View Single Post
Old 11-25-2019, 01:29 AM   #15
Flyguy1967
Scraping Paint
 
City: PNW
Vessel Model: 1984 Ponderosa 48 CPMY
Join Date: Aug 2009
Posts: 105
Bruce,

It all has to do with a legal theory called the economic loss rule.

First, you are correct, he would be responsible for damages sustained to the boat under both a breach of contract theory as well as negligence theory.

Under the theory of negligent repair, his carrier (and most yard/mechanic carriers) covers damage caused his negligence for everything which he was not contracted to repair (hence damage to the boat would be covered, which would include engines if the boat was totaled because he was not contracted to repair "the boat").

Our state (Washington) says a person cannot recover damages under a negligent repair theory if the only claim for damages (failing to bleed the cooling system/failing to installing the cold start solenoid correctly) is what was damaged (the engines) and that was what he was contracted to repair (the engines).

Another example, he also installed a new bow thruster in the boat. If the boat sunk (if i cold only be so lucky at this point) because of his negligent thruster installation, I would have coverage under his policy because his negligent installation sunk my boat. However, if he cooked the thruster motor because of his negligent installation, his insurance company would not pay for a new thruster motor because the economic loss rule says my cause of action is for damage to the thing (the thruster motor) I asked him to install. Consequently, I am forced to sue him for breach of contract for which he does not have insurance coverage (see below).

Under a breach of contract theory, he is liable all day long for both the boat running up on the beach (consequential damages) and the engines. Unfortunately most insurance companies (and that is who we are trying to bring into the action) do not cover damage caused by breach of contract so we would try to sue under a negligence theory, but as noted above, in my case, the boat did not go aground and economic loss rule prevents me from recovering under a theory of negligent repair.

Insurance companies (negligence) have money/mechanics (contract) not so much. Does not mean I still might spend a few boat bucks to make him spend 5x that amount to defend himself. Maybe I can at least help his lawyer make his boat payment by defending my negligent mechanic.
Flyguy1967 is offline   Reply With Quote