Who pays who?

Arborist Forum

Help Support Arborist Forum:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.

monkeypuzzle

ArboristSite Guru
Joined
Jun 28, 2001
Messages
853
Reaction score
4
Location
Florida and Montana
Mr. Smith calls and has a lighning damaged tree. I go remove the tree blah blah blah its a Insuance deal. Is it Mr. Smiths responsibility to pay? He called me first.


Seems like the Ins. co. should reimburse Mr. Smith.

Does anyone know what the law or policies say about this?
 
It probably varies by the insurance company.

We were hit by lighting last year about 2 weeks after we moved into the house. Did about $1800 worth of damage. We bought everything that needed replacing, took the reciepts to our agent and they cut us a check on the spot, minus our deductable.

I would think that most companies are this way though. Ours is State Farm.


Dan
 
There has never been a problem here. I will admit that I let some folks slide until they get a check in the mailbox, just to show good faith. Hey, this is the old south man, and we know just about everybody up and down the road. Thru the years I'm sure I've been burned by the customer, but thats life.


They are only covering part of the cost now, most ins. companies are only giving 500$ per tree here in my area. The extra $$'s HAS to come from home owner.
 
I do NOT accept insurance, the policy is between the CUSTOMER and the INSURANCE Co. NOT me!!! I expect payment at time of service. Now obviouly I have some customers that I will be a little lax with but not many!! And I don't accept ins. from ANYONE!!! Thats the quickest way to get dicked out of your hard earned money!!:mad:
 
Whoever signs the contract is responsible for payment. You do have a signed contract, right?
 
Mr.Smith's punk ash needs to pay you. You give him a receipt/invoice - Mr. Smith gets reimbursed up except for his deductible. Oral contracts are contracts and legally binding for one yr in this state.

Reguardless, tell him THE WAY IT IS!!! These kind of jobs rarely yield repeat biz........otherwise, he would have called his normal tree guy right???

I would lean, lean HARD. Don't let him dictate to you the situation so you can debate it on this forum, you dictate it to him.

I have clients where we share amiable relationships, but I am good at collecting when I get into situations where they say, "Talk to XYZ insurance" or "this property just sold, talk to the title company. " ........ FLEX!!

I don't put myself in the situation where I have to rattle any cages - my soul is not geared that way - trust me though, I can rattle them. I had a customer when I started and couldn't read people, lost the check in the mail 5 times. In other businesses, they could have fallen on a knife 5 times for that behavior......it is a rough world. One visit and they corrected that. I am good at dealing with behavior, guess that is why I am good with horses.

You do stand to gain here with patience. You can talk to XYZ yourself, see what they have to say, then just add a few HUNDRED to your bill for taking on this administrative duty.

I hate these situations, that is why I culture amiable relationships that are raving fans (see book-Raving Fans-Ken Blanchard). Plus these relationships waste time in frustration and energy that could better be spent towards new clients and.......tree care
;)
 
I'm always upfront with people, they are responsible for the fees agreed prior to starting the work.

Big dollar storm work can be paid in installments if they are waiting on the underwriter to cut the check. We cannot wait 2 months for an entire payment.
 
Speaking of insurance:

I just got an e-mail from a new customer. He recently purchased a home with a large live oak in the front yard. Now, we have been pruning this tree every 2 to 3 years for the previous owner. I met the new owner about 2 weeks ago while working next door. We looked over the tree and agreed it was good for another year or so. It overhangs the house considerably, but I assured him there was plenty of clearance and no structural defects to be concerned about.

Anyway, he just got a letter from his insurance company stating that a home inspection revealed "the tree was touching or over hanging the roof and that [he] would have to address it." They did not go into detail about how to address it, but from previous experience I know they usually want EVERYTHING over hanging the roof removed. On this tree that would equate to nearly half of the canopy.

Has anyone else done these insurance "preventative pruning" jobs? I get a couple every year. I really don't want to cut anything over the roof, because its not in any danger of damaging the home. Do you think the ins. co. would accept a letter to that effect? And what if something does damage the roof, am I assuming liability? Should I just hack the tree, walk away, or what? This is one of those trees that I feel a special bond with, I've been caring for it nearly ten years now.

MP, sorry for bullying in. Should I have started a new thread? :confused:
 
Originally posted by RockyJSquirrel
Why should YOU have to prove anything? Ask the homeowner to ask the insurance company for documentation on how and why they consider the tree a risk.

Your post makes it seems like the insurance companies care what you say. The insurance companies have been doing insurance way longer than a single person's been doing tree work. They don't care about the tree, my friend. All they know is that in the past, trees over houses equals we pay money. They don't like paying money, so they say, "get rid of it, or we will no longer insure you."

It will take a lot more than one person writing one letter to get the insurance industry to change their ways, but you know what....I'd write the letter. Change has to start somewhere.

love
nick
 
I did a job this spring for a very nice guy and his wife, whom were interested in de-nuding their property..... I managed to talk into saving 12 of 29 trees.... including a monster white oak in excellent condition, just south of the house.... What a beautiful and important shade tree....
Turns out their insurance agent had paid a little visit when they put the addition on and told them to get rid of the tree cause it was a hazard....
I stopped the story right there........... "Who's going to say whethere that tree is a hazard....the insurance man or ME????"
Felt great to have saved the 12 and that one in particular... I'd have walked from that job rather than cut the big oak...
While we were taking the rest down the neighbor came over and asked "how much to cut down all my trees?"
 
Hey Treeman14, I don't worry about if anything is off topic, or needs to be in a new thread. Speaking of Ins. is enuff for me:)

And yes to YOUR question,I learned long ago how to be prudent. And a reason why I asked the question about policy is that since we have been doing so many Insurance jobs this summer, lots of lightning, wind, and soggy ground I thought I may add some new fine print about this on our esimates. It just seems to me that the (general insured public) expects for the Insurance Co. to pull out their pocketbook first. It could be a cultural thing:confused:
Maybe I am too soft on people.

Here is what happened three weeks ago. I removed a H20 oak from house that failed from a combo of decay/wind/wet stuff. The tree was a time bomb. While my men are working I inspect all the trees and find another time bomb leaning toward the house next door. Large amount of decay on the tension wood.
Anyway....

Tuesday----- I wrote a note describing what I had found. You know (document everything) right. Took her the bill and I guess my little note threw her off because she thought I was trying to hustle her(Im a woman and you are trying to take advantage kind of chit). I turned and left as soon as she started her crapp and mailed the bill to the Ins. company. Can't wait for the results of this.


The customer is ALL-ways right, right?:mad:
 
My responce to removing all canopy over the house would be that in the long term that would greatly increase the risk of total tree failure.

Any part of a tree near a house can fall on it. If it is 50 ft away and 60 ft tall, ther is a risk of the tree falling on the house.

We can reduce risk asscocoated with tree failure, but the only way to eliminate it is to remove the tree en toto.

That is not reasonable risk mitigation.
 
If you can state that their demands are not reasonable, that it will not reduce risk, you can get the company to reverse the demand.

It really depends on the agent, many of them are reasonable people.

But shopping for insurance, even agents in a given undrwriter, is a good idea.
 
Back
Top