City Tree Fell on My Car, City won't pay, is city at fault?

[HighwayMan]

That is certainly a point that deserves reiteration.

 

[michaerlscai]

Yes I have already filed claim with the city and city denied it without given any reason. When I called, the person said 'the city didn't do anything to cause it'

The tree is planted between the sidewalk and the curb. Thanks for the clarification.

I think I'm going back to exam the remaining tree see the condition of it.

Here are some photos taken on the day it happened

https://picasaweb.google.com/michaelscai/Public

I'm looking for suggestions to strengthen my case.

 

[michaerlscai]

Now that I exam the picture again, the base where the branch falls off is hollow - that part looks rotten to me because it's hollow?!

 

[CdwJava]

A lot may depend on who is legally responsible for these trees. In San Jose, where I grew up, the easement between the sidewalk and the curb were technically owner by the city, but maintained by the property owner. While may parents could not chop down the tree, they were responsible for caring for it and the grass in that strip. It was actually in the deed if I recall correctly. In fact, when it finally fell, my mom had to pay the city to haul it away and for damage to the sidewalk from the roots because she failed to maintain if or notify the city of its poor condition.

If the property owner exercises control over the tree, then the city may have a valid claim for denial. But, if the city cares exclusively for that strip (easement) between the sidewalk and the curb, then they likely face the liability. But, who waters the grass there? Who trims the tree? Does the property deed indicate anything?

 

[Mnemosyne]

But, who waters the grass there? Who trims the tree?

In my perfect world, poster I'mTheFather would show up about now and say "I do. So sue me."

 

[michaerlscai]

The city owns the tree in this case, I went to city hall couple of times and called the clerk a few times, they never denied they own the tree. They would have told me it's not a tree owned by the city.

I wish there is a plantologist that can look at the picture and tell me the branch is rotten or dead in some scientific terms.. but it doesn't take a plantologist to see the hollow branch is dead.

 

[CdwJava]

From what I can read in the muni code, Monterey Park controls virtually everything to do with the trees. The property owner cannot even trim the tree without risking jail, so it would seem to me that the liability would clearly lie with the city.

http://www.ci.monterey-park.ca.us/index.aspx?page=766

You might want to contact someone higher up the food chain than the clerk you originally spoke with, and if that doesn't get their attention, get some estimates for your damages and file in small claims court (if they have officially rejected your claim to the city).

 

[michaerlscai]

That's a good link, thanks!

The clerk already escalated the issue, their risk management team reviewed it and decided to deny the claim. the claim denial was signed by city's director of risk management, so probably no point of escalating.

 

[CdwJava]

That's a good link, thanks!

The clerk already escalated the issue, their risk management team reviewed it and decided to deny the claim. the claim denial was signed by city's director of risk management, so probably no point of escalating.

Except to Small Claims court.

The best way to manage risk is to deny it ... most people then walk away. If there is a small claims action filed, they may decide it will be cheaper to pay you.

How much is the damage? Are you on the hook for all of it, or is the insurance company covering all or part of it? If you have been covered by your insurer, then it will be up to them to file against the city if they feel it is worth the time and expense.

 

[michaerlscai]

The damage was about 2200, I may contact the city again after I filed the claim see if they will reconsider their decision.

I cancelled my comprehensive insurance because car insurance is so expensive in California, I wish I hadn't.

 

[TheGeekess]

The damage was about 2200, I may contact the city again after I filed the claim see if they will reconsider their decision.

I cancelled my comprehensive insurance because car insurance is so expensive in California, I wish I hadn't.

Yeah, now you'll be spending TAXPAYERS' $$ to fix that car if you are successful.

 

[michaerlscai]

They deserve it, they should have used those TAX MONEY to trim those damn tree!

 

[You Are Guilty]

I wish there is a plantologist that can look at the picture and tell me the branch is rotten or dead in some scientific terms.. but it doesn't take a plantologist to see the hollow branch is dead.

A) arborist,
B) a hollow branch is not proof that the tree was visibly (externally) damaged, and
C) Try here: http://www.isa-arbor.com/faca/findArborist.aspx?utm_source=homepageclicks&utm_medium=homepagebox&utm_campaign=IAmA

I found three listings for people in your town "for hire" to diagnose sick trees and prepare a report.

 

[CdwJava]

Seems pretty clear to me that the city holds liability in this. The property owner cannot legally TOUCH the tree, and I found no ordinance that mandates the property owner inspect and advise the city if the tree grows weak. I'd think that even without an arborist report, the OP will likely prevail in a small claims action.

Cities pay out on liability for people who trip in a cracked sidewalk, I cannot imagine that their tree breaking and landing on a car is any different. I suspect they will pay if push comes to shove ... they just need to be shoved. The $2,200 is far cheaper than paying a city attorney to try and fight it.

 

[Ohiogal]

Yeah, now you'll be spending TAXPAYERS' $$ to fix that car if you are successful.

And if the city is found negligent then the city is to blame for it and they are the ones choosing to fix cars with taxpayers' funds rather than use those funds to run the city and maintain city property.