--00000000000062ef5006302cdcdb Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Chuck, Much appreciated. Quick question...this looks like it was feedback from a potential client, not your lawyer- or are they one and the same? I might have misunderstood the context on the origin of the edits as well? Best, Derek *Derek Gordon* COO | *TheKey* 310-402-9968 [image: TheKey] On Wed, Mar 12, 2025 at 9:18=E2=80=AFAM Chuck Terlesky wrote: > Hi Derek, > > Please see the attached email below. I hope this helps. > > Regards, > Chuck > > *I would very much like to proceed and work with you and your team, but > the contract you sent raises concerns for me. Basically, if I were to sig= n > it I would be agreeing to take on unlimited financial risk for my family = in > exchange for getting this service. Maybe that is not intentional, and you= r > lawyer was just using a template that no one had really thought about, bu= t > that is what the contract says. * > > *Basically, in exchange for purchasing services from The Key I am being > asked to act as The Key=E2=80=99s insurance company =E2=80=93 unless your= employee has > acted with gross negligence (a high bar), intentional misconduct or a > breach of a key contract term.* > > *To give you an example, if I were to sign this and your care giver > accidentally ran over someone on the way to see my wife, and was found > liable but not =E2=80=9Cgrossly=E2=80=9D negligent (ie. just an unfortuna= te accident, was > not being reckless), the Key would have a claim against me for any expens= es > it incurred, including judgements, legal fees etc. You would not even hav= e > to make an insurance claim, since your contract stipulates that I would > provide an indemnity against potential actions and claims connected to th= e > contract. In a bad car accident that could be a huge sum of money, yet t= he > accident had nothing at all to do with me or my wife. Basically, I would = be > providing The Key with a virtually unlimited insurance policy in exchange > for care giving services, even though The Key presumably already has > insurance.* > > *On the flipside, if your employee did anything at all to me or my wife = =E2=80=93 > so long as it was not clearly illegal, I would give up any claim against > The Key that exceeded the fees. * > > *Possible Solution: If you were o.k. to limiting the amounts in both case= s > to what insurance covers that would be fine with me. I will include > sentences with revised language below.* > > *I hope there is a way to address this. The Key sounds like it offers a > great service. But I can=E2=80=99t possibly sign a contract that creates = that sort > of potentially huge legal risk for myself and my family to get a care > giver.* > > *Thank you,* > > *Jeff* > > *REVISED LANGUAGE* > > *I would be fine with the contract if you were to insert the underlined > words I have added below:* > > *My liability:* > > *=E2=80=9CIn recognition of the relative risks