Return to index: [Subject] [Thread] [Date] [Author]

RE: Aase ruling

[Subject Prev][Subject Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
I'm not sure I follow your thought process.

My understanding is that:
Pre-Aase, if a contractor...let's say...neglected to put plywood on the
shear walls (as properly designed and conveyed on the plans) and
misallocated hold downs (also properly designed and conveyed on the plans)
,a homeowner in California could make a claim and have those oversights
corrected. 
Post-Aase a homeowner can not make a claim unless there is damage.

My concern is that damage must occur before a "construction" defect is
acknowledged as such.

Sharon Robertson Bonds, PE
Salerno/Livingston Architects
363 Fifth Avenue, Third Floor
San Diego, California  92101
(619) 234-7471

	-----Original Message-----
	From:	Steven A. [SMTP:cratylus(--nospam--at)earthlink.net]
	Sent:	Tuesday, April 03, 2001 2:25 PM
	To:	seaint(--nospam--at)seaint.org
	Subject:	Re: Aase ruling

	Dear Sharon:

	     Those concerned about the ramifications of this case should
keep in mind
	that the court limited its ruling to negligence claims and I believe
said it
	does not apply to a claim based on contract or warranty.

	     This may mean that those responsible for design defects
(negligence) fare
	better than those promising good construction. I believe that a full
study of
	this case, in the context of professional liability and construction
warranty
	(what typical contractors are held to) will impact builders more
than designers.


	Steven A.





	sharonb(--nospam--at)slarchitects.com wrote:

	> Have you received any response from any of the members of the
California
	> legislature?
	>
	> Sharon Robertson Bonds, PE
	> Salerno/Livingston Architects
	> 363 Fifth Avenue, Third Floor
	> San Diego, California  92101
	> (619) 234-7471
	>
	>         -----Original Message-----
	>         From:   chuckuc [SMTP:chuckuc(--nospam--at)pacbell.net]
	>         Sent:   Tuesday, April 03, 2001 10:46 AM
	>         To:     seaint(--nospam--at)seaint.org
	>         Subject:        Aase ruling
	>
	>         Dennis-
	>         I did the only thing I could think of.
	>         1. A letter of concern to various members of the
California
	> legislature.
	>
	>         "I am writing to express my concern about the recent Cal.
Supreme
	> Court
	>         decision in the Aase case regarding construction defects.
The court
	>         ruled that builders could ignore every provision of the
building
	> code
	>         and suffer no repair cost until there is an actual injury.
This is
	> the
	>         worst possible public policy.  California's structural
engineers
	> have
	>         been at the forefront of efforts to make our construction
more
	>         earthquake resistant.  This ruling is a major setback for
safe
	>         construction.
	>         The court's decision is one of the stupidest pieces of
reasoning I
	> have
	>         ever seen.  It incents developers to hire the cheapest,
most
	>         unprincipled builders who simply gamble on not getting
caught by the
	>         building inspector.  For the subsequent homeowner there is
no
	> recourse
	>         except to wait for an earthquake to wreck the home and/or
kill
	> someone.
	>         Construction quality is poor already and this will make it
worse.
	>         The Chief Justice's dissent calls on the legislature to
take action
	> to
	>         protect California's residents.  Please do so ASAP."
	>         Chuck Utzman, P.E.
	>
	>         2. A letter to the editor of the Journal of Light
Construction (they
	>         carried a recent summary piece on Aase.)
	>
	>         "The example you cited in your piece is a perfect example
of why the
	>         Aase decision is aasinine. An electrical subcontractor is
now
	> invited to
	>         build an electrical death-trap and the homeowner or
General
	> Contractor
	>         must wait until someone is electrocuted to get money to
fix it. The
	> same
	>         logic is applied to seismic safety problems, the court
sees no
	> problem
	>         until an earthquake wrecks your house.  This ruling is the
work of
	>         jurists with too many books and no common sense.  It is
doubtful
	> that
	>         the problem will be rectified by the California
legislature until a
	>         sufficient number of people are killed to get their
attention."
	>         Chuck Utzman, P.E., G.C.
	>
***
	>         *   Read list FAQ at: http://www.seaint.org/list_FAQ.asp
	>         *   This email was sent to you via Structural Engineers
	>         *   Association of Southern California (SEAOSC) server. To
	>         *   subscribe (no fee) to the list, send email to
	>         *   admin(--nospam--at)seaint.org and in the body of the message type
	>         *   "join seaint" (no quotes). To Unsubscribe, send email
	>         *   to admin(--nospam--at)seaint.org and in the body of the message
	>         *   type "leave seaint" (no quotes). For questions, send
	>         *   email to seaint-ad(--nospam--at)seaint.org. Remember, any email you
	>         *   send to the list is public domain and may be re-posted
	>         *   without your permission. Make sure you visit our web
	>         *   site at: http://www.seaint.org
********
	>