HOA Liabilities

The HOA could be liable to some extent or other even if they did not expressly authorize the person to paint the bench, or rake the leaves. And if they do things properly then the hired help carries insurance that protects the HOA should they become injured.

That being said, it would be well beyond foolish to not carry the insurance that would protect the HOA. Further, a claim will not always raise the rates the association pays (though it could). Further, from a pure cost standpoint it probably saves the HOA money to use volunteers as the added cost of liability insurance does not equal the cost of paid help.

Then there is the non-monetary issues. And quite simply I believe it is foolish to stop residents from helping out. I strongly believe that residents helping out makes the neighborhood stronger, reduces crime, increases quality of life, and is just a good thing that would surpass any liability issues.

It is time to stop worrying about the lawsuits to the point of stupidity and focus on the real issues. The simple fact is that you just can't stop all lawsuits. And that is why you carry insurance.

"
I just can't fathom a situation that would warrant not wanting volunteer help........."

Old men trimming trees with chain-saws!

Read the article at:

http://www.imakenews.com/ortenhindman/e_article001326365.cfm?x=bf4MvFJ,b1S4SwHw

Joe

AR, I think what the board is really doing in its communication is using the "liability" issue as the scapegoat for the larger issue of people just taking it upon themselves to do this, that or the other.

The "liability" thing is probably just a "cover" for them so they don't insult or hurt anyone's feelings or make it appear they are singling anyone out.

The fact is, if your organization has contracts in place to do those things of which you speak, then it's best to let the contracted entities do their job, with the agreed upon materials and labor for which the board is paying them.

If it seems that the contractor is not getting to things as quickly as some members would like, then that is the issue to take to the board, and they should not take it upon themselves to "gett'er done" on their own.

Example: We have a contract with a company to paint our three-rail enclosure fence. We've contracted with them for a specific type of paint at a specific cost, and have agreed upon a specific time frame for the project.

There is a timetable in place and if a resident takes it upon himself to paint the fence generic black, because he's tired of looking at it, yeah, I would be peeved.

If we have a contract with a company to maintain the area and the trees around our lake, including maintaining the walking path around it, and a resident is out there doing some raking instead of the contractor, then we are paying the company for work that isn't getting done by them.

Is it a big huge deal in the scheme of things and is there danger of "liability"?

The answer to both is probably "no."

But as a board member, I would still prefer the companies with whom we contract do the things for which we contract with them.

That's what we pay them for; it's a consistent and reliable contract (as opposed to a resident here or there opting to "gett'er done" from one month to the next), and we have a specific (and bonded) entity to which we can go back to if problems do arise.