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

RE: Aase ruling

[Subject Prev][Subject Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
I believe you are correct. There is an indirect benefit to engineers, but
most whom I have talked to agree that the decision is damaging to the
homeowner.
On clarification. I believe that the court was saying that as a "Product"
the defects were to be treated under Contract law based on the terms and
compliance of the builders warranty. This is what I interpreted from reading
the court decision.

Dennis

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Steven A. [mailto: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.
> >
> >
>
>