Contractor burst a tyre on my farm and is charging me with the bill ???

Fat Cant

Had a hedge cutting contractor in cutting hedges on my farm .
He was going in to cut a hedge in a small paddock ,I was with him and opened the gate to let him in and when he went out through the small gateway that does not get used a whole lot a piece of small angle iron sticking up that was in concrete stuck in his back Tyre and it punched it . He now is clamming that I have to pay for new tyre which is costing E1100
Who should have to pay this ?
The contractor said my insurance would cover it ?
I also rang the tyre shop and he told me it can be vulcanised but the contractor does not want this .

vincenzolorenzo

If i was the contractor I'd be looking for something off you as well, maybe not the full price but half anyway. Having a lump of angle iron sticking out of the ground in a gateway is just careless IMO.

ravima

ask you insurers if they will pay - whats the problem?

rancher

Fat Cant wrote: »

Had a hedge cutting contractor in cutting hedges on my farm .
He was going in to cut a hedge in a small paddock ,I was with him and opened the gate to let him in and when he went out through the small gateway that does not get used a whole lot a piece of small angle iron sticking up that was in concrete stuck in his back Tyre and it punched it . He now is clamming that I have to pay for new tyre which is costing E1100
Who should have to pay this ?
The contractor said my insurance would cover it ?
I also rang the tyre shop and he told me it can be vulcanised but the contractor does not want this .

You definitely are entitled to pay him, thats what you pay insurance for.... notify your insurer and tell the contractor to send in a claim, the assessor will give him what he's entitled to.

Tails142

What about the contractors own insurance?

Fat Cant

Tails142 wrote: »

What about the contractors own insurance?

This what I was thinking .

kirving

Doubt it would cover him for a punctured tyre. Angle iron shouln't really be sticking out of the ground, so I see why he's not happy. Also, repairing the tyre ins't really acceptable, it's not 100% perfect as it was when he drove in, and could be more likely to fail in the future. It's like sewing up a seatbelt.

BeeDI

Nothing worse than a contractor, who can't take a joke;)

bbam

In fairness would it not be the case that through your negligence his wheel was punctured, or at least partially your responsibility anyway... Would it not be fair for him to expect the entry to be clear from steel sticking from the ground... If it were a stone or natural object you might have some grounds to stand firm...

I think if in your position I'd be offering to go 50/50 and see from there...

bob charles

your fault buddy. pay the piper

mikemac1

Your fault I'm afraid

It's not a natural hazard or something that nobody could predict, it was just carelessness to leave it there

Inform your insurance company and let them deal with it

Fat Cant

He rang me up and told me that he needs his tractor tomorrow and wants a new tyre on it , i told him i reported it to my insurance and they will deal with it on monday. He insists that i hand him out a cheque tomorrow he also gave me a serious amount of cheek .

leg wax

your fault deal with it and get on, happened here 3 years ago contractor in spreading dung with a huge spreader burst tyre on a angle iron, my fault ,ins paid up for new tyre.

bbam

Fat Cant wrote: »

He rang me up and told me that he needs his tractor tomorrow and wants a new tyre on it , i told him i reported it to my insurance and they will deal with it on monday. He insists that i hand him out a cheque tomorrow he also gave me a serious amount of cheek .

While I would think its your responsibility I wouldn't be taking any cheek or bad manners...
You've offered to put it through your insurance, fair play.. Unless it's ripped to shreds he should have a repair done while he waits for the settlement...

If he continues with crap, give him the road !! (preferably through a clear entry :P)

Nobbies

i,m not so sure on this one either way.it was as poster said anarrow gateway,infrequently used.having worked myself contracting i would always be cautious seeing anarrow gateway and think (hoped) in this case iwould have got down and looked at the width for any irons sticking out or up.experince,s pass would tell me this.also these kind off things go with the terrain of contractors.yes it should,nt have been there but it was.if it where me with the burst tyre idon,t think i,de be looking for customer to pay for tyre in full,i think splitting it would be fairer and lessons learned for both. i.m.o

Agri contractor

Fat Cant wrote: »

Had a hedge cutting contractor in cutting hedges on my farm .
He was going in to cut a hedge in a small paddock ,I was with him and opened the gate to let him in and when he went out through the small gateway that does not get used a whole lot a piece of small angle iron sticking up that was in concrete stuck in his back Tyre and it punched it . He now is clamming that I have to pay for new tyre which is costing E1100
Who should have to pay this ?
The contractor said my insurance would cover it ?
I also rang the tyre shop and he told me it can be vulcanised but the contractor does not want this .

How worn are the tyres ? not much point putting on a new one if the other tyres are any bit worn. vulcanising is a super job when doen right.

martin46585

Agree to replace like with like, but hold on to the old tyre and repair it yourself, maybe the resale will soften the blow somewhat,

Fat Cant

The tyre is about 60% , cant get a second hand 1 . He says he is keeping the old 1 and vulcanising for a dual wheel . I told him that my insurance will handle it on monday .
I have giving him alot of money in the past for other jobs on the farm that he has done E20000 per year and he call me alot of insulting names and my yard. In my eyes he has stepped over the mark .

Nobbies

sounds like he,s getting personal with you.if he,s panicking about only 5days left too cut hedges before the ban,he must have been abusy fellow indeed since last september???he should know better if ur insurance is dealing with it,that it will take time with them.anyway he should have acontingency plan for asmall thing like aburst tyre.

bbam

Are you saying that you give him €20k a year work and now he's being unreasonable?

Bit OTT on his side, leave it to the insurance, give him no cheque or cash.

Then go out and find a new contractor, there are lots of good lads with machinery and looking for work, no need to be taking guff of anyone, he's being short sighted to say the least.

Figerty

The opening description is a little vague. Was the angle iron sticking up from the ground in a place it shouldn't be or was this part of the gate handing/locking system?

If it was visible and not a hazard that he managed to hit it this puts a different complection on it.
It it was a hazard you should have dealt with, then that's a different story. He has a genuine case.

There is term in the Health an Safety Act called 'resonably practicable' was it reasonably practiable to remove the hazard?

If you are paying for the tyre, then I would claim the damaged tyre or let him swing for the difference. You are paying for a replacement,, therefore the original is yours. You aren't buying him a tyre your are replacing damaged goods. See how smart he is then giving you cheek. You have the cheque book!

If he is giving you cheek, then let the insurance deal with it. He can wait.
The customer is always right! and if you are giving him large sums then he should be handling it differently.

lomb

Tell him to politely f off!

ZETOR_IS_BETTER

lomb wrote: »

Tell him to politely f off!

Totally agree with that

Make sure that contractor does not see any work in your place again for giving you that much grief. It will be a €20,000 lesson to him.

limo_100

will the insurance put out straight away for a new tire or will he be waiting a while..(cause I hope f*cker doesn't get it all his own way) and make sure to get the other tire back cause he will end up with two good tires

Farmer Pudsey

If you have notified your insurance it is up to them to sort him out. it is standard practice for him to replace the tyre and hold onto the damaged one for the acessor. However maybe he wanted to get the new tyre money and go and fix the old one and carry on. If you know him keep a check out over the next few weeks

Agri contractor

If the Insurance pay out. Keep the damage tyre get it fixed and sell it, and tell the contractor go f**k himself. Any customer that is giving us 20k a year I would not be unreasonable. Just curious what size and brand of tyre ?

mikemac1

You give him 20k of work and now he's giving you abuse???

Don't even talk to him again on it. Insurance company can sort it and then get a new contractor for future

You informed your insurance company and you are nobodys punching bag

Lots of lads out there contracting who would be very happy for your business


edit, bbam has much the same post above

Curly Judge

20,000 euro per year?
You must have one hell of an operation going on there!

Curly Judge

Figerty wrote: »

The opening description is a little vague. Was the angle iron sticking up from the ground in a place it shouldn't be or was this part of the gate handing/locking system?

If it was visible and not a hazard that he managed to hit it this puts a different complection on it.
It it was a hazard you should have dealt with, then that's a different story. He has a genuine case.

There is term in the Health an Safety Act called 'resonably practicable' was it reasonably practiable to remove the hazard?

If you are paying for the tyre, then I would claim the damaged tyre or let him swing for the difference. You are paying for a replacement,, therefore the original is yours. You aren't buying him a tyre your are replacing damaged goods. See how smart he is then giving you cheek. You have the cheque book!

If he is giving you cheek, then let the insurance deal with it. He can wait.
The customer is always right! and if you are giving him large sums then he should be handling it differently.

This is typical of the land owning class.
Let the serf "phuck off and wait"!
The man is losing money every hour he loses coming to the end of the hedge cutting season.
Other customers he has promised are also left waiting.
Through a clear dereliction of duty on behalf of the land owner he is "off the road".
Pay up and look happy.

the keen edge

Just to reiterate the general sentiment so far.

Do not let this guy bully you!.

Replacing like for like, plus meeting fitting costs should be your maximum exposure; if he's getting a 100% tyre in place of a 60% tyre waive fitting costs.

Do not pay out yourself; let the insurance company deal with this matter.
Source a new contractor, that guy sounds like an idiot.

JOAT

If he is p****d off about losing downtime because of the tyre, have a look through your pit tyres for one that might fit. It might be pretty bald but it would get him back on the road again fast and wouldn't cost you a penny. Might keep him calm until the insurance company can sort him out properly

bob charles

the keen edge wrote: »

Just to reiterate the general sentiment so far.

Do not let this guy bully you!.

Replacing like for like, plus meeting fitting costs should be your maximum exposure; if he's getting a 100% tyre in place of a 60% tyre waive fitting costs.

Do not pay out yourself; let the insurance company deal with this matter.
Source a new contractor, that guy sounds like an idiot.

Pay up for the tyre or else you may have a bigger bill it things go further and he could bill you for lost earnings during down time

the keen edge

bob charles wrote: »

Pay up for the tyre or else you may have a bigger bill it things go further and he could bill you for lost earnings during down time

You may mean well, however this advice is poor.

If the OP has insurance on his land, and has notified his insurance provider of the claim, he has fulfilled his initial obligation.

The contractor cannot bill the OP for lost earning; that is to say he can try, he wouldn't be awarded them by any legal process.

The OP is not responsible for the running of the contractors business.
Notwithstanding the claim to replace the tyre, the contractor is apparently providing a service. Tyres are not a permanent fixture on plant machinery,they required replacing and will get burst from time to time.
As a contractor he should have provisions for such events. It is an unarguably part of his remit as a contractor.
It is his responsibility to get his business back operating as soon as possible, not yours.

That being said, always try to sort out disputes in a amicable fashion.
Many contractors are under financial strain, having very expensive plant sitting in a yard due to a burst tyre is obviously a problem.
But don't be bully in to handing over €1100. Verbal insults directed at you are not the way to resolve this either.

Figerty

Nope, You are missing the point.
If I arrive on your land and drive into a wall....who fixes the wall?
I something is sticking out a wall that can't be seen and I drive into it, then I know who pays. I do.

Simple exam. Reseeded a field two years ago.. cleared all the stones. Cut the first year by a contractor. I manured it, topped it and cleaned it last year. Silage contractor comes back this year and kicks up and then picks up a rock in the mower. I had done everything I could to prevent it. The front wheel of the tractor kicked up the rock.I can't be held responsible for this.

The question I asked who is responsible. Not don't pay.
If you are getting hassle from anyone over something like this I would go through the Insurance company and take the heat out of the situation.

Secondly I was responsible, I would buy the tyre for him and give him the tyre minus the value of the repaired tyre or expect the repaired tyre to be handed over.

And I would also retain the receipt for my own accounts and not hand over the cheque directly.

This guy is going to lose more than the value of the tyre after this. The customer can go elsewhere.

Curly Judge wrote: »

This is typical of the land owning class.
Let the serf "phuck off and wait"!
The man is losing money every hour he loses coming to the end of the hedge cutting season.
Other customers he has promised are also left waiting.
Through a clear dereliction of duty on behalf of the land owner he is "off the road".
Pay up and look happy.

bob charles

the keen edge wrote: »

You may mean well, however this advice is poor.

If the OP has insurance on his land, and has notified his insurance provider of the claim, he has fulfilled his initial obligation.

The contractor cannot bill the OP for lost earning; that is to say he can try, he wouldn't be awarded them by any legal process.

The OP is not responsible for the running of the contractors business.
Notwithstanding the claim to replace the tyre, the contractor is apparently providing a service. Tyres are not a permanent fixture on plant machinery,they required replacing and will get burst from time to time.
As a contractor he should have provisions for such events. It is an unarguably part of his remit as a contractor.
It is his responsibility to get his business back operating as soon as possible, not yours.

That being said, always try to sort out disputes in a amicable fashion.
Many contractors are under financial strain, having very expensive plant sitting in a yard due to a burst tyre is obviously a problem.
But don't be bully in to handing over €1100. Verbal insults directed at you are not the way to resolve this either.

Of course the contractor is entitled to bill for lost earnings during the down time. I would expect the route the contractor should go down is to contact the farmers insurance straight away and proceed with the information they give me which would be to get back on the road asap and send the bill and pictures of the tyre and piece of iron to the insurance company. They will send out the accessor if necessary.

cj maxx

im really surprised this thread has gone on so long !! if the op feels it was his fault the contractor burst a tyre he might offer recompense via his insurance or pay up. his concience .
other wise is the onus not on the contractor to look where hes driving?? stuff happens on public and private roads ( has to me !) but the driver has control of the vehicle and is responsible for it . thats why he has a licence because a licence infers thet hes capable of driving it and looking out for hazards. to my mind the land owner has no responisibility save for doing a gentlemently act and throwing a contribution towards the tyre if he feels like it and can afford it. sounds like the contractor is trying it on . if hes giving hassle tell him to eff pff and claim on his own insurance ( which is why he has it !)

Curly Judge

If the contractor had made his way out into the field and run into a pin harrow abandoned in the grass, whose fault would it have been?

maidhc

Figerty wrote: »

And I would also retain the receipt for my own accounts and not hand over the cheque directly.

Important point!

Suckler

cjmc wrote: »

other wise is the onus not on the contractor to look where hes driving?? stuff happens on public and private roads ( has to me !) but the driver has control of the vehicle and is responsible for it . thats why he has a licence because a licence infers thet hes capable of driving it and looking out for hazards. to my mind the land owner has no responisibility save for doing a gentlemently act and throwing a contribution towards the tyre if he feels like it and can afford it.

Your assumption is incorrect. The land owner bears the responsibilty in this situation. He created a hazardous environment and did not take preventative action.

cjmc wrote: »

if the op feels it was his fault the contractor burst a tyre

There is no "If" in the scenario. The OP is at fault.

cjmc wrote: »

other wise is the onus not on the contractor to look where hes driving?? stuff happens on public and private roads ( has to me !) but the driver has control of the vehicle and is responsible for it . thats why he has a licence because a licence infers thet hes capable of driving it and looking out for hazards.

What you are implying is that if a drunk driver hits me, I should have seen him and avoided him as I had control over my vehicle and an applicable license.

If, however, I drive in to a tree, well thats off my insurance as I am the one at fault. That is the difference in this situation - The damage was caused by the OP's negligence.

cjmc wrote: »

to my mind the land owner has no responisibility save for doing a gentlemently act and throwing a contribution towards the tyre if he feels like it and can afford it. sounds like the contractor is trying it on . if hes giving hassle tell him to eff pff and claim on his own insurance ( which is why he has it !)

The land owner is responsible and "gentlemanly acts" don't come in to this. The contractor is not trying it on - he is legally to compensation for damage caused to his machine by the OP's negligence. The cost of the damage should be paid form the OP's insurance - Thats why the OP has it - Not the contractors - This instance is NOT why he has it.

yog1

Fat Cant wrote: »

Had a hedge cutting contractor in cutting hedges on my farm .
He was going in to cut a hedge in a small paddock ,I was with him and opened the gate to let him in and when he went out through the small gateway that does not get used a whole lot a piece of small angle iron sticking up that was in concrete stuck in his back Tyre and it punched it . He now is clamming that I have to pay for new tyre which is costing E1100
Who should have to pay this ?
The contractor said my insurance would cover it ?
I also rang the tyre shop and he told me it can be vulcanised but the contractor does not want this .

did the contractor use a different gate from where he was let in, did the op tell him to use the different gate, was it to gain access to another field that work was to be done in or out to the lane/road again, did the contractor have to get off the machine to open the gate, what size was the smaller entry, was it grew over, i think these would be relevant questions, also the steel was in the concrete, how far out from the gate post was the steel, why was it in there, it had to be for some reason, maybe stop the gate from swinging in or out a certain way, was the contractor trying to put a 8ft wide machine through a 8ft 6" gap that doesn't be used for machinery,
to me it's 50-50, more info needed, like said if it had of been in the middle of the field that's one thing but in a gateway that isn't the main entry, it's not the main entry for a reason,
there must be more to this than meets the eye, why was he using the smaller gate would be my main question,

cj maxx

''What you are implying is that if a drunk driver hits me, I should have seen him and avoided him as I had control over my vehicle and an applicable license.''

no ,im not implying that

---

If, however, I drive in to a tree, well thats off my insurance as I am the one at fault

my point exactly . if the op hit him with another tractor or some thing , cough up .
as pointed out above it was a narrow , rarely used (for machinery) gateway. does anyone get out of the tractor and look to see if you're going get stuck or hit something any more before horsing through a gap in a massive and expensive machine. ??? its just negligence on the drivers part . it'll be an expensive (E1100) lesson but one which will stand him in good stead if he heeds it. YOUR machine , YOUR livihood , YOUR reponsibility

blue5000

OP does the contractor have any insurance?

Suckler

cjmc wrote: »

as pointed out above it was a narrow , rarely used (for machinery) gateway. does anyone get out of the tractor and look to see if you're going get stuck or hit something any more before horsing through a gap in a massive and expensive machine. ??? its just negligence on the drivers part . it'll be an expensive (E1100) lesson but one which will stand him in good stead if he heeds it. YOUR machine , YOUR livihood , YOUR reponsibility

The fact remains , the OP has a legal responsibility to provide a hazard free work place. That is why HE carries insurance. Had the OP provide a proper entrance, this would not have occurred.
You say "as pointed out" - its too late to be pointing it out now? Did the OP warn the contractor prior to entering the gate that the piece of angle iron was sticking out?

If I walk to your front door and trip on a poorly laid path or a piece of angle iron that was not in plain sight ( for instance after dark) you are legally at fault.

Too think otherwise would lead to a farcical legal situation. Again this is what the OP's insurance is there to cover.

caseman

Fat Cant wrote: »

Had a hedge cutting contractor in cutting hedges on my farm .
He was going in to cut a hedge in a small paddock ,I was with him and opened the gate to let him in and when he went out through the small gateway that does not get used a whole lot a piece of small angle iron sticking up that was in concrete stuck in his back Tyre and it punched it . He now is clamming that I have to pay for new tyre which is costing E1100
Who should have to pay this ?
The contractor said my insurance would cover it ?
I also rang the tyre shop and he told me it can be vulcanised but the contractor does not want this .

Pay up you are fully responsible.
If i was the contractor i'd give a bit of check to

Conflats

Yes the op is a fault here and he has done the correct thing and notified the insurance company, imo that is where it ends the contractor is fully to blame from there on he had no plan in place for this happening and but there is 2 sides to every story. The contractor should get the tyre replaced and bill the op who then puts in the insurance claim however the tyre should be the same condition as the one it is replacing so a good 2nd hand one should do as its unfair to be expected to replace something which is better than what you had before

bbam

caseman wrote: »

Pay up you are fully responsible.
If i was the contractor i'd give a bit of check to

Why do you feel that giving cheek to a customer is acceptable. I'm any position the customer is king, OP has contacted insurance, what else could he do.
I'm sure like alot of us he may not have €1100 to just throw out.
It was through negligence and not malice so I think giving cheek just winds up the situation and shows a lack of respect for customers.
You give cheek in my yard for any reason and it's your last time to stand in it!

Figerty

The term used is 'reasonable practical' not Hazard Free. Hazard free is an impossible ask. It's a quantum measure of the level of risk against the cost of the solution.

Your assumption that the OP has a legal responsibilty to have a 'hazard free' farm is not true. If you want me to quote the act, I can.

One point is that there has to be safe access and eggress from the place of work. It's on this point that OP has to be concerned. However, not all the onus is on the OP. The contractor who is in effect, an employee of the OP has reponsibilities also. It's not black and white.

If however, it was 'reasonably practiable' for the OP to eliminate the risk, then it should have been done. To eliminate the risk coulld have been to remove the offending article, but it could also have been to warn the driver to inspect the gate access.

One way or another a tyre has to be bought. I'd let the insurance sort it out.

This is a great thread as it has thrown up many different view points. There was a case in the paper last week of a lady who was sitting on a high chair at a meeting, she attempted to 'shunt' the chair along while sitting on it(as we all probably have done), long and short of it was she fell off and broke her wrist. It was claimed a castor had been faulty and adjusted. She sued the company for compensation. But crucially the employer was not informed. Judge refejected the case under the Health and Safety act.

Suckler wrote: »

The fact remains , the OP has a legal responsibility to provide a hazard free work place. That is why HE carries insurance. Had the OP provide a proper entrance, this would not have occurred.
You say "as pointed out" - its too late to be pointing it out now? Did the OP warn the contractor prior to entering the gate that the piece of angle iron was sticking out?

If I walk to your front door and trip on a poorly laid path or a piece of angle iron that was not in plain sight ( for instance after dark) you are legally at fault.

Too think otherwise would lead to a farcical legal situation. Again this is what the OP's insurance is there to cover.

caseman

bbam wrote: »

Why do you feel that giving cheek to a customer is acceptable. I'm any position the customer is king, OP has contacted insurance, what else could he do.
I'm sure like alot of us he may not have €1100 to just throw out.
It was through negligence and not malice so I think giving cheek just winds up the situation and shows a lack of respect for customers.
You give cheek in my yard for any reason and it's your last time to stand in it!

I was responding to the first post, from reading it i think he felt he was not responsible. We don't no all the details but i get the feeling he told the contractor he was not paying.

Suckler

Figerty wrote: »

The term used is 'reasonable practical' not Hazard Free. Hazard free is an impossible ask. It's a quantum measure of the level of risk against the cost of the solution.

Your assumption that the OP has a legal responsibilty to have a 'hazard free' farm is not true. If you want me to quote the act, I can.

One point is that there has to be safe access and eggress from the place of work. It's on this point that OP has to be concerned. However, not all the onus is on the OP. The contractor who is in effect, an employee of the OP has reponsibilities also. It's not black and white.

You are quite right, stating it was to be Hazard free would be an impossible task and is not as black and white as that. Your third paragraph sums it up better than I did.

If the OP had pointed out the hazard it would've been a different scenario. There is greater onus here on the OP as he is employing the contractor, and was present when it happened so could've taken preventative measures. Had the OP warned the contractor of the potential hazard, the contractor could refused to enter the property.

Edit: Could you post a link to the act anyway - I know our place definately has a few access points that wouldnt be great.

Figerty

Here you go.
http://www.irishstatutebook.ie/2005/en/act/pub/0010/

Chapters 2, 3, 4 and 5 most relevent.

Everyone should have a read of this. Especially if they arrive in site.

If the OP asks the contractor for his safety statement and risk assessments it could get interesting!

the_syco

Fat Cant wrote: »

The tyre is about 60% , cant get a second hand 1 . He says he is keeping the old 1 and vulcanising for a dual wheel

As it has been said, if you know him, keep an eye out to see if he puts a new wheel on it, or vulcanises the wheel and pockets the insurance money.

As for the insults and what not, maybe bump his name down the list of people you call to do things?