|Date||Tue, 6 Dec 2005 14:48:58 -0500|
Jeffs waiver seems okay to me … but you can get by and less and it’s generally recommended.
Don’t say more than you need to. My attorney told me many years ago that, unless you are an attorney, any legal documents such as contracts or waivers should be as short and to the point as possible and not to get too involved in details. His point was that the more you say the more likely you are to trip yourself up. If you define Fab debris and do so incorrectly … their attorney may try to use that, if you contradict yourself their attorney may try to have the document ruled unenforceable, if you create a lengthy document that goes into things that aren’t a necessary part of the issue … their attorney may try to make it out to be confusing and unfair. Be specific but be brief and, while it would be wise to educate the customer about fab debris at the time you’re getting the waiver signed, don’t take any responsibility for doing so in writing. I do not profess the following to be the best possible wording but something along these lines is all you really need to have.
YOUR COMPANY NAME
(Name of your customers company) agrees to hold (name of your own company) harmless for any and all scratched or otherwise damaged glass on the job site located at (address of job) resulting from fabricating debris or neglect on the part of non (your company name) personnel.
As part of this agreement (name of your company) acknowledges normal responsibility for acts of neglect by its’ employees and agrees to use commonly practiced methods and care in providing window cleaning service at the above address.
Signature of customer _____________________________ Date ____________________
Signature of (your company name) representative ___________________________ Date ______________________
All you need is something that will either keep you out of court or show the judge what they agreed to in the event you must go to court. The more simple and general you keep it the better off you are. Were it not for the likelihood that the common customer will require it … I wouldn’t even use the second part.
Michael D. Brinegar
Pride Master, Inc.