The Daily Journal just reported that a Florida couple was awarded $2.4 million in damages on Friday in the nation's first jury trial over defective Chinese drywall. The damages were for loss of use and enjoyment of the home, cost of repair, and diminution in value. The developer is vowing to appeal the verdict. This is one to keep an eye on.
I am attorney Robert A. von Esch IV. I practice real estate and construction defect litigation. You can reach me via www.voneschlaw.com.
Monday, June 21, 2010
New Firm
After 10 years of paying my dues, I have decided to open my own firm. As of June 15, 2010, I am no longer an employee of Schroeder & Associates. I am now the owner of the LAW OFFICE OF ROBERT A. VON ESCH IV, ALC. I have offices in Orange County and the Inland Empire. I am practicing real estate, business, construction defect, and personal injury litigation, as I have for the past 10 years. If you wish to contact me, please visit www.voneschlaw.com.
Wednesday, May 19, 2010
Right To Repair Act
In California, we have Civil Code 896 et seq, also known as the Right To Repair Act. The Act requires a homeowner to give the builder a chance to repair before the homeowner can sue the developer for construction defects, assuming the developer complies with the Act (this is an entirely separate and lengthy discussion). Once the developer gets notice of the defects, he can inspect and make an offer to repair or settle.
If the developer offers to repair, he cannot get a relase from the homeowner. Thus, the homeowner can still sue the developer. In fact, the homeowner may have additional claims after the repairs have been made 1) original defects and 2) defective repair work.
If the developer offers a cash settlement instead of offering to make repairs, he can obtain a release, assuming the homeowner is willing to accept the cash offer.
In essence, there are pros and cons to both approaches. Repairs may be cheaper for the developer, but may not get you out of a lawsuit. Cash may be more expensive up front but, may get you out of a lawsuit.
I am attorney Robert A. Von Esch IV. I handle construction defect, contractor disputes, and real estate matters. If you need asssistance in these areas, please do not hesitate to contact me via www.voneschlaw.com.
If the developer offers to repair, he cannot get a relase from the homeowner. Thus, the homeowner can still sue the developer. In fact, the homeowner may have additional claims after the repairs have been made 1) original defects and 2) defective repair work.
If the developer offers a cash settlement instead of offering to make repairs, he can obtain a release, assuming the homeowner is willing to accept the cash offer.
In essence, there are pros and cons to both approaches. Repairs may be cheaper for the developer, but may not get you out of a lawsuit. Cash may be more expensive up front but, may get you out of a lawsuit.
I am attorney Robert A. Von Esch IV. I handle construction defect, contractor disputes, and real estate matters. If you need asssistance in these areas, please do not hesitate to contact me via www.voneschlaw.com.
Monday, May 17, 2010
No Insurance Coverage For Following The Plans?
I believe most contractors follow the plans they are given, unless, they discover a flaw or mistake in the plans. I believe most contractors and clients would characterize the job as a success if the plans were followed correctly. Interestingly enough, major insurance carriers are considering punishing both the contractor and consumer for good work.
I just attended an insurance industry conference, and major insurance coverage attorneys for the major carriers lectured about "intentional conduct." Intentional conduct is generally not covered. Thus, if you commit fraud or intentionally do something wrong, there is no insurance coverage for this act.
However, the insurance industry is seemingly taking this concept to a perverse level. Carriers are now discussing the following: if a contractor follows the plans but, there are still problems with the construction that render the project damaged (leaks, cracks, etc.), there may be no coverage. Why? The contractor followed the plans and intended to build the house as constructed thus, his intentional conduct should not be covered, even when unintended results arise, such as leaks, cracks, etc. In essence, contractors and consumers will be punished for following the plans, which before now, was considered the sign of a job well done.
This is an area of the law to keep an eye on!
I practice construction defect, real estate, and serious injury litigation. If you need assistance or have questions, please do not hesitate to contact me via www.voneschlaw.com
I just attended an insurance industry conference, and major insurance coverage attorneys for the major carriers lectured about "intentional conduct." Intentional conduct is generally not covered. Thus, if you commit fraud or intentionally do something wrong, there is no insurance coverage for this act.
However, the insurance industry is seemingly taking this concept to a perverse level. Carriers are now discussing the following: if a contractor follows the plans but, there are still problems with the construction that render the project damaged (leaks, cracks, etc.), there may be no coverage. Why? The contractor followed the plans and intended to build the house as constructed thus, his intentional conduct should not be covered, even when unintended results arise, such as leaks, cracks, etc. In essence, contractors and consumers will be punished for following the plans, which before now, was considered the sign of a job well done.
This is an area of the law to keep an eye on!
I practice construction defect, real estate, and serious injury litigation. If you need assistance or have questions, please do not hesitate to contact me via www.voneschlaw.com
Thursday, May 13, 2010
Adequate Insurance Coverage
I cannot emphasize the importance of making sure you (contractor) have adequate insurance coverage before you begin a construction project. Whether you are a sub or gc, take the time to assess primary and excess coverage and limits. Determine whether the policies are burning limits, work completed, wrap, and know the exclusions. Is coverage denied without a valid indemnity clause in the construction agreement? Are subsidence, mold, or sb 800 claims covered? Taking the time to address these issues at the onset can save you a lot of money and heartache. Call me for an insurance evaluation before your next project. I can be reached via www.voneschlaw.com.
Tuesday, April 13, 2010
Insurance Coverage For Contractors
Most Commercial General Liability (CGL) insurance policies require contractors to obtain written contracts with their subcontractors. In fact, some of them require the written contract to contain an indemnity clause (promise to defend and/or cover the cost of the judgment). If you fail to meet these requirements, the CGL carrier takes the position that your work is not covered. Thus, if you get sued, don't count on having the carrier defend you or cover the judgment or settlement, unless, you have a signed written contract with your sub-contractor, that contains an indemnity clause.
However, there is a common mistake made by the insurance companies that may enable you to obtain coverage. If a sub-contractor names you as an additional insured and the sub-contractors carrier fails to provide you with a copy of the policy or give you notice of the exclusion, the carrier may not be able to rely on the exclusion as a basis for denying coverage. In otherwords, if the carrier doesn't tell you in advance that it will not provide coverage without a signed contract that contains an indemnity clause, they may have to provide you coverage.
I am attorney Robert A. Von Esch IV. If you are involved in a construction defect or construction dispute, and your carrier is denying coverage, please do not hesitate to contact me. My contact information is available at www.voneschlaw.com.
However, there is a common mistake made by the insurance companies that may enable you to obtain coverage. If a sub-contractor names you as an additional insured and the sub-contractors carrier fails to provide you with a copy of the policy or give you notice of the exclusion, the carrier may not be able to rely on the exclusion as a basis for denying coverage. In otherwords, if the carrier doesn't tell you in advance that it will not provide coverage without a signed contract that contains an indemnity clause, they may have to provide you coverage.
I am attorney Robert A. Von Esch IV. If you are involved in a construction defect or construction dispute, and your carrier is denying coverage, please do not hesitate to contact me. My contact information is available at www.voneschlaw.com.
Tuesday, April 6, 2010
Naples Sea Wall
Naples is a nice coastal community in the Long Beach area. It is a community surrounded by water ways or canals. The property owners along the waters edge are protected by sea walls. The sea walls protect the abutting propery owners from erosion and subsidence. However, as a result of their neighbors failure to maintain their portions of the sea wall system, abutting property owners are at risk of losing portions of their lots as erosion and subsidence takes its toll. Civil Code 832 says property owners owe one another a duty of subjacent and lateral support. Furthermore, the failure to maintain the sea wall may constitute a nuisance if it is threatening a neighbors lot. This peacefull community may be entagled in a nasty fight as homeowners resort to legal action against their neighbors in order to protect their homes.
I am attorney Robert A. Von Esch IV and I practice real estate, construction defect, and subsidence law. If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact me via www.voneschlaw.com.
I am attorney Robert A. Von Esch IV and I practice real estate, construction defect, and subsidence law. If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact me via www.voneschlaw.com.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
