Balcony fire caused by friend's cigarette

[Zigner]

I 'm not sure that requesting a guest extinguish a cigarette in a pot. And if the guest fails to properly extinguish it constitutes negligence on part of condo owner

Telling a guest to put a lit cigarette in to dead vegetation?

 

[xylene]

I 'm not sure that requesting a guest extinguish a cigarette in a pot. And if the guest fails to properly extinguish it constitutes negligence on part of condo owner

I am not convinced any negligence occurred at all.

I also don't believe the OP is entitled to the entire replacement cost of his >10 year old composite deck. In fact I'm quite certain of that.

 

[quincy]

I am not convinced any negligence occurred at all.

I also don't believe the OP is entitled to the entire replacement cost of his >10 year old composite deck. In fact I'm quite certain of that.

I think the smart thing might be to report the fire to the insurer, unless the replacement costs can be easily borne otherwise.

 

[Zigner]

Furthermore, it may actually be a requirement of the policy that this sort of incident be reported to them.

 

[LdiJ]

Placing a lit cigarette in to dead vegetation could certainly be considered negligent.
Now, if there had been nothing but dirt, things would be different...but the OP was pretty clear that there was dead vegetation in the pot.

Except that it was the OP's wife who suggested doing that.

 

[Zigner]

Except that it was the OP's wife who suggested doing that.

Yes, which would (ok, could) cause liability to be placed on to her as well.

 

[adjusterjack]

He mentioned homeowners insurance, not renters insurance.

The industry standard form is entitled "Homeowners 4 - Contents Broad Form." Homeowners insurance has become a generic term that could refer to owning or renting so the question had to be asked.

Yes, which would (ok, could) cause liability to be placed on to her as well.

Assuming she co-owns with the OP, there would be no "liability" attributed to her in the legal sense of the word. However, that the guest relied on her direction could certainly be a defense for the guest if anybody tried to get money out of him.

 

[Zigner]

Assuming she co-owns with the OP, there would be no "liability" attributed to her in the legal sense of the word. However, that the guest relied on her direction could certainly be a defense for the guest if anybody tried to get money out of him.

Perhaps you didn't explain this right. If the OP/OP's wife is sued and found to be liable, then liability would be attributed.

 

[quincy]

Why would the wife be sued?

 

[Zigner]

Why would the wife be sued?

For directing that a burning object be placed in to a pot containing dead vegetation which lead to a fire.
Of course, if this is turning over to the insurance, it won't get that far.

 

[quincy]

For directing that a burning object be placed in to a pot containing dead vegetation which lead to a fire.
Of course, if this is turning over to the insurance, it won't get that far.

I see no reason for anyone suing or being sued.