Most agree that buying a home is the single most expensive purchase you will make in your life. Most also agree that good maintenance and care is the best way to protect your investment, and few would purposefully take steps that actually decrease home values. Against this backdrop, when does it make sense to file a lawsuit based on claims that a home was defectively built? When doesn’t it? Read the rest of this entry »
If someone told you to jump off a cliff would you? With the exception of professional cliff divers, most would say no. The same should apply to taking steps that will forever impact the value of your home. This article exposes the dangers of falling prey to a select group of lawyers who profit from soliciting homeowners to join construction defect lawsuits. What you are not told about these claims is far more important than what you are told. Here are the facts: Read the rest of this entry »
After receiving a flyer regarding neighborhood defect claims, the Johnsons decided to join a lawsuit against their builder and those involved in the construction of their 6 year old home claiming it suffered from pervasive defects including roof leaks, stucco cracks, window failures, and water intrusion. Papers filed with the court covered everything but the kitchen sink which apparently continues to function defect-free. During the suit, the Johnsons’ lawyers prepared a detailed defect list and sought over $100,000 to “fix” the home. After a visual inspection without and destructive testing, the Johnsons settled for $10,000, one-tenth of claimed repair costs. Why this radically discounted settlement? Perhaps in reality, there was little wrong with the home.
Read the rest of this entry »
Most members of the building profession assume that a homeowner’s claims for construction defects and deficiencies, whether known or unknown, are barred after 10 years. In reality, the cut off for liability is not quite that clear; indeed, the 10 year statute of repose is arguably misnamed and oft times misunderstood. Does it provide limitations? Read the rest of this entry »
The recent fires have devastated hundreds of thousands of acres of land and homes in Northern California. Given the decline in real estate values, builders are faced with a unique opportunity to acquire land, held rebuild communities, and make a profit. Such opportunities come with unique challenges; for the unprepared or unwary builder, those challenges can prove insurmountable and costly. A feasibility study and risk analysis must be undertaken before and not after a builder decides to buy lots for residential development. Read the rest of this entry »
It’s no secret that the building industry has been hard hit by a declining real estate market. With markedly slow sales, there is an abundance of available product, and the value of California homes has decreased. Inarguably, those who bought homes before the downturn now own homes worth considerably less. The result? Homebuilder attorneys are seeing an increase in defect claims coupled with demands that builders “buy back” their homes. Are these the symptoms of buyer’s remorse and a desire to offset economy driven losses? Read the rest of this entry »
The roof leaks. The windows leak. The stucco is cracking. The house is not performing well. As between the builder and the subcontractor, who should bear responsibility for the cost of defending these claims and repairing the defects and damage? Historically, contracts for work on residential projects have required the subcontractor to assume responsibility if his workmanship is involved. The subcontractor was to defend the builder and hold it harmless from all claims arising out of, related to or deriving from the subcontractor’s work, including labor and materials. Critics of these “indemnity provisions” claimed they unfairly imposed liability on subcontractors regardless of whether their work was only partially to blame. Read the rest of this entry »
Homebuilders typically retain the services of architects, geotechnical engineers and structural engineers to design residences for proper layout, structural safety and geotechnical conditions. Visualize a luxury home located in a canyon with views aplenty. The home is adorned with the nicest interior finishes imaginable. It is perfectly nestled into a hillside; the living room, dining room and family room include vast picture windows that capture the beauty of open space on all sides. It is the nicest home in the subdivision. Priced at a mere 5 million, the would-be homebuyer loses all control and must buy. A year later, the home continues its steady movement downslope. Repair is no longer a solution; the dream home is no longer. Read the rest of this entry »
Over the years, claims have consistently been asserted against builders and architects for the defective design and construction of residential building projects. In the old days, these claims alleged water intrusion through the building envelope or skin and sought compensation for the resulting damage associated with these conditions. Read the rest of this entry »
On a weekend in spring, the employee of a stucco subcontractor builds makeshift scaffolding to assist in applying a three-coat stucco system to a two-story single-family residence. He has been on the job for three days. He is asked by his employer to work on a Saturday so the project stays on track. Neither the builder nor the architect know anything about the fact that he is working on a weekend, or that he has built this makeshift scaffolding. His foreman turns the corner, sees the scaffolding and insists that the worker immediately remove it because it is unsafe. The worker falls during the removal process and sustains head trauma and permanent head injuries. He remains in a coma. Will you be liable for the injuries he sustained? Read the rest of this entry »
