Need a book? Engineering books recommendations...
Fwd: Re: construction liability[Subject Prev][Subject Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
- To: addseaoc(--nospam--at)euken.com
- Subject: Fwd: Re: construction liability
- From: rlewis(--nospam--at)techteam.org (Richard Lewis)
- Date: 30 Jul 1997 14:51:05 GMT
In a message dated 97-03-08 16:11:14 EST, HARRISENGR(--nospam--at)aol.com wrote: <<Yesterdays L.A. times ( Fri, 3-7-97 ) has a small article on page 2 of the business section about AB746. This bill would give ( CA ) consumers 6 years instead of the current 10 years to sue for building deficiencies. ... I think this is good for engineers and i support it but i wish there was more i could do. Any ideas?>> This bill may be a mixed blessing for engineers. Yes, it would shorten the statute of limitations to 6 years, which is a plus. But, as the Legislative Counsel noted in his Digest, " This bill would provide that a builder, developer, contractor, subcontractor, seller of residential improvements, or supplier, as specified, shall not be held liable for any loss or damage occasioned by any deficiency in the design, specifications, surveying, planning, supervision, or observation of construction of residential improvements, unless the loss or damage is occasioned by a construction defect, as defined." In plain language, this means contractors and suppliers can't be sued unless construction defects can be established. If it becomes tougher to sue these relatively deeper pockets, engineers with shallow pockets may get hauled into court more often than now. This bill, sponsored by the California Building Industry Association, is just a reincarnation of similar past failed efforts. The CBIA members are mostly tract builders, and they don't have a history of doing favors for engineers. Their strategy this time, apparently, is to throw in something for design professionals in hope of gaining broader support, or at least neutralizing opposition that surfaced in previous attempts. It will be interesting to see what positions SEAOC, CEAC, and CCAIA will take on this bill. If the SEAOC Board decides to support it, presumably after weighing the merits in a more informed manner than we can as individuals, then we should write our representatives and do likewise. But it isn't a given that this will be the decision. Franklin Lew, SE --- Internet Message Header Follows --- Received: from server1.seaoc.org (bqe.com [184.108.40.206]) by host1.texramp.net (8.8.5/8.8.5) with SMTP id WAA22619 for <rlewis(--nospam--at)techteam.org>; Sat, 8 Mar 1997 22:04:08 -0600 (CST) Received: from emout11.mx.aol.com by server1.seaoc.org (NTList 3.02.10) id za008683; Sat, 8 Mar 1997 20:00:02 -0800 Received: (from root@localhost) by emout11.mail.aol.com (8.7.6/8.7.3/AOL-2.0.0) id WAA18638 for seaoc(--nospam--at)seaoc.org; Sat, 8 Mar 1997 22:57:19 -0500 (EST) Date: Sat, 8 Mar 1997 22:57:19 -0500 (EST) From: IteUrsi(--nospam--at)aol.com Message-ID: <970308225718_179239771(--nospam--at)emout11.mail.aol.com> To: seaoc(--nospam--at)seaoc.org Subject: Re: construction liability Reply-To: seaoc(--nospam--at)seaoc.org Error-To: seaoc-ad(--nospam--at)seaoc.org X-Loop: seaoc(--nospam--at)seaoc.org X-Info: [SEAOC] Owner: seaoc-ad(--nospam--at)seaoc.org X-POP3-Rcpt: seaoc-ad(--nospam--at)seaoc.org X-Sender: seaoc-ad(--nospam--at)seaoc.org Precedence: list X-ListMember: rlewis(--nospam--at)techteam.org [seaoc(--nospam--at)seaoc.org] __________________________________________________ Richard Lewis, P.E. Missionary TECH Team rlewis(--nospam--at)techteam.org The service mission like-minded Christian organizations may turn to for technical assistance and know-how.
- Prev by Subject: Fwd: construction liability
- Next by Subject: Fwd: Re: Construction Tolerances
- Previous by thread: Fwd: construction liability
- Next by thread: Fwd: Quality issues in engineering practice - Internet discussion