Claim damage against Govt or Contractor ? Limitations ?

[Zigner]

Your use of future-tense implies I'm not doing so - it was only that year.

I don't see that future-tense was used.

 

[Kerry9]

You needed to file a claim with the gov't agency within 6 months of the damage occurring. You failed to do that. Your position is that you couldn't have discovered it. My position is that the damage was obvious and, using a normal/reasonable level of diligence, you could have discovered it.

You say that you were going to have your handyman do the work 2 days after it was already done. How did you know the city had actually done the work? Did you send the handyman out? If so, why didn't he advise of the damage? If not, why didn't you go out to see the work that had been done?

Answer # 1: The damage was NOT obvious, it wasn't even obvious to me until I was literally standing on top of it.
Answer # 2: Because he called to tell me that it had already been cut when he arrived there, and feeling badly for me because he realized I would be charged their exhorbitant fees on my taxes (he'd said I could pay him months later when I was able to - and his rate is only 20% their rate)
Answer # 3: He didn't, because he couldn't have, nor anyone else, unless they actually stood above it, AND even then would have had to dig beneath the cut brush they leave: the formerly prominent well-head was sliced & shattered & scattered underneath the shallow cut brush.

 

[Kerry9]

I don't see that future-tense was used.

Why aren't you maintaining your vacant lot?

You have just claimed that I'm STILL not maintaining it.

 

[Zigner]

I suspect that you are going to have a problem overcoming your failure to file a timely claim. Furthermore, I suspect that you are going to have a problem proving that it was their contractor that did the damage.

In any case, you have to start by filing a claim. Good luck.

 

[Kerry9]

I'm a bit surprised they've entertained you this long.

How on earth has the Govt. "entertained" me ??

 

[Silverplum]

How on earth has the Govt. "entertained" me ??

I wasn't referring to your city government.

 

[Kerry9]

I suspect that you are going to have a problem overcoming your failure to file a timely claim. Furthermore, I suspect that you are going to have a problem proving that it was their contractor that did the damage.

In any case, you have to start by filing a claim. Good luck.

My question was focused entirely upon:
a.) WHOM to make the claim upon: The District, or Contractor
b.) WHETHER the very well established doctrine of 'Delayed Discovery' (case-law relating to property insurance, & personal injury) was applicable to property damage when there is no insured.


It was NOT focused upon (as the dozen comments did) what a bad person I was for making the poor govt. take care of my weeds ONE season. (A govt. which pays their new hires $ 176,000/year BEFORE benefits, and Fire Marshall 290,000 /year)


Regarding their contractor: that should be the easiest part, because in their contract they specify the precise equipment used (which is extremely rare in this application), and a well contractor has told me that equipment is the only thing that could have caused it to shatter in that manner.

 

[OHRoadwarrior]

Though I would not argue you could potentially sue and win a lawsuit against the city, they would then be within their rights to add the expense of the lawsuit to your taxes as a maintenance expense. It seems kind of foolish for you to pay for both the damage and everyones' legal fees for your negligence.

 

[Kerry9]

Though I would not argue you could potentially sue and win a lawsuit against the city, they would then be within their rights to add the expense of the lawsuit to your taxes as a maintenance expense. It seems kind of foolish for you to pay for both the damage and everyones' legal fees for your negligence.

The damage is over $ 8,000 - you're saying to just absorb it ? OR else, the 8,000 will be placed back on my taxes ? That is absurd.


The contractor's negligence in rushing through doing lot after lot with a giant machine is at fault. For some reason, they made him carry 2 million injury policy (plus property damage policy).

In your view, if he negligently ran over a someone's baby while cutting someone's lot, and they won a Million $, they'd get that Million $ added right back to their taxes ?!?
All because (to quote you) that someone "was negligent" in not cutting their weeds that year - so they should just 'absorb' the loss & carry on ???

 

[Silverplum]

The damage is over $ 8,000 - you're saying to just absorb it ? OR else, the 8,000 will be placed back on my taxes ? That is absurd.


The contractor's negligence in rushing through doing lot after lot with a giant machine is at fault. For some reason, they made him carry 2 million injury policy (plus property damage policy).

In your view, if he negligently ran over a someone's baby while cutting someone's lot, and they won a Million $, they'd get that Million $ added right back to their taxes ?!?
All because (to quote you) that someone "was negligent" in not cutting their weeds that year - so they should just 'absorb' the loss & carry on ???

Overgrown weeds are not babies.

 

[Kerry9]

Overgrown weeds are not babies.

Silverplum: You seem to have attention-deficit problems:

We're talking about $8,000 - 10,000 damage which has NOTHING to do with overgrown weeds. Negligence in the carrying out of a contracted task.
I provided the example of another type of damage to illustrate the point.

 

[Silverplum]

Silverplum: You seem to have attention-deficit problems:

We're talking about $8,000 - 10,000 damage which has NOTHING to do with overgrown weeds. Negligence in the carrying out of a contracted task.
I provided the example of another type of damage to illustrate the point.

Isn't there a corollary of Godwin's when babies are compared to overgrown weeds?

 

[justalayman]

Zigner: are you admonishing me for not having cut them ??

Had they waited 2 more days, as I'd requested for them to do by phone, my own handyman would have cut them by hand. And, he knew to leave that tiny area alone.

No, "delayed discovery" case law doesn't go on whether it was simply "possible" to know, but rather if under normal circumstances, the fact of damage could be observed/discovered.

under normal circumstances, the damage could have been discovered. It was not hidden and therefor, there was no reason it could not be discovered immediately. The fact you don't live there is not a reason it could not be discovered.

and where was your handyman? wouldn't he have discovered it when he went out to cut the weeds?


and if you knew they were going to cut the weeds, all it would have taken is you provide them notice of the wellhead. Then they could have known to leave it alone as well.

 

[justalayman]

I suspect that you are going to have a problem overcoming your failure to file a timely claim. Furthermore, I suspect that you are going to have a problem proving that it was their contractor that did the damage.

In any case, you have to start by filing a claim. Good luck.

good point. If OP did not discover the damage for years, how does he know some kid in a car didn't cruise through the lot and hit the wellhead?

 

[justalayman]

and a well contractor has told me that equipment is the only thing that could have caused it to shatter in that manner.

so, if he walked up to a wellhead that was broken as yours was and had no idea the area had ever been exposed to a flail mower or anything else he would look at it and say:

yup, somebody had a flail mower out here and hit this wellhead. Ain't nothing in the entire world that causes damage like that other than a flail mower.



get real. He is not qualified to make that determination nor is it even accurate.