Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: Alberta's Child

It wasn’t from a building inspector. It was from an engineering consultant hired by the board.

And yes, there presumably was a failure on the part of the engineer to communicate due urgency.


103 posted on 06/26/2021 8:26:41 AM PDT by 9YearLurker
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies ]


To: 9YearLurker
You have no way of knowing the engineer’s legal exposure that unless you know the terms of the engagement letter or contract between the engineer and the association.

The engineering report cited in this article is only nine pages long and includes no assessment of the structural integrity of any part of the building. It was basically a visual inspection where the engineer highlighted a number of problems and recommended some general solutions. The main focus appears to be water infiltration into individual condo units during storms. Interestingly, the report noted a poor feature in the original design that caused water to pool instead of draining properly, and noted some cases of poor workmanship in some repairs that had been done over the years.

107 posted on 06/26/2021 8:52:48 AM PDT by Alberta's Child ("And once in a night I dreamed you were there; I canceled my flight from going nowhere.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 103 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson