Towertalk
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [TowerTalk] preformed gripsTo

To: towertalk@contesting.com
Subject: Re: [TowerTalk] preformed gripsTo
From: Jim Lux <jimlux@earthlink.net>
Date: Fri, 25 Nov 2011 08:03:08 -0800
List-post: <towertalk@contesting.com">mailto:towertalk@contesting.com>
On 11/24/11 7:13 PM, Kevin's Mail wrote:
> It gives the insurance company a real good excuse not to pay the claim.
>
> I can rewire my house to my hearts content. If I shortcut things, don't get 
> an inspection and the house burns because of my creative wiring should I 
> really expect the insurance company to cover the loss?
>


That's a very tricky legal issue.  Sure, the insurance company *might* 
be able to avoid paying the claim, but there's an awful lot of 
unpermitted work done on an awful lot of houses (otherwise, why would 
there be so many "after the fact" permits issued when the house changes 
hands), and while the insurance company might be cranky and slow, I 
suspect they eventually pay.

What would the insurance company's standard of performance for rewiring be?

In California, it's legal for a homeowner to do their own work, so there 
couldn't be a "has to be done by licensed professional" standard.  I 
suspect most other states are the same.

It can't be whether a permit was issued. Building permits are more a 
revenue/land-use thing:  there's lots of work that doesn't require a 
permit and there's huge variation among localities in what requires a 
permit and what doesn't.

It can't be "code compliant", for a variety of reasons.  For instance, 
which code applies, when the house was built in 1930, and has had 
modifications over the last 80 years.  After the fact, it might be 
difficult to tell which changes were made when.  Besides, I'd venture 
that if you went to *any* house in my 15 year old tract, you'd find at 
least one code violation (in the same way that an officer making a 
traffic stop can always find some obscure thing wrong, if they want to)

I suspect that the *real standard* is something along the lines of 
"willful negligence and disregard for safety", i.e. you should have 
known better.  And since that's a sort of subjective thing, it would 
ultimately be up to some judge/jury to decide what the "reasonable 
person" would think.

_______________________________________________



_______________________________________________
TowerTalk mailing list
TowerTalk@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/towertalk

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>