premiums to shield them from having to appear to be the (shell-game) con-artists they are. This idea of cancelling long standing policies for the audasity of filing a reasonable claim is in my view next to criminal and I for one refuse to position myself to act as their deflector shield to the tune of several thousand dollars per year. I never hesitate to fully reveal my status and position on this matter to clients along with a promise to pay thiere deductible in the event of mishap. This practice has cost me some jobs but you would be surprised the number of homeowners who see things my way. also, I believe that this practice has made me a better climber as I have a 'disinsentive' to hurry a project or take extrordinary risks. After all--my money as well as my reputation is at stake. I am pleased to say that in 27 years of pratice I have never had to pay a deductible. I did once destroy a lovely dogwood tree and had to replace it to the tune of 200 bucks.
As regards the possibility of getting sued for recovery of claims paid by the insurer. That is indeed a possibility but one that can be inhibited by a clearly stated and signed waiver of libility inherent in the work contract between you and the homeowner. Obviously this would not provide total protection but in leiu of gross negligence would certainly help. There is simply no risk-free way to do this job. I've been very lucky and have had my share of close calls all of which were learning experiences. I am not -repeat not- advising anyone out there to drop their insurance. What I have done has worked for me but would not be for everyone.My advise is to take some time and talk to an honest(if you can find one) insurance man and lawyer. My feeling is that you will find this issue is more complicated than you may have thought.

 

[Ekka]

This is the exact wording from our household insurance policy ...

Impact by a falling tree or part of a tree. We also pay the cost of removing and disposing of the fallen tree or parts. We will not pay if damage is caused when you cut down or remove branches from a tree or have someone do it for you.

.... Pretty clear.

We would gave over 50 different insurance companies to choose from each with a variety of policies ... I doubt most people have ever read their policy document.

Around here you simply would never get the job, no-one would sign a liability waiver like that, I just think the risk is not worth it nor the reputation you build as being the risk taking liability waiving operator. If you were my competitor here I would have a field day.

 

[old dude]

insurance thing

Good thing I don't live in austrailia. Here in north carolina (u.s)-- there are six broadform homeowners insurance policies available. four of the six provide coverage to insured dwellings against "falling objects". The other two forms which do not are the least used of all. Over the coarse of the last twenty-five years I have had clients check what I tell them with their insurance man and one even went so far as to pay his lawyer $300 for a written opinion as regards legal exposures et-al regarding this issue. In all but a few cases I wound-up doing the job.
What I would like to know is what homeowners policies say regarding the issue of falling trees(by homeowner or others) in other U.S. states or locales. Surley some of you guys out there own your own home. Let us know what your policy states.
Let me stress that in no way am I advising anyone out there to drop their coverage as I readily admit that it is by far the safest most reasssuring way to do buisness. All I'm saying is what has and continues to work for me. I admit that I have been unusually lucky to never (as yet) to have put my possition to the test in a real-live civil action and I dearly hope I will never have to. In fact, the paranoia of just such a possibility keeps me on my toes. I have turned down 'some' jobs simply because the probability of mishap was beyond my personal comfort-level reletive to the issue under discussion.
Anyway-- let me know what your policies state.Especially if they are in fact filled with caviats like our friend in Austrailia.

 

[RatliffLogging]

Not in the tree service business but Gen Liablity at 1mil and coverage on 3 2003 jeep wranglers, a 1600 international, a F-350 crew cab, and misc items and worksite equipment......$9426.00 yearly....Kentucky is a high place for insur.

 

[RatliffLogging]

6 fallers, two yarding men, and myself....workmans comp...in that yearly price.

 

[Newfie]

As regards the possibility of getting sued for recovery of claims paid by the insurer. That is indeed a possibility but one that can be inhibited by a clearly stated and signed waiver of libility inherent in the work contract between you and the homeowner. Obviously this would not provide total protection but in leiu of gross negligence would certainly help. There is simply no risk-free way to do this job. ..... My feeling is that you will find this issue is more complicated than you may have thought.

It's more than a possibility.It is a certainty. A waiver such as that is only worth the paper it is printed on. It might deter an uninformed homeowner, but certainly not an insurance company. The issue is not complicated at all. Insurance companies main goal is to take in more money than they pay out. They will go to whatever legal means necessary to accomplish that goal. Sure, insurance companies suck and it sucks even more that we have legislated ourselves into attempting to devoid ourselves of resonsibility.

By not carrying your own liability insurance you are opening yourself and the homeowner up to the huge liabilty of injury or property damage to uninvolved third parties.

It must be nice in your rosy colored world.

 

[Nickrosis]

6 fallers, two yarding men, and myself....workmans comp...in that yearly price.

Hey, your insurance is cheap! Quit yer complain'!

 

[old dude]

Who's edititing the content

Wooo- guys!
Just yesterday there were two guys posted on this site who were about to meet with their insurance man and said they would get back to me with thier insurance mans' responce to some issues I had raised about the necessity(or possible lack thereof ) of public liability insurance. Have been looking for their report and am somewhat alarmed that not only have I been unable to find their responce but am now unable to find their original posts promising a reponce once having met with their insurance agent. Have these posts been removed (or blocked) by someone?
Please tell me I don't smell something fishy in the chatroom. Thought we were having a legitimate discussion.

It's more than a possibility.It is a certainty. A waiver such as that is only worth the paper it is printed on. It might deter an uninformed homeowner, but certainly not an insurance company. The issue is not complicated at all. Insurance companies main goal is to take in more money than they pay out. They will go to whatever legal means necessary to accomplish that goal. Sure, insurance companies suck and it sucks even more that we have legislated ourselves into attempting to devoid ourselves of resonsibility.

By not carrying your own liability insurance you are opening yourself and the homeowner up to the huge liabilty of injury or property damage to uninvolved third parties.

It must be nice in your rosy colored world.

 

[Ekka]

Hey Old dude

You posted in 2 threads, the other was called Insurance Joke http://www.arboristsite.com/showthread.php?t=20326&page=2&pp=15

Hmmm, I don't care what the insurance agent says anyway, read your policy document. Oh by the way, I sold general insurance for 5 years!

 

[Newfie]

Hmmm, I don't care what the insurance agent says anyway, read your policy document. Oh by the way, I sold general insurance for 5 years!

And I sold it for 4 years, but "old dude" has all the answers. Not much you can tell a person that has a conscience that will allow the onus to be placed on the client for his own risk and potential mistakes.

I wonder what would happen if "old dude" did have an accident? He says he would pay the clients deductible. Would he compensate the client for their time and effort to file the claim and the time involved in processing it? Will he be willing to compensate the client for the increase in their insurance rates and for how many years? How about the time involved in finding another carrier after being cancelled? I wonder if he would pony up the cash after the client's insurer refuses to pay the claim because they hired an uninsured hack?