So a company came out to work on our washer. They botched the job. This lead to a flood. While moving things out of the flooded areas, I earned myself what the doc says is a bulging disk. This has largely had me on my back for the last week.

My homeowners insurance is going to help with the property damages and they say they’ll go after the company that botched the repair. But they say they (the insurance co) don’t cover personal injury in this case. I've lost a week of work due to this, plus doc and therapy related fees, and am not supposed to lift anything more than about 5 lbs for the next several weeks. Lifting up to 40 lbs is a small part of the work I do and I’ll have to get help with occasions where this is necessary.

I was thinking of talking with an atty to see if I can make a case of damages in the form of lost income, medical expenses and added costs for the help I’ll need to have for my work. I would be asking the atty to go after the company that botched the repair job. I’m not sure how this may go. Would the fact that I have a history of back problems eliminate or otherwise lower the likelihood of success should I ask an atty to pursue this?

Anyone been through this kind of fiasco before?

TIA

Just because the insurance comapny doesn't cover personal injury doesn't mean that you don't have a case. The burden of proof however, rests on your proving that the injury wasn't pre-existent.

Insurance companies rarely work on your behalf...get your lawyer involved in this one.

__________________
2009 ML350 (106K) - Family vehicle
2001 CLK430 Cabriolet (80K) - Wife's car
2005 BMW 645CI (138K) - My daily driver
2016 Mustang (32K) - Daughter's car

In short--call an attorney. It will be a contingent fee case, so it won't cost you anything for a consult. You will have to prove that the company was actually negligent and that their negligence was the proximate cause of your injury. If you are in a comparative negligence state, you may be sol for negligently messing with the washer yourself and contributing to your injury. btw, if you have fixed your washer, you can possibly kiss your case goodbye--you will have to have an expert (another repairman) make a determination that the work they did was negligent. Shoddy work doesn't necessarily indicate negligence, either, and your word alone that it was bad won't make it negligence. Not a real good case, but they may be willing to settle for nuisance value since the damages are not that high at this point--but future meds may be an issue.

Pre-existing condition is only a defense--he has no burden of proof related to that.

Also, you MAY have a case against your homeowner's insurance company for bad faith denial of claim which could be big bucks

Talk to a lawyer in YOUR state and good luck.

Personal injury case is week. No one told you to move the items that caused your injury and their were probably other options available. If you don't know these options they will be explained to you by the Defense Attorney in court. This type of case is commonly called a nuisance lawsuit.

__________________
BENZ THERE DONE THAThttp://www.peachparts.com/shopforum/...c/progress.gif
15 VW Passat TDI
00 E420
98 E300 DT
97 E420 Donor Car - NEED PARTS? PM ME!
97 S500
97 E300D
86 Holden Jackaroo Turbo D
86 300SDL
(o\|/o)

The washer was covered by warranty and all the work was done by the company that offered the warranty.

I called a random local law company that I found on google and provided about the same info as above. I spoke with a legal assistant and she said that their co wouldn’t take the case. She hinted that proving that the flood was the cause for my back injury was a problem.

What type of proof would be needed? My SO was with me. She’s a nurse and could verify that I was injured by the event. Would I need beyond a doc’s assessment that the injury is real?

> No one told you to move the items that caused your injury and their were probably other options available.

I am not certain about this. The person with the insurance company that I spoke with moments after the event suggested moving things away from the flooded area. Even if she hadn’t suggested it, I would have as I think it normal for anyone to take steps to protect their property. We have lots of stuff stored in boxes in the area that was rained on by the flood. The only other option was to do nothing.

It was a sobering weekend. It seems odd that a company can perform an act of neglect which causes property loss and injury, acknowledge responsibility for the property loss but not the injury. Makes me wonder how many people are injured or even disabled by events such as this.

Thanks for the feedback.

sounds to me like it might be more work to prove your case then you missed during the week you were out of work. If I were you at this point, I would forget the legal action because if its not cut and dry its going to be a royal pain in the.... back... What I would do is contact the Better Business Bureau. the best way to hurt a business is in the pocketbook. call the manufacture of your washer who most likely does a lot of business with that company for warranty work and tell them what happened. if you were able to get the manufacture to drop their contract with that company they will loose more money then if you were to take them to court.

__________________

I probably will drop the pursuit for the physical damage. I think it is always useful to find out the reality of the situation and move foreword from there.

BTW, you, sir, have a fine sense of justice

Time marches on. The insurance company had a company out to do water damage mitigation. They lifted some of the carpets to blow air underneath. They pulled down parts of the ceiling underneath where the flood occurred to let it dry, ran multiple dehumidifiers and fans for up to 2 weeks, then replaced the drywall. One of their notes is that the carpet is delaminating. They recommend replacement. The insurance company concurs.

The upstairs is the living area. The floor is about 95% covered with carpet. The living room hallways and bedrooms are covered with the same carpet. The insurance company is saying that they will replace the carpet in the hall and living room but not the bedrooms. I’m worried about my house value being lowered due to their refusal to re-carpet the bedrooms. Is this reasonable on their part?

The insurance company says that they will subrogate to the company responsible for the damage. I’m wondering if it is time to bring a lawyer into this…

Any suggestions?

Why do you consider it unreasonable? I understand about making the carpet "match" where immediately visible, up to the door frames of enclosed rooms, but beyond that, you might be "unjustly enriched" by an entire re-carpeting. You may want to consider negotiating a deal with the carpet company to do the rest of the rooms.

I guess my analogy would be along the lines of . . . if you had a car accident, you might be entitled to a respray of the whole car to match the repaired fender(s) . . . but I wouldn't expect removing the engine so that the engine bay or interior of the trunk be painted to match.

Thanks for the feedback.

I don’t know what might be “normal” in this case. It is outside of my experience. The carpeted area is contiguous and changing part of it will look like crap. The house didn’t start with non matching carpet and I should not be obligated to accept that. Nor should I be obligated to pay to restore the damage done due to the negligence of another party.

Do you think a lawyer could help to get the carpets replaced beyond what the insurance company offered?

Cars and houses are different kinds of property so your analogy, while well intended, isn't valid.

Well you did ask for feedback from an attorney. I agree with MTI. Sounds like you're trying to milk it. Save it for when a real disaster happens.

__________________
You don't need a weatherman to know which way the wind blows - Robert A. Zimmerman