The courtrooms of California have always seen their share of nonsense litigation. For many of these lawsuits, the matter started as a claim against an insurance policy. Attorneys discovered a method for taking advantage of the courts, and they utilized a construction defect expert to do so.
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 lawsuits were part of a Litigious attack on Lloyds which occurred during the 1990s, following the Northridge earthquake. After this devastating natural disaster, several thousand homeowners went to the original blue-prints of their homes and checked the framing that existed with what had been promised on the original schematics. With the aid of some experts on drafting and architecture, a jury was shown how only 25% of promised structural reinforcement had actually been performed.
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.
Now that twenty years has passed, everyone can see that this concrete did not dissolve. Settlement funds paid out were supposed to be utilized for the laying of a better grade of concrete. Instead, one sees that these funds were used most often to pay off the mortgages on these homes; which is understandable considering the cost of property in the area.
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 lawsuits were part of a Litigious attack on Lloyds which occurred during the 1990s, following the Northridge earthquake. After this devastating natural disaster, several thousand homeowners went to the original blue-prints of their homes and checked the framing that existed with what had been promised on the original schematics. With the aid of some experts on drafting and architecture, a jury was shown how only 25% of promised structural reinforcement had actually been performed.
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.
Now that twenty years has passed, everyone can see that this concrete did not dissolve. Settlement funds paid out were supposed to be utilized for the laying of a better grade of concrete. Instead, one sees that these funds were used most often to pay off the mortgages on these homes; which is understandable considering the cost of property in the area.
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.
No comments:
Post a Comment