Fence contractors literally walk the line as part of their jobs. Sometimes the property owners on either side of that line are happy that the fence contractor is there. But where only one homeowner hires a fence contractor, what happens when that homeowners neighbor seeks to hold the fence contractor liable for damage to the neighbor’s property?
Earlier this month, in Ives v. Gettinger and Alex Fences, Inc., the Third District Court of Appeal affirmed a Miami trial court’s dismissal of a neighbor’s claim against a fence contractor. To be clear, the decision reached is very fact-specific, but it demonstrates some of the potential risks to contractors working along property boundary lines.
The facts underlying the case are fairly straightforward. A homeowner engaged a contractor to back fill part of its property and engaged a fence contractor to install a fence along one of the boundaries of its property. As part of its work, the fence contractor installed the fence over some of the back filled area. In response, the neighbor hired a separate contractor to remove some of the back fill, damaging the fence in the process.
When the homeowner sued the neighbor, the neighbor filed a counterclaim and a third-party complaint against the fence contractor. Specifically, the neighbor claimed that the fence contractor had trespassed on its property and damaged landscaping and the property, and that the fence was negligently installed such that it negatively impacted the neighbors view. Some allegations also seemed to imply that the installation of the fence on the back fill violated certain county ordinances that the neighbor argued should have prevented the back fill.
Ultimately, the trial court dismissed these claims against the fence contractor, finding that the neighbor had no private right of action against the fence contractor to enforce the relevant county ordinances. Further, the court found that the neighbor’s claims had been brought after the expiration of the relevant statute of limitations. On appeal the Third District Court of Appeals affirmed this ruling with little comment. While the court did not reach the merits of the neighbor’s claim, this was clearly a good outcome for the fence contractor.
The key takeaway from this case for contractors and subcontractors working along property boundaries is that first and foremost you should be careful to minimize any impact to a neighbor’s property. While the claims here were ultimately dismissed, it was only after nearly 2 years of costly litigation. To the extent you can confirm the neighbor is aware of the planned improvements, you should. Further, ensure you pull proper permits for the work to be performed. As part of the permitting process, issues relating to drainage, boundaries, and zoning should be reviewed by the county and resolved before work begins. This is always preferable to trying to fix them after the fact.