Liability associated with cabling?

banjo

banjo

Location
rhode island
I have a job this weekend cabling and bracing a large norway maple that has a pretty big crack in it. My problem is as follows...the people actually hiring me for this job run a small city farm and they love the tree. Also, the neighbors are chipping in because they too love the tree. The guy who actually owns the tree is a slum lord and seems to be very eager to sue people. He actually wanted me to provide a written guarantee signed by three lawyers saying that the tree would never fall. (I respectfully declined). Anyway this man is not actually paying for the work at all but I'm just wondering if something happens to this tree after I do the work am I still liable?? Should I provide some kind of written disclaimer??? What do you think?
 
My humble advice... Back off completely. This scenario smells fishy all the way.

Would you be a happy man If you did the job, or would you be a less happy man if you stepped aside?

In the nine years that I have my own comp I had to hand over a written statement of my insurance company to state that I was insured for 5.000.000 Euro's per incident once.

What you had to do (provide a written guarantee signed by three lawyers saying that the tree would never fall) is bonkers.

IMO this is a job that's in the same corner as working for a neighbor cutting the branches that are over his property. In that case I tell the neighbor to give my phone number to the tree owner so he can contact me to have the work done.

If you want to continue with this job, than don't, under no circumstance, give them the idea that you can save the tree 100% guaranteed (look what Katrina did).
But reducing a crown and putting in some cabling can give them a 99,9% guarantee. That's more than they could wish for when you are working with living matter.

Don't forget banjo, I am an arb from Europa (Holland) so my opinion is mine and there is probably a lot of American legal mumbo jumbo that I don't even know of.
 
I have been very specific with the property owner about NOT being able to provide a guarantee. I have only told them that the proposed work would make the tree safer than it is right now. For the record, mine is not the only opinion given on this matter.
 
It is never good to use the word 'safe' when trees are involved. The only way to make a tree safe is to remove it. A better, more accepted, thought is to talk about 'risk management'.

Here is a good book that addresses this issue.

http://www.na.fs.fed.us/spfo/pubs/uf/utrmm/

There is a chapter in the book on cabling. I was asked to write that chapter and I wrote about how cabling is as routine a part of tree care and risk management as any other practice.

If the owner wants those sorts of guarantees I would be very unlikely to take on the job. He is out of touch with the realities of the world, not just the tree world.
 
[ QUOTE ]
If the owner wants those sorts of guarantees I would be very unlikely to take on the job. He is out of touch with the realities of the world, not just the tree world.

[/ QUOTE ]

That's it Tom, thank you. Working in a tree for someone like that would make me 'look over my shoulder' all the time.
 
[ QUOTE ]
The only safe tree is a stump.

[/ QUOTE ]

HA HA!

I used to say that too. Until a client in New Hope showed me the nasty scar that he got when he was chopping out a stump. The ax bounced out and he whacked himself...ugly scar...
 
Great link Tom, appreciate it.

jp
grin.gif
 
Not to hijack this thread in anyway but, I guess my question would be how many people here put in writing that they inspect an installed cable at certain intervals or set up a program with the client to do so? Or is it common practice for most to just install one then forget about it, maybe check on it when your back to prune that tree again?
 
When cabling, I charge FOR THE SECOND INSPECTION...and third if they'll pay for that. It says in the paper work that I will climb the tree and inspect the hardware 2 years after. If I leave, I will make arrangements to have someone else do it, or have the money returned to them.

Silly- I know- but it shows them the importance of regular follow up inspections.

love
nick
 
That's the point where I often hand-off a free one paragraph arborist report to one of the parties, so that some guy like that ends up with an announcement of the hazard - signed in writing.

Leaving him as the target if something happens.
 
[ QUOTE ]
My humble advice... Back off completely. This scenario smells fishy all the way.


[/ QUOTE ]

I agree. Walk away from this one fast.
 
Liability always falls back to reasonableness. What would a reasonable person do. Would a reasonable "qualified" arborist prune and cable the tree, would a reasonable arborist inspect the tree on a regular basis, would a reasonable arborist prune and cable the tree in the manner you did and would a reasonable arborist bolt the tree also.

Beyond that the law can get very murky. For example somebody has paid for the work to be done, they therefor know there was a problem, it was corrected and that hardware exists, they take on responsibility. Manufacturers, salesman and sellers take on responsibility for the product. If you notify the person inspections must be done you have acknowledged a limitation with the system but at the same time but more burden on the owner.

As for written disclaimers you can write all you want but you must still act in a reasonable way. You can not have your liability signed off if you know you are doing something wrong or incorrectly.

As for banjo's specific case he knows the answer. It does not have to do with liability it has to do with working for a questionable character.
 
[ QUOTE ]
I have a job this weekend cabling and bracing a large norway maple that has a pretty big crack in it. My problem is as follows...the people actually hiring me for this job run a small city farm and they love the tree. Also, the neighbors are chipping in because they too love the tree. The guy who actually owns the tree is a slum lord and seems to be very eager to sue people. He actually wanted me to provide a written guarantee signed by three lawyers saying that the tree would never fall. (I respectfully declined). Anyway this man is not actually paying for the work at all but I'm just wondering if something happens to this tree after I do the work am I still liable?? Should I provide some kind of written disclaimer??? What do you think?

[/ QUOTE ]


Recommend they contact your worst enemy and RUNAWAY!
 
any sort of cabling and bracing work is admitting the tree has a fault.a cable can offer support but i would never claim 100% reliabilty and safety in installing one.......sadly from my experience where customers want such guarantee the only option really is felling.
 
I don't see any liability issue with cabling a tree whatsoever.

When you cable a tree according to industry best standards, you are displaying that you have tried to make it safer, not more hazardous.

I would happily cable any tree without thinking of liability.
 
Being antagonistic, it could be argued that if a tree is cabled, you are comfirming the fact that it has either potential, or actual structural flaws. Therefore is inherantly unsafe.

Both sides of the argument hold merrit, in this case where the landowner is seeking to sue i'd just turn tail and run. I do not doubt your ability or intentions, but being dragged through a legal system personally would spoil my week for sure!
 
I see many problems looking at the situation as a whole. You have someone else paying for the work on an unstable property owner that runs a questionable housing situation.

Seems to me it is better money spent to walk than have this one knock on your door in a few years.

Just my 2 cents.
 
[ QUOTE ]
Being antagonistic, it could be argued that if a tree is cabled, you are comfirming the fact that it has either potential, or actual structural flaws. Therefore is inherantly unsafe.

[/ QUOTE ]

I'm sorry, but I won't accept that arguement.

If a tree is cabled it is because a risk assessment has been carried out by a suitably qualified professional and the best option to reduce the risk of failure is the installation of a cabling system.

It goes without saying that you are confirming 'either potential, or actual structural flaws' That is your job as an arborist!

It's what you do next that's important....leave the tree, remove the tree or try and lengthen the useful life of the tree by installing a cable.

[ QUOTE ]

Both sides of the argument hold merrit, in this case where the landowner is seeking to sue i'd just turn tail and run. I do not doubt your ability or intentions, but being dragged through a legal system personally would spoil my week for sure!

[/ QUOTE ]

The landowner in this case does not want to pay for the tree removal, but he has spotted an opportunity to try and displace liability for the tree onto a third party(banjo)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

New threads New posts

Kask Stihl NORTHEASTERN Arborists Wesspur TreeStuff.com Teufelberger Westminster X-Rigging Teufelberger
Back
Top Bottom