California has earned their reputation for outlandish settlements on nonsense litigation very honestly. They are the darling child of property casualty claims against insurance companies who become litigious when a law firm encourages homeowners to get together and sue under four policy terms for each suit brought. These became a cash-cow for attorneys in California who had big brass ones and called in a construction defect expert to make a case.
Within this genre there are those who have marketable knowledge about wear and tear on carpet, wood erosion, and degeneration of concrete. The concrete experts were used most often by certain law firms, as they were willing to testify that improper mixing of ingredients resulted poorly constructed foundation slabs, driveways, sidewalks, and curbs. It was claimed that, within ten years, the concrete would dissolve completely.
These were lawsuits of the Nineties which followed a series of settlements made following the Northridge quake. There were homeowners pulling out the blue-prints of their houses, and successfully showing that the framing had been put together in a shoddy fashion. The courts agreed that it constituted fraud since there was an expectation that those who built the structures had followed these schematics.
This means that where the blue-print showed 100 nails or screws should have been present on a particular part of the framework, only 25 nails or screws were holding it in place. The companies who constructed these homes were guilty of cutting corners with such consistency that it could not be an accident. On average, about 75% of the homes built by certain contractors had followed this model.
The Northridge Earthquake initiated this cycle of class-action lawsuits brought by homeowners in the state. At this point, firms moved in like carpetbaggers, going door-to-door in many communities in order to organize class-action suits. If they could not prove that shoddy work was performed on the structure through framing schematics, then they went to the chemistry involved in laying the groundwork for structures in the area.
If the integrity of framing could not be brought to question, the integrity of carpet and linoleum was. With settlements averaging only around $10,000.00, counsel representing the homeowners went hunting for a more lucrative angle. They found their golden tuna when they discovered PhD-qualified professors with some technical knowledge on concrete, along with some theories about how it can fail within decades if poorly mixed materials are used on a fault line.
In hindsight we see that these concrete slabs, driveways, sidewalks, and curbs did not crumble and fail. While some of the insurance loopholes have been closed, it does not change the fact that the settlements were not used by the homeowners to repair or replace any concrete. These monies were used the way most free and easy money gets used, and we can only hope that some children were put through college at least.
Most of these insurance policies were open-peril contracts where the types of claims not covered had to be specifically delineated. Within most of these insurance contracts, construction defects were specifically named as an exclusion to coverage. These policies were written in this way because of the land movement so prevalent in California. To get around this, these lawsuits were made under the portion of coverage known as completed operations.
Within this genre there are those who have marketable knowledge about wear and tear on carpet, wood erosion, and degeneration of concrete. The concrete experts were used most often by certain law firms, as they were willing to testify that improper mixing of ingredients resulted poorly constructed foundation slabs, driveways, sidewalks, and curbs. It was claimed that, within ten years, the concrete would dissolve completely.
These were lawsuits of the Nineties which followed a series of settlements made following the Northridge quake. There were homeowners pulling out the blue-prints of their houses, and successfully showing that the framing had been put together in a shoddy fashion. The courts agreed that it constituted fraud since there was an expectation that those who built the structures had followed these schematics.
This means that where the blue-print showed 100 nails or screws should have been present on a particular part of the framework, only 25 nails or screws were holding it in place. The companies who constructed these homes were guilty of cutting corners with such consistency that it could not be an accident. On average, about 75% of the homes built by certain contractors had followed this model.
The Northridge Earthquake initiated this cycle of class-action lawsuits brought by homeowners in the state. At this point, firms moved in like carpetbaggers, going door-to-door in many communities in order to organize class-action suits. If they could not prove that shoddy work was performed on the structure through framing schematics, then they went to the chemistry involved in laying the groundwork for structures in the area.
If the integrity of framing could not be brought to question, the integrity of carpet and linoleum was. With settlements averaging only around $10,000.00, counsel representing the homeowners went hunting for a more lucrative angle. They found their golden tuna when they discovered PhD-qualified professors with some technical knowledge on concrete, along with some theories about how it can fail within decades if poorly mixed materials are used on a fault line.
In hindsight we see that these concrete slabs, driveways, sidewalks, and curbs did not crumble and fail. While some of the insurance loopholes have been closed, it does not change the fact that the settlements were not used by the homeowners to repair or replace any concrete. These monies were used the way most free and easy money gets used, and we can only hope that some children were put through college at least.
Most of these insurance policies were open-peril contracts where the types of claims not covered had to be specifically delineated. Within most of these insurance contracts, construction defects were specifically named as an exclusion to coverage. These policies were written in this way because of the land movement so prevalent in California. To get around this, these lawsuits were made under the portion of coverage known as completed operations.
0 komentar:
Posting Komentar