ExpertLaw.com Forums

Who is Responsible when a Hazard is Created

Printable View

  • 11-16-2011, 07:59 AM
    Grudo
    Who is Responsible when a Hazard is Created
    My question involves a consumer law issue in the State of: MASSACHUSETTS

    Our condo association, via our manager, hired an independent contractor to shovel our roof earlier this year. In their haste to get paid, the contractor simply dumped everything from the roof onto each unit owner's back deck, creating a 5ft wall of snow and ice blocking our sliding doors. Since the sliding door is the only other means of egress besides the front door, this created a fire hazard. I was eventually forced to call our local fire department to get relief, and they agreed that this was indeed a fire hazard and contacted the property manager, who in turn sent his own men to clear the decks. I later discovered that the property manager billed our association thousands of dollars to return and compete this work. My question, because the original contractor created a code-violating condition by blocking our means of egress, were they not responsible to remedy? Is it lawful for our association to be billed for the clearing of the decks? Thank you for reading.
  • 11-16-2011, 03:06 PM
    jk
    Re: Who is Responsible when a Hazard is Created
    It isn't because the guys created a hazard that makes any difference.

    Basically, you would have to find out what the contractor was hired to do. If he was hired to simply shovel the snow off the roof without any regard as to where is got dumped, then it was proper to pay them to come and clean your patios. If the contractor was hired to shovel the snow off the roof with specific direction as to what to do with the snow, and that didn't include dumping it on your patio, then he should not have been paid to come back and clean up.
  • 11-16-2011, 04:47 PM
    Grudo
    Re: Who is Responsible when a Hazard is Created
    Ok, lets just assume the agreement was to simply "dump the snow anywhere you please." So they dump it on the deck, blocking the slider, and go home. Lets also assume that the next day my house catches fire and I can't reach the front door. As I climb over the wall of snow to escape through my slider, I slip, crack my head, and fall unconscious, dying in the blaze. Would the fact that the agreement only required the contractor to carelessly dump the snow protect them from liability? In other words, do they not have a duty of care to avoid such a hazard regardless of the agreement?
  • 11-16-2011, 05:36 PM
    jk
    Re: Who is Responsible when a Hazard is Created
    They might have some liability for your injury but that does not require them to remove the hazard, especially without payment for the work.

    Think about it this way:

    a construction crew is hired to tear up a road so some new water lines can be run across the road. Now, if they are hired to make the ditch across the road and nothing else, are the liable for filling in the ditch later because it is a hazard to drivers? Of course not. They are required to do what they were hire for, nothing more. Can they be found liable if somebody is injured due to their excavation? Possibly but that still does not mean they are required to fill in the hole in the road.
  • 11-19-2011, 05:24 PM
    Grudo
    Re: Who is Responsible when a Hazard is Created
    Did a little research and answered my own question. Sorry, jk, but you were wrong on this one...

    MGL Chapter 142A, Section 17 states: "The following acts are prohibited by contractors or subcontractors: violation of the building laws of the commonwealth or of any political subdivision thereof" and "Violations of any of the provisions of this chapter shall constitute an unfair and deceptive act under the provisions of Chapter 93A" (Chapter 93A being Massachusetts' Consumer Protection Act, which provides relief and/or treble damages for such acts).

    According to Mass building code, specifically the Board of Fire Prevention Regulations 527 CMR, Section 10.03.13, "The means of egress from each part of the building, including stairways, egress doors... shall at all times be maintained in a safe condition and shall be available for immediate use and free of all obstructions." Further, "All exterior stairways and fire escapes shall be kept free of snow and ice"

    So it seems pretty clear that the contractor should have been put on notice of 93A by the property manager, with a demand for relief by means of clearing the obstruction from the egress doors. Rather, management took the situation as an opportunity to gouge the association of several thousand dollars by clearing the decks themselves and billing us internally.
  • 11-19-2011, 06:35 PM
    jk
    Re: Who is Responsible when a Hazard is Created
    you go ahead and chase them for the money they illegally took from you then and let me know how that turns out but while you are off chasing rainbows:


    Quote:

    So it seems pretty clear that the contractor should have been put on notice of 93A by the property manager, with a demand for relief by means of clearing the obstruction from the egress doors.
    It doesn't make any difference if the contractor or the management remedied the situation.

    Ya see, even if your argument is correct, it still does not mean it would get done for free. Whoever performed the service is due payment for those services so in the end, you would have paid for it regardless of who did it. Why you believe there should be no charge for the work is beyond me. If the management demanded the snow removal contractor clear the decks, (with the assumption the directive previously was to dump the snow anywhere), the contractor would have every right to demand payment for the additional work.

    The only argument you would have to dispute the money you were charged would be if the management claims the snow removal contractor did not fulfill his contract and the hiring entity is due a partial refund to cover the services that had to be hired out to complete. If that is the case, chase after the management group since that is who the bad guy is in this situation.

    So no, I am not wrong in this one...

    you don't get work done for free and that is what I have maintained throughout this thread.
  • 11-19-2011, 10:41 PM
    Grudo
    Re: Who is Responsible when a Hazard is Created
    You're awfully upset about this. It's probably a good thing you're a professional forum poster and not a real attorney.

    Anyway, I didn't post to argue with you, just to inform anyone else who may be following this thread. They would be wise to heed the disclaimer in your signature.
  • 11-20-2011, 04:37 AM
    Mr. Knowitall
    Re: Who is Responsible when a Hazard is Created
    Nobody is upset here but, it would seem, you.
    Quote:

    Quoting Grudo
    View Post
    MGL Chapter 142A, Section 17 states: "The following acts are prohibited by contractors or subcontractors: violation of the building laws of the commonwealth or of any political subdivision thereof" and "Violations of any of the provisions of this chapter shall constitute an unfair and deceptive act under the provisions of Chapter 93A" (Chapter 93A being Massachusetts' Consumer Protection Act, which provides relief and/or treble damages for such acts).

    You don't mention any violation of Chapter 142A. Also, this was not residential contracting ("the reconstruction, alteration, renovation, repair, modernization, conversion, improvement, removal, or demolition, or the construction of an addition to any pre-existing owner occupied building containing at least one but not more than four dwelling units"), it was snow removal.
    Quote:

    Quoting Grudo
    According to Mass building code, specifically the Board of Fire Prevention Regulations 527 CMR, Section 10.03.13, "The means of egress from each part of the building, including stairways, egress doors... shall at all times be maintained in a safe condition and shall be available for immediate use and free of all obstructions." Further, "All exterior stairways and fire escapes shall be kept free of snow and ice"

    Which means, after the COA hired an agent to remove snow in a manner that created a temporary obstruction, it had a duty to remove the obstruction / ice / snow. Which it did. You don't get to hire somebody to do half of a job, then say "By following my instructions and completing the contract to the letter you created a hazard, so you have to do the rest for free."

    Your argument would be a bit like hiring a cement contractor to pour a foundation for a new home, then asking him why the electrical isn't up to code, and when the house will be finished so that you can move in. Yes, all of that must be done before you move in, but it's not that contractor's obligation to perform any of the additional services it would take to complete your home and get it up to code.
All times are GMT -7. The time now is 03:08 PM.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.4
Copyright © 2023 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.
Copyright © 2004 - 2018 ExpertLaw.com, All Rights Reserved