My Premises Libility Claim denied...

[mcage]

What is the name of your state (only U.S. law)? CA

Hello All,

So last year I fell down the stairs outside my apt and sustained a trimallelor fracture to my right ankle. Here I am two surgeries and 12 weeks of PT later. I obtained a lawyer immediately because the way I fell was very unusual and I felt as if I lost my balance way too easliy, and there was no right side hand rail to grab ahold of.

When I informed my landlord of my fall (before obtaining the lawyer) he laughed it off and asked me what kind of shoes I was wearing at the time, he just shrugged the whole situation off. A few days later, my then new attorney sent a safety engineer out to inspect the steps. Ultimately, his findings were that my fall was caused by the irregular risers and tread heights and depths. He states in his report that I lost my balance on the first step and since the second step was a considerable amount shorter in height, there was no way I could have been able to arrest my fall, especially with the absense of a right side rail. My neighbor has also fallen on the stairs (same steps) but with a less serious injury. He made a statement to my lawyer.

It was raining on the day my injury occured so i guess this must have been the insurance carrier's assumption that I slipped and fell as opposed to tripped and fell. They have recently denied my claim, citing my own expert witness' report. They said they have no liability because the stairs were not of a slippery substance. It seems they only reviewed the facts they wanted to review and ignored the rest. They also said that the safety engineer found there to be no building codes, but his report clearly states that irregularities (up to half inch) in treads and risers is a building code violation, clearly stated in his report. Why would they deny my claim when they clearly have information which states otherwise? And, why would they sight my attorney's safety engineer when they sent their own out to inspect the stairs? What kind of games are they playing?

[ecmst12]

What did your lawyer tell you?

[mcage]

My lawyer says he is surprised that they denied the claim. He expected them to offer something. He says he believes my case is a good one and he plans on getting another law firm involved since we will now be filing suit.

I guess I am looking for an adjuster perspective, why would they deny my claim and then site my side's report, only taking certain parts of the report? How come they didn't use their own expert's inspection (I know they did one, I saw the guy).

The conclusion of the safety engineer's (the one my attorney sent) report was that there were in fact building code violations (the irregularities of the risers and tread depths) and these violations directly pertain to the way my injury occured.

Why would they just ignore the main points of the report and deny the claim?