Question. As spring
approaches and many residential projects break ground a fairly common
fact pattern emerges. Homeowners were involved in the basic planning and
coordination of their home renovation project. Their participation was
however, not so significant that they could be considered serving as
their own general contractor. The Homeowners hired a construction
company to perform the work and the worker received direction regarding
the method and manner of his work from company representatives. In
addition, a company representative recruited and coordinated the work of
subcontractors, even though one of the homeowners was primarily
responsible for making sure that the subcontractors were paid and
documented their working hours. There is no evidence that Homeowners
had either actual or constructive knowledge of any alleged dangerous
condition regarding the property conditions.
Are Homeowners liable to a construction worker who was injured while working on their home renovation project?
Answer. NO.
The analysis (and the outcome) relies heavily on the
particular factual situation. This is certainly one situation where the
old adage “If you want something done right, do it yourself” does not
apply.
Construction Worker was employed by Contractor, which was hired by
Homeowners to perform renovation work at a lake house they owned. While
Construction Worker was digging holes to install concrete footers near a
retaining wall, the retaining wall collapsed onto him, causing personal
injuries. Seeking to recover damages for those injuries, Construction
Worker sued Homeowners.
With respect to Homeowners, it is well established that “[a]n owner of a
one- or two-family dwelling is exempt from liability under Labor Law §§
240 and 241 unless he or she directed or controlled the work being
performed.” As there is no dispute that Homeowners are owners of the
house, the relevant inquiry is whether they directed or controlled the
work that was performed there. In that regard, “[t]he phrase ‚Äòdirect or
control’ … is construed strictly and refers to the situation where the
owner supervises the method and manner of the work”.
Although Homeowners were involved in the basic planning and coordination
of the renovation project, their participation was not so significant
as to support a finding that they essentially served as their own
general contractor. Specifically, Homeowners hired Contractor to perform
the work at their house and Construction Worker received direction
regarding the method and manner in which he was to perform his work
directly from Contractor. Although Homeowners were primarily responsible
for making sure that the subcontractors were paid and they documented
when each was present and how many hours they worked, it was Contractor
who recruited them and coordinated their work. Despite Homeowners
completing the building permit application themselves, provided sketches
of the work that they wanted done and making payments for the work
directly to the subcontractors rather than through Contractor the result
is no different.
Homeowner’s actions however did not cross the line from being a
legitimately concerned homeowner to a de facto supervisor. That being
said homeowner’s should allow the construction professionals they hired
to do their job and contractors should strictly enforce the channels of
communication to prevent future disputes and minimize injuries, delays
and cost.
