small claims court and damage to my garden by roofers

I'm in WA.

I rent my home. The property owner hired roofing contractors to reroof the house.

The roofers assured me they would take "every care" to prevent damage to my garden, which is located against one side of the house. They then proceeded to trample several plants, break the branches of a large climbing rose, pile roofing debris 2 and 3 feet deep on the clearly marked flowerbeds and damage or completely pull out dozens of plants while raking up the mess. (ETA: I have photos of the piled debris and the wrecked plants or bare spots where plants used to be, but not "before photos" -- so it's my word that there were plants where I say there were.)

I sent a demand letter to the owner of the company offering to settle for $700, which is roughly $200 less than the cost of replacing all the plants plus the cost of skilled labor to replant.

He says there is no way I'm getting $700 out of him and if I sue him he will countersue for his lost wages. His argument is that *he* can't see $700 worth of damages and if I want labor to replant he'll send someone out to do it. He says the damage was unavoidable due to the rotten condition of the roof and overhangs needing to be replaced.

I don't think his position would stand up in court but I would like to make as sure as I can before I go ahead and sue. For what it's worth, I contacted 4 local roofing companies (and numerous consumers) and all of them said that I shouldn't expect to have debris piled on my flowerbeds. The property owner and property management company are neutral on the issue and I had permission to build the flowerbeds.

I appreciate any advice or insight. I'm very upset about this.

Thank you,

smashy

smashy said:

I'm in WA.

I rent my home. The property owner hired roofing contractors to reroof the house.

The roofers assured me they would take "every care" to prevent damage to my garden, which is located against one side of the house. They then proceeded to trample several plants, break the branches of a large climbing rose, pile roofing debris 2 and 3 feet deep on the clearly marked flowerbeds and damage or completely pull out dozens of plants while raking up the mess. (ETA: I have photos of the piled debris and the wrecked plants or bare spots where plants used to be, but not "before photos" -- so it's my word that there were plants where I say there were.)

I sent a demand letter to the owner of the company offering to settle for $700, which is roughly $200 less than the cost of replacing all the plants plus the cost of skilled labor to replant.

He says there is no way I'm getting $700 out of him and if I sue him he will countersue for his lost wages. His argument is that *he* can't see $700 worth of damages and if I want labor to replant he'll send someone out to do it. He says the damage was unavoidable due to the rotten condition of the roof and overhangs needing to be replaced.

I don't think his position would stand up in court but I would like to make as sure as I can before I go ahead and sue. For what it's worth, I contacted 4 local roofing companies (and numerous consumers) and all of them said that I shouldn't expect to have debris piled on my flowerbeds. The property owner and property management company are neutral on the issue and I had permission to build the flowerbeds.

I appreciate any advice or insight. I'm very upset about this.

Thank you,

smashy

Click to expand...

Try to make a reasonable settlement , minus a professional's cost to replant them .

That is ask for the cost of what the plants are worth .

You may have talked to a few roofing Co.'s and numerous consumers , but the bottom line is , the mess may have been unavoidable .

Roofing isn't an easy job . To tear up the old , the easiest way is to pull it up and push it down the slope of the roof , not sideways to each end , or over to the other side .

Also ,

He says the damage was unavoidable due to the rotten condition of the roof and overhangs needing to be replaced.

Click to expand...

Again , it comes with the way one has to work .

Were you at home when to work was being preformed ?

BL said:

Try to make a reasonable settlement , minus a professional's cost to replant them .

Click to expand...

What is the reasoning for not including the value of the labor? or is this just what I should do if I want to settle without going to court?

I was under the impression that labor is valued as damages and I got estimates from companies I felt would most closely resemble the care and work with which I planted everything originally (that is, skilled gardeners, not a dig-plop-done! company).

Roofing isn't an easy job . To tear up the old , the easiest way is to pull it up and push it down the slope of the roof , not sideways to each end , or over to the other side .

Click to expand...

True, but then the easiest way isn't always the right way. I feel that having other roofing companies describe how they would have avoided the damage is a good way to show that there were reasonable ways this company could have avoided it.

Were you at home when to work was being preformed ?

Click to expand...

Yes. I have a job to do, though, and I was busy doing it. I took photos as soon as I looked out and saw the damage being done but it was too late to stop anything at that point.

Thanks,

smashy

Nobody?

I'm really concerned about the impact it will have on my suit to not have "before" pictures of the flowerbed. I don't have receipts for the plants or anything. My husband's the one who's driven me all over creation on endless plant shopping trips, listened to me chatter on about the changes I made to the bed, tried to call me in when it was getting dark and I wanted to plant "just one more plant"; and he can say that there were plants where now there aren't any. Will his testimony do me any good, or will being my spouse make him too much of a biased witness?

Also, what about Roofing Guy's threat to countersue for his lost wages if I take him to court? (Those would presumably be the wages he would lose by having to attend court. As far as I know he was paid in full for the roof job.) I can't find a straight answer on when and how that would be possible for him to do. If I win would he succeed at his countersuit? Would he succeed if I lost? Only if I lost and he could argue that my suit was frivolous or malicious? Is he just completely bluffing?

Thanks,

smashy

Planting

Oh my gosh! I don't know who ever told you that roofers don't make a mess, but believe me they do. Especially a tear off. It is unavoidable. You planted the plants and you want a professional to replant them? A lawsuit? Are you crazy? People like you just clog up the court system with your nonsense. Quit threatening the LL and the roofer and go out and pick up a few plants and replant them.

If you can get the LL to pitch in a few bucks, then all is well that ends well. Sheesh.

Excuse me. I discussed this at length on a forum with other gardeners and several of them had had new roofs put on without any significant damage to their plants. I also called local roofing companies and several of them were kind enough to explain to me in detail exactly how they would have protected a garden during a reroofing -- things like building plywood boxes to cover the plants, or arranging tarps to shield them from the worst of the weight.

Nobody told me it wouldn't make a mess. I expected a mess. What I didn't expect was to tell the workers "Hey, I have a garden here and need it protected" and then have them dump 3 feet of debris directly on it. Besides, come on. If the garden had belonged to the guy who owns the roofing company, do you seriously think he wouldn't have found a way to protect it?

I think you don't understand the investment that a garden can represent in time and labor. This is a small bed (15 feet long and 7 feet wide at its widest point) and the plants seriously damaged or destroyed were worth almost $500 and took several years to mature to the size they were. It's not a matter of "picking out a few new plants". We are not talking about a few bucks.

I don't want a professional to replant anything. I want the value of my labor, which is not inconsiderable. Have you priced work by a skilled gardener or landscape installer lately? It might surprise you. The estimates I got were all over $400 to replant ~30 plants and remulch. If you ruined someone's paint job you would be liable not just for the cost of the new paint but for the going rate of labor to repaint. It wouldn't matter whether the homeowner hired someone to do it or did it themselves, that is the value of the labor.

I think I'm not the crazy one if you think for some reason I'm not entitled to restitution for my damaged and destroyed property. I bet you wouldn't say the same thing if it were the $500 paint job on my car, or a $500 sofa, would you?

smashy

smashy said:

Nobody?

I'm really concerned about the impact it will have on my suit to not have "before" pictures of the flowerbed. I don't have receipts for the plants or anything. My husband's the one who's driven me all over creation on endless plant shopping trips, listened to me chatter on about the changes I made to the bed, tried to call me in when it was getting dark and I wanted to plant "just one more plant"; and he can say that there were plants where now there aren't any. Will his testimony do me any good, or will being my spouse make him too much of a biased witness?

Also, what about Roofing Guy's threat to countersue for his lost wages if I take him to court? (Those would presumably be the wages he would lose by having to attend court. As far as I know he was paid in full for the roof job.) I can't find a straight answer on when and how that would be possible for him to do. If I win would he succeed at his countersuit? Would he succeed if I lost? Only if I lost and he could argue that my suit was frivolous or malicious? Is he just completely bluffing?

Thanks,

smashy

Click to expand...

You are not a professional , nor were they planted by a professional .

A Judge could make a ball park figure , so why can't you , and try a reasonable settlement ?


http://www.consumeraffairs.com/consumerism/small_wa.html

Read the Guide .

Everything you want, you have the burden to prove. It seems you have a problem of proof (and of duty). Sorry about that. NEGOTIATE.

Well they didn't damage a car, paint, sofa or whatever else you stated. It was plants. I do know what the cost of plants are, as we are greenhouse growers. The fact remains YOU planted them, NOT a professional. If I were your LL I would tell you no more plants period. Work with the LL and ask him if he'll supply the plants that you will plant them. And forget about a lawsuit.

BL said:

You are not a professional , nor were they planted by a professional .

A Judge could make a ball park figure , so why can't you , and try a reasonable settlement ?

Click to expand...

The point is, as far as I can find out, damages are figured with labor being figured at the cost of having a professional do the job. Look, say I built my house and was my own general contractor and brought the job in for way under what it would cost to hire a general contractor. Or I built it before a massive rise in the cost of building materials. Then my idiot neighbor negligently burns it down. My understanding is that he'd be on the hook for what it cost to rebuild, now, not what it originally cost for me to have it built, and that would be the going price of a general contractor and all the other labor.

I guess the thinking is that if my neighbor negligently destroys my property, it's not my responsibility to assume the labor of fixing his screwup, just like it's not my responsibility to assume the cost of replacing the material goods.

If anyone has specific legal reasons why my understanding is incorrect, I'd appreciate hearing them, just not "Well it ain't so" or "This is plants! That's different". As far as I can tell my plants are property just like my sofa, car etc are property. I paid for them or was given them, I own them, they have a market value. If you can support an argument that this isn't true, by all means tell me.

And I am willing to make a reasonable settlement, that's why I offered to settle for $700. That's almost $300 less than the total damages including labor. But I'm not willing to settle for a few bucks and suck up the rest just to get this threatening sleazeball off my back.

My landlord has nothing to do with this, by the way. He has explicitly declined to be involved and said it's between me and the roofers.

smashy

smashy said:

The point is, as far as I can find out, damages are figured with labor being figured at the cost of having a professional do the job. Look, say I built my house and was my own general contractor and brought the job in for way under what it would cost to hire a general contractor. Or I built it before a massive rise in the cost of building materials. Then my idiot neighbor negligently burns it down. My understanding is that he'd be on the hook for what it cost to rebuild, now, not what it originally cost for me to have it built, and that would be the going price of a general contractor and all the other labor.

I guess the thinking is that if my neighbor negligently destroys my property, it's not my responsibility to assume the labor of fixing his screwup, just like it's not my responsibility to assume the cost of replacing the material goods.

If anyone has specific legal reasons why my understanding is incorrect, I'd appreciate hearing them, just not "Well it ain't so" or "This is plants! That's different". As far as I can tell my plants are property just like my sofa, car etc are property. I paid for them or was given them, I own them, they have a market value. If you can support an argument that this isn't true, by all means tell me.

And I am willing to make a reasonable settlement, that's why I offered to settle for $700. That's almost $300 less than the total damages including labor. But I'm not willing to settle for a few bucks and suck up the rest just to get this threatening sleazeball off my back.

My landlord has nothing to do with this, by the way. He has explicitly declined to be involved and said it's between me and the roofers.

smashy

Click to expand...

What's the next step in the Guide , if you can't agree to settle ?

We aren't going to fill a 50 reply thread over this .