Scumandvillany t1_j2byv3h wrote
When a developer puts a shovel into your land without permission you step the fuck outside and tell 'em to get the fuck off your lawn. If they don't, you call the police. It sucks, but then you gotta get a lawyer.
There's a such thing as a construction easement, and you gotta get in the face of workers and the developers early on in the process, and demand $$ for any incursions into your property. She could have easily demanded thousands beforehand. Now she'll spend thousands on a lawyer too. I've heard of similar easements costing 10k or more. She's got much more than that in damage now, but it will cost here as much money to a lawyer to recoup.
felisverde t1_j2dc9i3 wrote
& the police don't do shit, they tell you to call L&I, who don't do shit, they tell you you have to go before the zoning board, etc...who don't do shit, & so on & so on & so on . & By the time all these city agencies who are supposed to be protecting you are done giving you the runaround, the contractor/developers are done doing whatever shit they were doing that they shouldn't have been doing in the 1st place & you & your property are screwed. Wanna guess how I know??
Scumandvillany t1_j2dhzw9 wrote
I would bet you didn't go outside and tell them to fuck off your land tho
William_d7 t1_j2dstjl wrote
I’ll bet he did.
This happened to my neighbor this year.
He tries to get a formal agreement in place before letting contractors on his land, developers don’t want to sign anything.
Workers just start coming onto his property/roof. Neighbor tells them to get off, workers pretend not to know English. Neighbor calls police, police tell him he should just let them finish the work. Neighbor says not without agreement in place. Workers try to time future trespassing when neighbor’s car isn’t around. Neighbor calls police again several times but eventually they stop showing up.
felisverde t1_j2fdddv wrote
Yup. Or they'll time their work for holidays, when city inspectors' offices are closed-they've done that on multiple properties around here. By the time anyone gets around to doing anything their work is pretty much done.
felisverde t1_j2fd0h3 wrote
Really? I lost track of how many times I went out & lost my shit on those assholes. (As well as all the other crap you're supposed to do) & yet here I am w/a cracked foundation, front steps, doors & windows that needed to be reset, etc...& thanks to city laws at that time, no recourse. But please, do go on & tell me all about my experience w/this shit...
Scumandvillany t1_j2fe3qj wrote
I'm sorry you went thru this, really. I'm talking more about actual encroachment onto your property, not so much structural damage of an existing structure that results from construction next door.
felisverde t1_j2fjl2g wrote
I live in a row home. I have had contractors & developers encroach onto my property, w/out permission, more times than I can count..guys on my roof from both sides, guys in our yard from the back & both sides, huge construction vehicles driving over or parking on my sidewalk out front, etc...etc...etc....& If lifting & underpinning your house & foundation WITH YOU IN IT FFS, doesn't count as 'encroaching' on your property, then I just don't know wth does. (& No, I absolutely am not kidding)
felisverde t1_j2fkm6f wrote
Oh, another favorite..taking my scaffolding ladder off of MY side roof (I had been out there doing some siding repairs) that they had never asked or had permission to be on & putting it in the yard of the house they were working on, & the owner pulling the whole she thought it was theirs b/s & didn't have them put it back, I just had it handed back over my yard wall. Contactors & developers do whatever tf they want to do here, basically b/c they know they can & will get away w/it. The city only protects property owners while they're places are under development. After that, you're on your own.
Smightmite t1_j2c17vn wrote
I mean the construction company will be liable for her lawyer and court fees after she wins
Scumandvillany t1_j2c1zmw wrote
Not exactly how it works. You'd think so, but only if it goes to trial, and believe it or not, trial can cost 30k. Hell the lead up to trial can cost 30k. I'm familiar with a similar case, but more damage, lawyers racked up 50k in the year of litigation. Parties agreed to settle for 100k. Person took home 50k. If it had gone to trial, would have cost even more, but there's no guarantee a jury would award that much.
Vast majority of these cases are settled.
Smightmite t1_j2c24al wrote
Interesting thank you for clarifying!
Scumandvillany t1_j2c2uzz wrote
The only reason this person walked away with 50k is that he was willing to spend 50k, and had it to spend. It sucks. This is why you gotta get ahead of it at.
Fuckin lawyers. Pretrial motions, motions in limine, motions to dismiss, expert witnesses, depositions, discovery, statements of fact, opposing statements of fact, motions upon motions, it adds up. A civil case right now can take years to get to trial.
IANAL
[deleted] t1_j2dme3o wrote
[removed]
usernametakensofme t1_j2cosf2 wrote
Settled to account for these costs. She will come away, if not whole, better off. The Developers insurance will pay but it may take time.
MrMcFunStuff t1_j2cpyrv wrote
They’re probably a LLC that’ll just fold at the first sign of trouble and nobody will be held accountable.
lucascorso21 t1_j2dhmmu wrote
That practice doesn’t really work anymore.
wawa2563 t1_j2dkjwy wrote
All ears/eyes. Tell us why.
eapocalypse t1_j2dm9lu wrote
I mean even if they do their liability insurance will still be on the hook. It really only serves to protect the business owners and if they didn't do anything fraudulent then you can't pierce the veil and go after them anyway
lucascorso21 t1_j2dsn4l wrote
Right, if they are a legitimate business, they will have the insurance and just pay the claim out.
If they involved in fraud/negligence/reckless/illegal acts, then the LLC doesn’t protect them anyway.
lucascorso21 t1_j2dsg1g wrote
Because larger LLCs, or those simply operating like a legit business, will carry the appropriate liability insurance in the event that it’s employees screw up or when accidents happen. That’s extremely common, a best practice, and the typical result to settle the claim.
Smaller LLCs, or ones that are badly managed, will be personally involved in operations including any negligent/fraudulent/illegal actions. That involvement negates the standard LLC protections and exposes the ownership to individual liability. You also run into situations where a member claims they weren’t “directly” involved in X matter, but somehow their specific LLCs are constantly being sued for the above issues. A strong argument to make and one that leads to a settlement in order to head off the much larger ramifications.
There’s also a crap ton of legislation coming down at a federal level which is focused on improving the transparency of beneficial ownership, including for LLCs, because such business setups are constantly used for financial crimes.
throwawaythedo t1_j2d7kj0 wrote
Civil Lit attorneys mostly use a contingency contract. If there is a settlement, the attorney takes what they said they’d charge in the contract, and the client gets the rest. But, the client does not spend a dime to retain, have representation, court fees, etc. The firm puts up all this money with the hopes that they’ll win a profit.
If no settlement is agreed upon and it goes to trial, the attorney could lose quite a bit. I served on a civil jury where the cost for a forensic actuary alone was 10k/day. They were suing for millions and we awarded him nothing (he was a lying mfer). His attorneys were out quite a bit of money. But, shame on them for turning down the settlement, agreeing to trial bc they genuinely thought this guy was going to get sympathy from the jury.
eapocalypse t1_j2dm0hz wrote
Strictly speaking as soon as lawyers are involved the construction companies insurance will get legally involved and start making legitimate settlement offers many of which will likely cover the damage plus lawyer fees.
Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments