Question Details: We are renters who have had mold growing due to a leak (due to defective solar panel installation) one of our rooms. We have made a claim for property damage. The insurance company for the solar panel has offered us a settlement and is also asking us to sign a release. This is where the problem is. From the looks of it, the release is not only a release against any future property damage claims, it looks like a release for ANY claims made in the future arising out of this incident. I want to make sure this is not the case. It states: We do not want to sign a personal injury release.
It is very common--probably pretty near universal--for a settlement to contain a release against any and all future claims arising out of the action or property covered by the settlement. Without such a release, why should the other party settle? You could take their money and then still sue them. If you feel there may be future claims and you are exposed for more liability, don't sign and don't settle--because is is *very* unlikely you could get a settlement w/o offering a broad release in return.

Are you a lawyer?
![]() |