Should I expect the worse?

[thcri]

Junkman,

You are rtight. But having the umbrella is still a good idea as president of the corporation they may come after me individually also. This is where the umbrella will pick up. In other words if someone doesn't tighten a gas line properly and there is an explosion they would go after my company but they may also come after me personnally for negligence. Even though I wasn't the one doing the gas line. The umbrella covers a lot of stuff but your right it would not cover my business or add to the insurance I have at the business.

In Mike's case it would have helped.

murph

 

[InlineDieselFan]

I did like MikePA said and saved a few$$$.

for what it is worth, this guy that broke his finger may not sue you at all. But his medical insurance (Blue Cross, Kaiser, etc.) may sue you, file a claim against your homeowners insurance.

this has been happening around WA lately, to a few people I know. Me being one of them, I crashed on the Sea Doo and needed some stitches that I put on my Blue Cross, total bill ER and DR fees about $450.00, those Montana docs were cheap. A few weeks later my Blue Cross try to go after the SD owner, I tell them that I own the SD. They then needed a copy of my policy for the SD to show that my deductible was more than my medical bill.

A guy at work has a trampoline for the his kids, neighbor kid comes over to play (invited) falls and breaks his arm. His parents medical insurance company comes after the guys homeowners insurance company.

So it may not be the guy but his medical insurance that come knocking.

steve

 

[Henro]

<font color="blue">for what it is worth, this guy that broke his finger may not sue you at all. But his medical insurance (Blue Cross, Kaiser, etc.) may sue you, file a claim against your homeowners insurance. </font>

Why would one want to do THAT /forums/images/graemlins/confused.gif /forums/images/graemlins/shocked.gif when one does not even know if the finger is broke or not? It is all hearsay really, isn't it?

Until some kind of formal notice is given of the injury, why would anyone accept responsibiliy for the broken finger? How could one be sure it really happened on his property? Even if the finger was viewed and determined to be broken?

This is a sad place we live in if we have to worry like this about things that we don't really know even happened. And I grant you all that we do need to worry. Better stop now...starting to feel like what I want to say would be...DELETED! /forums/images/graemlins/blush.gif /forums/images/graemlins/blush.gif /forums/images/graemlins/blush.gif

 

[thcri]

</font><font color="blue" class="small">( Better stop now...starting to feel like what I want to say would be...DELETED! /forums/images/graemlins/blush.gif /forums/images/graemlins/blush.gif /forums/images/graemlins/blush.gif )</font>


Awww come on Henro, tell us how you really feel!! /forums/images/graemlins/grin.gif /forums/images/graemlins/grin.gif /forums/images/graemlins/smile.gif


just kiddin


murph

 

[Junkman]

If your employee did something wrong in the performance of his job, you corporate insurance would cover it. If you exceeded that and they went after you personally, then you personal umbrella insurance would not offer you any more protection. Your personal umbrella policy only covers you for your personal acts, that are not related to any business venture. What you have said is what I also thought until I spoke to the agent, who then confirmed this with the underwriting department of the insurance company. My personal umbrella doesn't cover anything business related under any circumstances. They suggested that I purchase a business umbrella policy to cover these events and add myself as an additional named insured to that policy. I tried to add my business as an additional named insured to my personal policy and was told that it couldn't be done. Your state might be different, so check with your agent to be certain......

 

[Junkman]

It is common for medical insurance to try to collect from third parties whenever possible. Since Mike didn't supply the fishing rod or reel, he has no liability. The person who was fishing owns all the equipment and there for is responsible for all injuries caused by that rod and reel. Mike only provided the water and fish. He has no control over any act of the people fishing on the land. In fact, Mike doesn't own the water either. He only owns the land under the water. The state owns the water and fish. I don't want to get into this part of the law any further, but it is commonly accepted that you can only keep people off the land that is at the waters edge, but they can row there boat right up to that edge and they are not trespassers even if you own the land under the water. Land and water issues are very complicated, so anyone that cares to go into this further is welcome to do so, but I don't have the patience to do that much typing. Also, before anyone goes into the fishing license issues, you as the land owner don't need a fishing license to fish on your own land, but in most states, you do need one if you don't own the land that you are standing on while fishing. If you ask me, the fishermen's best claim is against the fish itself. /forums/images/graemlins/grin.gif

 

[Henro]

<font color="blue"> Since Mike didn't supply the fishing rod or reel, he has no liability. </font>

Not to complicate the issue, but what if the person slipped on the bank, and it was not the rod, reel or anything he brought that caused the injury.

What if it was a hole or soft spot caused by that guest of Mike's that he was trying to catch last week?

The whole issue is distasteful to me personally, but we live in the world we live in... /forums/images/graemlins/frown.gif

 

[goodoleboy]

Ive read that some states have a law that protects land owners from people from people who are sportsman. IS your state one of them? ID find that out also and I would be carful what you say to your friend while on the phone from now on if your really fear a lawsuit.

Dang that must have been one heck of a fish.

 

[DannyD]

When my father was alive and worked on lawnmowers after retirement one of his customers came by with a tiller. Dad got it going and the guy grabbed the belts, causing major damage to his finger (belts and pulleys win against flesh). Never heard a word from it.

When Dad pulled out in front of a lady in a car, got hit broadside, the lady who got out of her car, to check it out, then sued dad's insurance for 60K. No big deal insurance paid for her to go away. Funny thing was, she had NO insurance, in a car her kid had rented and she was not listed as driver, and she had NO license to drive............she also went to the emergency room.........after she got out of the car to check her car........... This woman should have been locked up, instead she got paid.

 

[Junkman]

Sometimes the insurance companies find it less expensive to give a token amount to the claimant, rather than fight the claim. I don't agree with this attitude, but it is a business decision. Most states allow the insurance companies rate increases based on the amount of claims paid and profits retained. Therefore, it isn't a wise decision on there part to fight the claimant since they will recoup that money 100 fold in increased revenue the following year in premium increases. We all pay for the losses in higher premiums. Most insurance companies never loose money unless there is a catastrophic event that they have no control over, such as a hurricane or tornado that causes untold damage in a geographical location where the insurance company has many policy holders. Florida last fall was one of these places as an example.