|
I have fixed several with wind damage, and my opinion is you probably wondered when you purchased it, and darn sure wondered after they erected it. You get what you pay for, most isurance companies can see what is coming down the pike, so will not insure them. I have heard that the legal system is usualy more costly than the building, and you end up paying at both ends. I personaly do not know of anyone ever winning, but that is not my field, and most cases are probably word of mouth at best. In our area most insurance companies will not cover snow load. The reason I am told is how can anyone prove the actual snow load. You can estamate, but in all fairness it could have drifted in one tiny area, and then started the whole donward process. I would probably guess on the outcome. I can not tell who is getting the law suit, insurance or manufacture, or even the builder. I can't think of any insurance company getting blained, and then paying out. Insurance companies are not a bunch of good ol boys sitting down and writting a contract. The good ol boys writting the policy get paid good money to word the contract so no one wins against them. The builder has insurance, but many times not for manufacture failures, and they have attornies on the payrole as well. If your friend gets a attorney, they are a dime a dozen, and probably are very limited in actual knowledge of what is realy going on. The good part is the judge is just as dumb, and could rule in your friends favor. It seems like a real long shot, but who knows. I once got involved in a law suit as a witness only about weather the landlord had supplied a manure pit. I only had notes as I built the manure collecting point from a cow yard. The measurements that I supplied was 8 ft wide, 12 ft long, and a 1 foot high wall on two sides. The coment from the judge was ---now that is a big pit---NO LIE HE SAID THOSE EXACT WORDS-- I will check and see if anyone has won a case against the manufacture of the trailer house version of ag buildings. If I remember correct, one manufacture suggested that the building (used for hogs) was not managed correct, and had condensation that turned into ice, thus adding to the weight on the roof. Im not sure if it was the same company that suggested the farmer could have bumped the building with his skid loader when removing the manure. Did the heat from the building melt some snow, thus making ice under the snow on the roof--thus making the excess total snow load, well you get the picture of the unknown, and impossible to prove. How many of there buildings did survive the same approx snow? How many buildings have been up for years and did not give way to snow? There are all kinds of questions, like those above that your friend can only try to convince the courts that none of the above applyed. It is all hard to prove either way. Your friend will probably have to PROVE his side, so good luck.
| 
