All Forum Posts by: John Clark

Two things: First, if you were negligent in allowing the branch to rot and did not do preventative maintenance, you can be sued. Most states have laws that allow neighbors to go onto their abutting neighbor's property in order to maintain their own, and certainly as a good neighbor, you'd ask permission and explain the situation anyway, getting permission and not just showing up claiming right of temporary ingress and egress. A little civility goes a long way. You can, however, be sued. That is a given.

Second, those who say that the damaged neighbor has to go through her own insurer first are simply wrong. They assume that she has collision and comprehensive coverage. What if she doesn't? And that doesn't prevent you from being sued by her/her insurer for your negligence.

If your neglect of the tree was the cause, do the right thing. Pay for her damage, and ask her for permission to go onto her property in order to maintain your trees. Be a good neighbor, not a jerk.

"Lead is not against the code" -- If you mean grandfathered lead pipes in use pre-1986, I agree with you, you don't have to take them out. You cannot put in new lead pipes, though. As for 1 and 1/2 inch copper service, that sounds awfully large for a single family residence. I have 3/4 inch service for my two flat and my water pressure is great. Are you talking about three flats or such?

Pipe size remained the same, 3/4 inch to 3/4 inch. No self-respecting plumber would connect a smaller source pipe (main to bbox) to a larger pipe downstream (bbox into house). The water pressure drops tremendously and nothing works right, and water doesn't flow properly from the main into the house. That may be why you're running into resistance from the city of Chicago. Were you in fact planning on increased pipe size from bbox into house from what you have now?

My understanding is that it is quite common to go from bbox to house and keep the lead pipe from main to bbox. The plumber will have to install a new bbox ($125 or so?) in all probability, and fiddle the connection because it's two different metals, but I think the City of Chicago is finally getting serious about lead pipe after Flint, Michigan, and  letting people get rid of it in stages. Eventually Chicago will start replacing main to bbox lines because of public concern. 

I signed the contract to do my bbox to house pipe a few weeks before Flint, Michigan, hit the news. I imagine plumbers have raised their prices due to increased demand.

If I remember correctly, the permit fee for bbox to house was about $600. Bbox to main is more expensive since usually there's a street cut involved, and now you're talking about directly working on city infrastructure. Governments are real touchy about that.

I had the lead service line from the bbox into my house replaced in 2016 at a cost of about $9,000. To go from the bbox to the water main would have involved going across the street, and cost an additional $10,500, plus permit fees of about $3,000. The deposit that the plumber has to put down is substantial, and he doesn't get it back for years.

Eventually, I'll get the bbox to main service pipe replaced.

The whole problem is that the City REQUIRED the use of lead pipe up until 1986, even though the dangers of lead pipe have been known for centuries. It was a sop to the plumber's union, since lead is harder to work with than copper, and the plumber's union, for all its faults, does have a good training program. It meant more jobs for union plumbers (you can be a licensed plumber without being a union-trained plumber).

I wish the City would waive the permit fee. Inspect, sure, but free installation inspections is the least the City of Chicago could do after ignoring the health of its residents for so long.

"

For a point of information, is there anything that can be done if you believe that the selling agent did not present your offer? "

As an attorney, this is one of the reasons why I hate real estate agents. The real estate agent has a fiduciary duty to the owner to present ALL offers. Full stop. Period. No if, no ands, no buts. If you feel that the agent has not presented your offer to the owner, I would the offer directly to the owner. I you have evidence that the agent has not presented your offer, complain to the state regulators.

Oh, I second the opinion about dual agency being a conflict of interest.