responsibility

[Tim]

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.

Tim

[willshak]

on 5/24/2009 3:48 PM (ET) Tim wrote the following:

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.

[RicodJour]

Right, but a weaselly homeowner would complain to the contractor licensing board anyway. They're looking to squeeze out some free work, they don't care how the squeezing gets done. 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.

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.

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.

R

[PeterD]

They are not party to the contract, and the licensing board will dismiss their claim. (Generally...)

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.

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.

Good idea.

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.

[Tim]

I had the sinking feeling that the homeowner could say that the contract was oral and the homeowner paid the contrator in cash to do extra work and the contractor didn't do it. It's like when I found out that whatever a contractor says is under penalty of perjury but not the homeowner. So basically, I could say that I hired Bill in Hamptonburgh, NY to remodel my bathroom and I paid him $25,000 in cash (because he only accepts cash) and when he didn't do it, I filed a complaint. Bill says he doesn't know what I am talking about, I swear up and down he STOLE MY MONEY. The problem, naturally, is how does Bill prove he didn't do it? Contractors boards don't care much about how many nails you put in a Simpson clip, they care more about contracts and how consumers are treated. A mean contractor like Bill (just kidding Bill) stole this poor homeowner's money. He says he didn't do it, but as we all know, contractors are all lying, cheating bad guys. Rock and a hard place.

[willshak]

on 5/24/2009 5:57 PM (ET) Tim wrote the following:

I still deny I didn't take his money. You can ask my brother-in-law, who I gave half the money to... :-P

[PeterD]

Thank you for saying 'oral' and not saying 'verbal'! (All contracts are verbal, verbal means 'of words'!)

And an oral contract is worth every cent of the paper it was writtin on! IOW, it is a meaningless concept in this case. Again, I suspect a licensing board would say "sorry..." to the homeowner.

And you the customer now understand the value of a written contract, and a receipt for the cash! And if that Bill guy won't do either, he's one to give a wide miss to!

Absolutely. Without a (written) contract, it is a case of 'He said, she said'!

Bill's like that!

[PeterD]

Give me half your brother-in-law's share, and I'll agree with you too!

Give me all, and I'll take care of your 'brother-in-law' so he doesn't need any future payoffs.

BTW, I to have a brother-in-law, wanna trade 'em?

[willshak]

on 5/25/2009 8:55 AM (ET) PeterD wrote the following:

Actually, No. I have the best brother-in-law (wife's brother). He's funny. He never bothers me or borrows tools. I almost have to beg him to come and visit and he only lives 35 minutes away.

[Stars]

Why are Spamming here?

[ransley]

First off this is one side of the story from a guy thats lying in my opinion, what 3rd party would say " even if they have to lie to get it". And none of my friends would write this for me. So who knows , maybe the HO should have gotten something that someone is trying to get out of, we all know insurance companies honor all true claims, dont we.

[RicodJour]

If you had checked the OP's posting history before writing the above, you would probably change your opinion. I have no idea what the contractor friend/owner/insurance company's story is, but the OP is a square shooter.

R