How would you interpret this clause re: contractor responsibility for damage?

[Anonymous]

I’m preparing to get new windows, and in the contract for an installer I’m considering, it says that “contractor shall not be responsible for pre-existing conditions of the home, nor liable for claims of incidental or consequential damage.”

I get the part about the pre-existing conditions, but how am I supposed to interpret the part about damage? Would you take this to mean that if a worker breaks one of the windows on the way out, or accidentally burns down my house, or does some other damage to my home whether intentional or not, that the contractor bears no responsibility for the damage? That’s how I’m reading it, but it’s hard to imagine how anyone would agree to a clause like this.

What do you think? Is this a typical clause for a contractor to put in a contract? Would appreciate anyone’s insight or interpretation. Other than this I like this contractor very much, but am reluctant to sign the contract given this clause.

[Anonymous]

Yea, that’s a no. Strike the last part or find a new contractor. They don’t get to damage your home and then pretend it’s not their responsibility. That’s why they have insurance. Unless this person does not in which case you should definitely run away.

[Anonymous]

Do not use this person.

[Anonymous]

He’s not paying for the mink coat you said that water damage because the window leaked.

He’s not paying to rebuild the front wall of your house because the window leaked.

He’s not putting you up at the Sagamore Pendry for 10 nights because the windows are drafty.

He’s not paying to rebuild the front wall of your house because upon opening it he discovered it’s nothing but Legos and popsicle sticks.


None of his language in the fine print would get him out of liability in the event of a defect in workmanship, there’s no signing that away, as you collect your estimates you will find very similar wording if not exactly that wording on the others; if you don’t see it then the contractors don’t care, have no business skills or don’t have a pot to p in so it doesn’t matter anyway.


In the event of an issue you call your insurance company, your insurance company makes you whole then subrogates the claim onto the contractor either via a direct demand or a lawsuit.

If the window installer has a fairly prominent online presence with lots of reviews they would never allow an unhappy customer, I wouldn’t worry about it and I would just buy the windows.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:
In the event of an issue you call your insurance company, your insurance company makes you whole then subrogates the claim onto the contractor either via a direct demand or a lawsuit.

Read your policy. Most policies specifically exclude construction related damage.

Anonymous wrote:
If the window installer has a fairly prominent online presence with lots of reviews they would never allow an unhappy customer, I wouldn’t worry about it and I would just buy the windows.

In my experience the more a company markets the shadier they are. Anything beyond a cursory online presence is a red flag.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
In the event of an issue you call your insurance company, your insurance company makes you whole then subrogates the claim onto the contractor either via a direct demand or a lawsuit.

Read your policy. Most policies specifically exclude construction related damage.

Anonymous wrote:
If the window installer has a fairly prominent online presence with lots of reviews they would never allow an unhappy customer, I wouldn’t worry about it and I would just buy the windows.

In my experience the more a company markets the shadier they are. Anything beyond a cursory online presence is a red flag.

So true.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:He’s not paying for the mink coat you said that water damage because the window leaked.

He’s not paying to rebuild the front wall of your house because the window leaked.

He’s not putting you up at the Sagamore Pendry for 10 nights because the windows are drafty.

He’s not paying to rebuild the front wall of your house because upon opening it he discovered it’s nothing but Legos and popsicle sticks.


None of his language in the fine print would get him out of liability in the event of a defect in workmanship, there’s no signing that away, as you collect your estimates you will find very similar wording if not exactly that wording on the others; if you don’t see it then the contractors don’t care, have no business skills or don’t have a pot to p in so it doesn’t matter anyway.


In the event of an issue you call your insurance company, your insurance company makes you whole then subrogates the claim onto the contractor either via a direct demand or a lawsuit.

If the window installer has a fairly prominent online presence with lots of reviews they would never allow an unhappy customer, I wouldn’t worry about it and I would just buy the windows.

LOL at the window company shill.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:He’s not paying for the mink coat you said that water damage because the window leaked.

He’s not paying to rebuild the front wall of your house because the window leaked.

He’s not putting you up at the Sagamore Pendry for 10 nights because the windows are drafty.

He’s not paying to rebuild the front wall of your house because upon opening it he discovered it’s nothing but Legos and popsicle sticks.


None of his language in the fine print would get him out of liability in the event of a defect in workmanship, there’s no signing that away, as you collect your estimates you will find very similar wording if not exactly that wording on the others; if you don’t see it then the contractors don’t care, have no business skills or don’t have a pot to p in so it doesn’t matter anyway.


In the event of an issue you call your insurance company, your insurance company makes you whole then subrogates the claim onto the contractor either via a direct demand or a lawsuit.

If the window installer has a fairly prominent online presence with lots of reviews they would never allow an unhappy customer, I wouldn’t worry about it and I would just buy the windows.

LOL. Stick to Baltimore.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:He’s not paying for the mink coat you said that water damage because the window leaked.

He should.

Anonymous wrote:
He’s not paying to rebuild the front wall of your house because the window leaked.

If the leaking caused the framing to rot, he should

Anonymous wrote:
He’s not putting you up at the Sagamore Pendry for 10 nights because the windows are drafty.

He should

Anonymous wrote:
He’s not paying to rebuild the front wall of your house because upon opening it he discovered it’s nothing but Legos and popsicle sticks.

This one is on the homeowner.

Anonymous wrote:

None of his language in the fine print would get him out of liability in the event of a defect in workmanship, there’s no signing that away, as you collect your estimates you will find very similar wording if not exactly that wording on the others; if you don’t see it then the contractors don’t care, have no business skills or don’t have a pot to p in so it doesn’t matter anyway.

This is a really strange thing to say. If you install a window, and it leaks, that's a defect in workmanship. There is no "acceptable" level of leaking, other than none.