|
Posted by PeterD on May 24, 2009, 5:39 pm
On Sun, 24 May 2009 14:13:57 -0700 (PDT), RicodJour
>> on 5/24/2009 3:48 PM (ET) Tim wrote the following:
>> > I am asking this one for a friend. He is a bit confused ...
>> > My buddy does insurance work. State Farm (for example), hires him to
>> > do work for them and he fixes the bathroom of a homeowner. The work
>> > was authorized by the insurance. The insurance company thought the
>> > work was great, and they paid him. The homeowner thought they should
>> > get more, and they have threatened to file a complaint unless he gives
>> > them a bunch more (free) work. He has no contract with the homeowner
>> > at all. Nothing. The homeowner didn't hire him, and had no say in what
>> > was done, but they seem bound and determined to get what they want,
>> > even if they have to lie to get it. Can the homeowner file a complaint
>> > even if they didn't hire him? The work is good, this just a classic
>> > shakedown.
>> The homeowner did not pay him, the insurance company did. The Insurance
>> company hired him to do the work. The homeowner's grievance is with the
>> insurance company.
>Right, but a weaselly homeowner would complain to the contractor
>licensing board anyway.
They are not party to the contract, and the licensing board will
dismiss their claim. (Generally...)
> They're looking to squeeze out some free
>work, they don't care how the squeezing gets done.
The homeowner could be found liable for the contractor's expenses in
defending himself from such an action if they are not careful. They'd
be well advised to hire an attorney first, and listen to what he has
to say.
> From personal
>experience I know that a lying homeowner can withhold money, complain
>to a licensing board, and when the licensing board finds out that the
>contractor did nothing wrong, the board can't do anything to force the
>owner to pony up the money. They just close the case as unresolved.
And there are both regular court, and small claims court. That is what
*they* are there for, not the licensing board who have NO power to
force a party to pay the contractor.
>I don't know the OP's specifics and what the contractor licensing
>board's requirements for filing a grievance are. Best for the
>contractor to speak to the contractor licensing board in person and
>explain the situation and ask for guidance.
Good idea.
>This is where an indemnification clause in the contractor's contract
>with the insurance company would be useful. Then again the insurance
>company very possibly would refuse to sign such a contract. Rock and
>a hard place.
Perhaps not. Ideally the homeowner should have been party to the
contract, and I'm amazed that they were not. Not a good insurance
company, but then again we don't know the details at all.
It is possible the homeowner does have a valid complaint, it is just
that they were left out of the loop (intentionally, most likely by the
insurance company!) to prevent this from happening.
>R
| 
Yahoo! 
Google 
Windows Live 
del.icio.us 
digg 
Netscape 
XML Sitemap
> My buddy does insurance work. State Farm (for example), hires him to
> do work for them and he fixes the bathroom of a homeowner. The work
> was authorized by the insurance. The insurance company thought the
> work was great, and they paid him. The homeowner thought they should
> get more, and they have threatened to file a complaint unless he gives
> them a bunch more (free) work. He has no contract with the homeowner
> at all. Nothing. The homeowner didn't hire him, and had no say in what
> was done, but they seem bound and determined to get what they want,
> even if they have to lie to get it. Can the homeowner file a complaint
> even if they didn't hire him? The work is good, this just a classic
> shakedown.
> Tim