What every door service provider can do to proactively protect your business.

As one of the most frequently hired automatic door injury experts in the country, I am routinely hired by plaintiffs and defense attorneys. I am known as one of the most unbiased experts in this field and have been asked by numerous service providers and manufacturers to assist them in their defense. I have a unique perspective having been involved in the sale, service and installation of doors and hardware as a working contractor for over twenty-five years. Many independent door service providers have used my services as an automatic door expert to help defend against claims brought against them. When they have been named as a co-defendant or co-defendant, I have been instrumental in getting them released from the lawsuit.

Many attorneys choose to directly sue each individual entity they can identify in the chain of commerce, or sue only the primary party that owned or operated the place where the injury occurred. In the latter case, the primary defendant is expected to bring claims against all parties who have ever worked on the gates, expecting that subparty to provide additional contractually required damages, or at least a partial share in the defense and possible contributions of settlement.

When I have been hired by the plaintiff, I have intervened in the assessment and determination of those directly responsible for the lawsuit. After discovery and documentation disclosures, it is often apparent that many service providers are often not involved in the claim, but are named anyway. I have often told the plaintiff’s attorney that the failure was directly attributed to store ownership and management for not having competent service providers, thorough daily safety inspections, or having programs and policies in place to train employees to understand the internal responsibilities that arise. with any automatic door system. In many cases there are numerous service providers that have been used for a single door and it is difficult to prove which company created the problem. There are often inadequate records and documentation identifying which services were performed and by which service company. Other large chain store claims have named the primary service provider, regional affiliates (sometimes 3 or more), and a variety of uninvolved vendors who may have manufactured components or performed the original installation. This is done in an attempt to include these entities in the potential deal.

Each case is unique and has many variable factors. In many cases, the management of the stores where the injury occurred held the service providers they turned to when necessary to be responsible for the claim, even though those providers had not been in their store for 6 months or more. In contrast, there are cases where a service technician was in the shop just a few hours before the injury. In that circumstance, it is hard to believe that the service provider is not at fault for the accident.

Assigned Responsibility:

Generally speaking, most cases ultimately show that the store owner has not understood the responsibility of performing daily safety inspections of automatic door systems. Many service providers bear some liability for injury claims due to poor business practices that may have been unintentional or wholly at fault due to their staff members’ lack of proper technical training. Manufacturers of door systems typically bear little or no responsibility for product defects or hidden problems, but they are included in most claims. When the special requirements of the job require installation crews provided by general contractors or construction management, with no experience with automatic door systems, and without proper training, they often fail to properly assemble and set up door systems as instructed by the contractor. maker.

Limit your exposure:

1. The first step in proving that your business practices are sound is to keep complete and comprehensive records of all work performed for each client. Make sure all services provided are well documented. Provide accurate descriptions of the entry systems at each location where there are multiple automatic door systems. Number each individual entry in a way that establishes an indisputable location for all services provided. For example, in a store where there are two exterior entry doors (North and South) and two interior entry doors (North and South), it is important to label and maintain individual service records for each door unit. Train your technicians to use a standardized method of naming all doors so you can prove that an injury that occurred on the interior (north) entrance, for example, was not the same door that was recently checked on the exterior (south) entrance . ) where your company provided recent work. Change a number, letter, or barcode system that will prove which door bill is connected to which door service call, every time. Label doors and frames to ensure positive identification.

2. Communicate with a single point of contact when you’re working from any location. After making the service call, be sure to inform the person requesting service in writing of the condition found upon arrival. Detail what service was needed, what service was provided, and what conditions relate to the maintenance of the entrance. Make sure all your correspondence is in writing to provide a solid paper record of all work contracted with your company. Make sure that all your invoices, estimates and proposals mention the importance and non-delegable responsibility of the owner to carry out daily safety inspections of all automatic door systems. Clearly indicate where and how store owners and managers can obtain information on how to properly perform daily security checks. If your company offers this training service, mention the fact that your company can provide professional training and instructions on how to check the safety of all automatic door systems for store management and staff. Inform store management that regular maintenance and annual inspections are important to ensure the safety of store customers. But, daily inspections are your main obligation. The old saying, “You can lead a horse to water, but you can’t force it to drink” is something to keep in mind. Make sure your company does everything possible to let your customers “drink” your professional knowledge. If the customer decides not to accept your offer, that customer will have a very hard time blaming your company when something goes wrong with their door systems.

3. Door deficiencies and door compliance issues should be put in writing. If a system is found to be unrepairable or requires costly upgrades to bring the entry into compliance, be sure to fully explain the non-compliance issues in writing. Tag the door “unsafe” and photograph your tag. Many service providers have been released from a “Summary Judgment” case by showing that the door systems that caused the claim injury needed to be removed from service and completely replaced. The store owner or management refused to accept the service provider’s advice. The service provider, having a fully documented letter and photos showing all the deficiencies and the need to replace the door, was able to successfully dispute the claims made by the lead defendant. The door service provider proved that the store was the negligent party and refused to heed the warnings given to bring the door into compliance.

4. Have your technicians routinely photograph their work. Photographic documentation can also prove invaluable when making a claim for negligence and shoddy workmanship against a service provider. Showing the status of the ticket at the arrival and departure of your technician can often prove the repairs and upgrades made during the service call. In a recent case, photos showing the location of a new sensor above the door proved the location to be suitable. The sensor had been relocated by someone else after the original installation, leading to an inadequate field of coverage. The plaintiff was seriously injured, which led to a major wrongful death lawsuit. The service provider was released from the case and, in fact, filed a lawsuit against the main defendant.

5. Hopefully, it goes without saying that all of your employees and technicians should be as competent as you think they are. It’s not uncommon to hear that many service providers train their technicians by having the new guys travel along with a more experienced technician for a couple of months. The old philosophy of “Watch one, Make one, Teach one” just doesn’t work these days. Make sure all of your service providers are well-trained and competent at the work they do. I have witnessed many statements where some disgruntled employees, no longer working for a door service provider, tried to get revenge and blame their former employers’ training practices for their poor workmanship. Even if this isn’t the case, you really don’t need the negative press.

One last observation:

There are several well-known “so-called” automatic door experts who seem to lack business experience or practical knowledge of the field. I have repeatedly seen a couple of these men customize their analysis of a case to attack any entity that fits the needs of the attorney who hired them. First, their evaluations point the finger at a store, and then, when the store manages to be removed from the case, these experts’ modified opinion points to the door system manufacturer, service providers, or sometimes the component suppliers. If you find yourself in a legal situation, it is hoped that you have followed the instructions in this article and have a substantial documentary record to demonstrate your professionalism.