Plow damage claims may change policy
By Kate Daly Contributing Writer

Marlborough - Scattered across a map of the city are nearly three dozen tiny triangles, each representing property damage allegedly caused by snowplows driven by city employees and cityhired contractors.

Mailboxes, lamps, stone walls and even sprinkler heads are on the list of damaged property in claims residents have submitted to the city.

There have been 34 claims made between late December 2007 and the end of January.

"The majority of the claims I think were attributable to the fact that we had a snowstorm followed by snowstorm followed by snowstorm without a lot of melt," Commissioner of Public Works Ronald Le- Freniere said. "It took its toll on a lot of mailboxes."

Anywhere from 50 to 70 plows, sanders, front loaders and sidewalk plows are used for snow removal, with about 65 percent of them cityowned, he said.

"Obviously, we don't want to have any damage out there, but, again, these things happen. We have to recognize that it's the cost of doing business," LeFreniere said.

He explained that the plow operators are driving huge pieces of equipment, with plows on the side and larger ones in front, often in "conditions that border on blinding."

A review of the claims showed that the incidents were spread over the city, Le- Freniere said, and many of the incidents seemed to be the result of the snow accumulation. A driver might even not realize the plow hit a mailbox under those conditions.

That can lead to a problem with reimbursements. If the driver doesn't file a report, it results in a rejection by the insurance company, LeFreniere said.

And while the city's insurance policy covers damage by city employees, damage done by contractors must go through the contractors' insurance, City Solicitor Donald Rider said.

The matter went before the City Council's Operations and Oversight Committee Feb. 19 and Rider said that the city plans to look at ways to expedite insurance claims.

"We're looking to see if there's a way to perhaps improve the process by which claims are handled," Rider said. "I think part of the idea is to see if there is another way to handle these claims."

Currently, residents fill out a claim form, which goes to the City Council and is referred to the Legal Department, which contacts the city's insurance company, which approves or denies the claim. The city's insurance company immediately denies any claims against contractors, Rider said, because the policy covers only city employees.

The city is now considering changing the process so that claims against contractors will not go to the city's insurance company, he said. Instead, the city would inform the residents to file a claim directly with the contractor's insurance company.

"The idea would be to sent informational letters identifying the contractor and insurance company," Rider said.

Rider and LeFreniere are examining the process and will report back to the committee.