PING: Lawyers or anyone who knows about Construction

[oliegirl]

My parents own a condo in Orange Beach, AL...as a result of Ivan, the roof the building (32 total units in building - 8 floors, 4 on each floor) sustained some damage, which was repaired by a company the board contracted. The work was not done right and during some heavy rains that came through months after Ivan, the 4 units on top floor of the building (including my parents) sustained water damage. Their unit had about $15K worth of damage, but some were worse and some not as bad. The roof was re-repaired and everyone thought it was fine.

Last week, in preparation for Dennis, they went up on the roof and noticed that some of the panels they had installed were not installed correctly (I don't know the specifics) and in order to keep them from coming off during the storms, some extra panels were installed on top of these existing panels, as a "patch" until after Dennis came through and they could re-do the work correctly. The braniacs who put the new panels on, used large screws and managed to screw all the way through the ceiling of the condo building and into the individual units. As a result, water dripped down these screws and they now all have water in them again.

My question is this - the board has mentioned that they are going to hire an attorney, but my parents are wondering if they can sue individually, or since they as unit owners didn't hire the company, are they not able to bring a case against them. The board has proven themselves through a number of situations to be inept and not very aggressive when it comes to situations like this. Does anyone know what their rights are in this type of situation, or know of a legal website that could give them some information? Or...know of any attorneys in Georgia (where they reside) or Alabama (where the condo is) who they could talk to?

[Swaggs]

I would recommend that they file a claim with their insurance company to get their property restored/replaced as quickly as possible. You can be certain that the insurance company will pursue subrogation against any and all negligent parties, and they will absorb the legal fees.

[KevinNU7]

I believe they could sue the board and kind of get the ball rolling that way :)

[oliegirl]

I would recommend that they file a claim with their insurance company to get their property restored/replaced as quickly as possible. You can be certain that the insurance company will pursue subrogation against any and all negligent parties, and they will absorb the legal fees.

They have already contacted their ins. company - but they want to sue the roofing company for whatever you sue someone for in this situation...for loss of use, "pain and suffering", etc...

[Farrah Whitworth-Rahn]

I think our FOFC legal eagles are going to start charging for their advice with all the pinging going on around here lately...

[Ksyrup]

If loss of consortium is involved, I'm out of here.

[digamma]

Their CCR's may have some provisions that address this. This isn't my area of law, but unless they are prohibited from suing on their own by the CCR's or other contract with the building management, I can't think of a reason why they wouldn't be able to sue on their own.

[oliegirl]

Their CCR's may have some provisions that address this. This isn't my area of law, but unless they are prohibited from suing on their own by the CCR's or other contract with the building management, I can't think of a reason why they wouldn't be able to sue on their own.


Dumb question - what is a CCR?

[hhiipp]

Creedance Clearwater Revival.

[Ksyrup]

Covenants Conditions and Restrictions

[digamma]

Dumb question - what is a CCR?
Oh, sorry. Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions. Basically, the rules they agree to abide by in living in the complex. I think it's conceivable that the CCR's may state that the building has the sole right to sue contractors hired by the building, but again not my area of law and just a guess.

[kcchief19]

Their CCR's may have some provisions that address this. This isn't my area of law, but unless they are prohibited from suing on their own by the CCR's or other contract with the building management, I can't think of a reason why they wouldn't be able to sue on their own. I'm not an attorney -- I am involved in construction, however -- and that pretty much sums up my understanding of it.

Six of one/half dozen of another over whether you are more "successful" pursuing a claim on your own or as a whole. If there are defects resulting from contractor work, I've seen most of the cases be pursued as a class action, but the law differs there in some ways too.

I don't know if Alabama has a notice and opportunity to repair law. In that case, there are steps you have to go through to notify the contractor of the defect and perhaps enter mediation before you can go to a lawsuit. It's designed to try and get the problem solved so you don't have to resort to a lawsuit.

If the goal is get the problem fixed or the goal is to get a back judgement, these are two separate mindsets.

[oliegirl]

I'm not an attorney -- I am involved in construction, however -- and that pretty much sums up my understanding of it.

Six of one/half dozen of another over whether you are more "successful" pursuing a claim on your own or as a whole. If there are defects resulting from contractor work, I've seen most of the cases be pursued as a class action, but the law differs there in some ways too.

I don't know if Alabama has a notice and opportunity to repair law. In that case, there are steps you have to go through to notify the contractor of the defect and perhaps enter mediation before you can go to a lawsuit. It's designed to try and get the problem solved so you don't have to resort to a lawsuit.

If the goal is get the problem fixed or the goal is to get a back judgement, these are two separate mindsets.


I think their goal is both...first to get it fixed and repair any damage that was done by the water. Second, to sue and get a judgement...that is where we are confused. Unfortunately, not living there full time they don't have the "connections" they have here and know of good attorneys who can handle this. And as I said, the board seems to have a very lax position - since it's not "their" problem (not their unit that was damaged), they are not very aggressive in pursuing legal action.

As for the opportunity to repair law, it would seem that since the work they did the first time was not right, which caused the first water damage, then it wasn't repaired right after that, which was caught before Dennis hit and not repaired correctly, which caused the second water damage, that they have had more than enough opportunity and notice that their work was not up to par. (Sorry for the run-on sentence!)