SPF Lawsuit Avoidance: What You Need to Know
Taking a few preventative steps can help your company avoid the potential for lawsuits. By doing the following, you will be taking measures to avoid going to court and be better prepared, should you need to defend yourself legally. The following is an excerpt from an interview with Dr. Thompson about an actual lawsuit case in which he was an expert witness.
About Dr. Thompson:
Dr. George Thompson, President & CEO of Chemical Compliance Systems, Inc. Dr. Thompson has 14 years of experience in industrial hazard and risk assessments, environmental evaluations, and product development. He has published 21 hazardous chemical books, 39 technical/research articles, hosted two worldwide and three national safety/health conferences and trained over 10,000 employees. He has been an expert witness for legal cases involving SPF.
Court Case:
The homeowners were asked to leave their home during the SPF application, but they refused to comply. The contractor made no record of the homeowners’ refusal to leave during the application. Later, in court, it was their word against his.
What Should the SPF Company have Done?
The contractor should have documented, in writing, that the couple refused to comply and sign a safety agreement sheet, which explained that they should have left their premises for 24 to 48 hours. In addition, the contractor should have posted signs that said, “No Entrance”, which should have been posted at the entrances of the home while the application is in process. The contractor should have also taken photos of those posted these warning signs. In retrospect, the contractor wished he would have refused to do the job.
Court Case Continued:
After the job was completed, the homeowners tried to sue the contractor because they claimed they were sick from the odor of the foam. The SPF company actually removed all of the SPF in the home in an attempt to satisfy the customer and avoid going to court. This effort; however, was to no avail and the court case proceeded.
What Should the SPF Company have Done?
Had the company taken the time to educate the homeowners up-front, then asked them to sign a “No Occupation” document, this case may never have gone to court at all. At the least, the company would have been able to provide the court with proof of the company’s due diligence to protect the homeowners. The other option would have been to refuse to do the job.
Court Case Continued:
Dr. Thompson was called in as an expert witness to testify that SPF was not responsible for the symptoms the husband and wife said they were experiencing. It turned out that the attorneys, judge, jury, and a doctor who provided testimony for the homeowners, had little understanding of spray foam. Moreover, when Dr. Thompson, along with others, visited the home to make an inspection, it became apparent that all chemicals had been removed from the home, such as laundry and other soaps, bleach, cleaning products, paints, varnish and other home maintenance products. This way, the homeowners could lay the blame squarely on spray foam as the cause for their supposed ills. Air sampling was also done, and nothing unusual was found. By this time, the foam had cured, so there would not have been anything in the air.
What Should the SPF Company have Done?
Some contractors may feel awkward about educating customers up-front because they are concerned that they may unduly alarm their customers or because they may have difficulty explaining the application process in laymen’s terms.
Explaining the difference between curing and cured could have helped the homeowners understand why it was so important for them to cooperate. It would have demonstrated how much the company was looking out for the homeowners’ safety. Once the foam is sprayed, it goes through a curing process. After 24 to 48 hours, the curing process is done, and the foam is now cured. Once cured, the foam is no longer in the air, it has bonded and is now harmless to humans and animals. Implementing an educational session with the homeowners to explain safety should have been viewed by the SPF company as a selling point!
Who Won the Case?
The SPF company won this case, but how much money did they lose? Had the SPF company done a thorough job of educating the customer upfront, offering them an opportunity to ask questions, and had them sign the “No Occupancy” agreement, it would have been unlikely that anyone would have gone to court. Had the customer tried to do so, the SPF company would have been in a good position to win this case quickly and easily. SPF companies should have educational literature and agreements in hand, so that they can provide these to the homeowner in advance. Hiring legal experts and going to court is an expensive endeavor. Being prepared in the beginning could have averted this entire case.
How much do you imagine that this court case cost the SPF company? How much money do you think they would have saved by taking the few preventative measured as described in this article?
For Further Information:
Dr. Thompson’s Website: www.chemply.com
Email: georgethompson@chemply.com
Phone: 973.663.2148