[ptmQqoxw]

The following is a post on a woodworking forum I'm active on. What do you all make of it? I believe the dog owner is always on the hook, for whatever their dogs do-and I think the insurance company knows that. Just seems wrong for them to try to make somebody else pay.
Jason


I was on a job where I was the acting general, government funded residential rehab stuff.
I brought my painter in to give me an estimate on finishing some built ins we had done. The homeowner was there and expecting his arrival. She has a very large 150# pitt bull.
I made introductions, they shook hands, and her dog leapt from the couch and attacked my painter, who is an independant contractor and one of my best friends. Myself 2 of my employees, and the homeowner had to tear this dog off of his chest. I had it in a semi head lock while the homeowner was trying to force the dogs face away from the painter. It flipped me over into a fish tank which crashed onto my head, and got his leg. We were able to pull it off of him and get him to the hospital.
To make a long story short, he was injured enough to miss 3 weeks of work. Her homeowners insurance settled out with him at 11,000.
Due to some wording in this government agencies contract which basically states contractor will accept responsibility for any and all injuries and hold xxxx agencyxxxx and homeowner harmeless during the time that work was perfomed or resulting of the performance thereof,
her insurance company is counter sueing me for reimbursment of their settled amount plus costs. The contract is a very generic standard item . It doesn't actually specify that injuries must be work related, nor am I as a contractor allowed to alter these terms or even bring my own terms to the table.
Due to tight pockets, my own liability insurance lapsed for 2 days, one of course being the day things went down.
So I am stuck without defense and looking at owing 15k for some lady's dog trying to kill one of my associates.
Do I have anything to worry about? OH. They also want me to pay for the aquarium and all of it's contents.
Thanks for any input.

[Zysyewgg]

You need a lawyer!

[Guaranano]

You need a lawyer!

sure do - thats ridiculouse

[Derrida]

Uh, I can't say I've ever seen a 150lb pit, most likely it was some other breed as that's extremely large. Now having said that, the homeowner should be responsible for any damage and the hospital bills.

[Karpattaisp]

150 pound pit bull. Yeah right. My two put together aren't even 100 pounds. Was it a cane or presa maybe? They get large and often confused for pit bulls. Sounds like a crazy story though, dog attacks him and he's responsible for the damage? And they are sueing because the fish tank broke in the attack by their own dog? Weird. I'm no lawyer though.

[altosburg]

I would get a lawyer

[formobilagsw]

First of all, you need to reply and tell them that there is no way in hell a Pit Bull will get to be 150# and that the dog that attacked could only be some sort of Mastiff mix. Then you should invite them here.

Second, you should get a lawyer. This person is responsible for letting his/her dog attack your friend and should be paying.

[ptmQqoxw]

That's what I told the guy. There is no such thing as a 150# pit, and there's no way he is responsible for any damages-no matter what his hold harmless contract says.
Jason

[QualityReachOut]

Sounds like a mastiff or presa etc Not a "Pit Bull" but I guess everyone will call any dog whom bites a "Pit Bull" out of sheer ignorance. ( I cant count how many labs and lab mixes are called pit bulls after they bite UGH). But thats a sucky situation I think the homeowner should be fully responsible, if whats being said actually happened in that mannor.

[Z3s9vQZj]

If that dog weighs 150 he's part Mastiff. When my son had BoBo he was 130 but very fat, just a big couch potato slug. When I got him I trimmed him down to 110.

[jhfkgkfdvjk]

The dog owner should still be responsible for her dog's actions. It's the same as if a child acted inappropriately, the parents are responsible. I don't see the difference.

[MIBgirlsXXL]

Why woulden't they put the dog up. Mine go in lockdown when the cable man or someone like that comes over. he should be the one paying. things like that give dogs a bad name.

[Z2sc8gEz]

The dog definitely wasnt a pure apbt.. If it was, a 150 lb pit would probably be to lazy to even attack. .. An apbt's body cant handle 150 lb's and be able to move and run correctly... Their bone structure isnt that big to fit that much weight and be able to move normally ect. So yea. def not a pure bred apbt. Either way, the dogs owner IS responsible.

[b3JOkwXL]

Ok, I'm new to this forum but have to defend the 'BIG' APBT's. Yes, I agree with everyone about being the owners fault. Definately NOT the General Contractors. Anyway.... I know everyone has their own opinion about the 'size' of an APBT. APBT's can be extremely large. The only reason I know this is because my husband and I bred one. Now, I did not breed his sire and dam so I cannot claim I know how they became. All I know is I had duel registered APBT's (UKC & ADBA)and bred them and produced a rock solid 130lb APBT. He was up to 140 but was 10 pounds over weight. Just stating that weirder things have happened..LOL!

Here's a pic at 140lbs.



Here's a pic at around 130lbs;

[Thunderzee]

Everyone seems to forget the terrier in the dogs these days. By nature they should be smaller and lively...