 |
Advanced Environmental Solutions |
 |
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
| |
News & Litigation
The AES Answer to Costly Litigation, Delays, and Settlements for Developers and Builders. It is time for developers and builders to modify their building and selling methods to address the growing risk of “Toxic Mold Litigation”.
Your business is vulnerable to the expanding litigious nature of consumers and lawyers with regards to mold related health issues. Defective craftsmanship or faulty circumstances allow for water intrusion creating a breeding ground for toxic mold, which creates health risks to occupants.
Advanced Environmental Solutions (AES) will provide developers with preventative “Sealant” pretreatments and mold remediation for all new home construction.
Proactive Risk Management is taking preventative measures before the mold problem exists. This is the most cost efficient response to complicated and
|
|
|
expensive alternatives: repairs, remediation, delayed closings, litigation, settlements, and ultimate loss of consumer confidence, which results in declining business.
Toxic Mold Litigation
With the advent of “Toxic Mold Litigation”, it is imperative for developers to cautiously incorporate preventative measures to defend against liability issues with regards to mold growth and related health concerns.
Developers and builders have an opportunity to alleviate the excessive costs of liability claims due to “Toxic Mold Litigation” by consumers and lawyers. Developers can become leaders in protecting the consumers by taking a proactive preventative approach through: “Education” packets for every new home buyer, “Prevention” by means of quality control of craftsmanship and structural integrity, and mold “Pretreatment” of all new construction via the services and preventative “sealant” treatments by Advanced Environmental Solutions.
Case Number: CV02-00440 (3/14/04) Kuhn and Wilke v. Rockwood Properties Idaho, American West Real Estate, Commonwealth Management Corp., and B&B High Country Properties (Ada County, Idaho). Plaintiff’s notified defendant’s of hazardous defects and the presence of mold. Tests indicated unsafe levels of mold contamination. Plaintiffs exposure to mold suffered the following ailments: joint/bone aches, stiff neck, bloody noses, hives, rashes, fatigue respiratory problems, constant coughs, chronic colds, ear infections, rashes, blisters and emotional distress. Confidential Settlement.
Case Number: CV02-8374 (6/24/04) Heidi Pederson v. Mather Capital Corp., and Richard Wooley & Esther Wooley Trust: Disaster Kleenup (Ada County, Idaho). Plaintiff reported discoloration on the walls and health symptoms to defendant. Defendants painted over mold growth to conceal. Defendants conducted secret air quality tests that confirmed toxic high levels of mold, which they concealed from plaintiffs. Plaintiff injuries included: permanent respiratory system injury; asthma. Increased risk of cancer given the highly carcinogenic nature of the particular mold spores found. Settlement: $120,000.
ID0308 Construction Warranty Case (August 2003) Main v. Roth Homes (Idaho). Plaintiff purchased home from defendant. Within one year plaintiff notified defendant fo recurring problems with water intrusion and concerns over mold. Defendant was unwilling to discuss resolution. Settlement on eve of trial: $74,000.
US v. Kaufman and Broad Home Corporation (July 1991) (California), the court ruled Kaufman and Board Home Corporation to pay monetary civil penalty in the amount of $595,000.00.
Catherine Pittman v. Community Unit School District 303, a Unit of Local Government, Ill. Cir., Kane Co., No. 02-LK-142 (Illinois) An Illinois high school student sued a Geneva, Ill. School district, alleging that mold contamination at her school caused her personal injuries. The plaintiff alleges that she suffers from bodily injury, medical expenses and emotional distress.
Erin Brockovich v. Robert Selleck (California)
Erin Brockovich filed a personal injury/construction defect complaint against the former owner (Robert Selleck) and the builder, alleging that each had a role in causing water intrusion that led to the growth of mold. Brockovich alleges that she and members of her family have suffered adverse health effects from exposure to the mold.
Case Number: CCV0211573 (2/15/05) Paul and Renee Haynes; Pamela Hopkins v. Adair Homes, Inc (Clackamas County, OR). Plantiffs contend as a result of defective workmanship there was water intrusion and growth of toxigenic mold. Injuries included: diarrhea, nausea, upset stomach, fatigue, respiratory problems, muscular aches, eleveated blood pressure, hearing loss, dizziness, neurological deficits such as facial numbness, emotional distress, weight loss, fear and anxiety, vomiting, funny nose, hyperactivity, and impaired self esteem. Settlement: $498,417.
Case Number: 02025-05372 (5/22/03) Richard and Lynn Rosenfield v. Urban Renaissance, LLC (Multnomah, OR). Defendants claim construction defects resulted in water intrusion and mold growth that exacerbated pre-existing allergies and asthma. Plaintiff verdict: $500,000.
Case Number: CV99317 (10/00) John and Carol Armstrong v. Ranche and Windermere (Yamhill County, OR). Plaintiff and two children rented house from defendant. Home uninhabitable due to mold from moisture and lack of ventilation. Injuries included: respiratory problem due to mold exposure. Plaintiff settlement: $30,000.
Toxic Mold Litigation and Liability Summary
”Builders and developers have been hard hit by mold related construction defect claims that include not only property damage and mold remediation but also for personal injury as well. New cases are being filed daily!”
“The courts are increasingly loosening the standards for admissibility of “scientific” evidence. Recent decisions in Illinois and New Jersey indicate a lack of sympathy from the courts to allow the defendants to bar evidence for lack of truly definitive scientific study.” “Mold and the Facility Manager”, by Susan Hickman and Jason Wehrle
Legal remedies fall into two categories:
“Equitable Relief”: encompasses any non-monetary judicial decision such as specific performance and is usually only available when monetary relief would be inadequate. Specific performance may entail a court order that a person do (or not do) something, such as remediate a building.
“Legal Relief”: a monetary award in which the disputes between the parties are resolved by the payment of some amount of money. In the “Mold Legal Arena”,
suits have been filed requesting both “equitable relief” and “legal relief”.
“Education”, “Prevention”, “Pretreatment”
“Education”, “Prevention”, and “Pretreatment” are critical to the continued quality product and service homebuyers expect.
“Education” for the consumer about mold and mold prevention through educational packets for homebuyers promotes homeowner awareness and responsibility. The packets will detail the cause of mold growth and homeowner preventative measures to deter mold infestation.
“Prevention” is directly related to quality control of all contractors and subcontractors. Proper craftsmanship and attention to details directly relate to the structural integrity, essential for mold prevention.
“Pretreatment” will be the responsibility of Advanced Environmental Solutions. AES will “pretreat” all new construction during the framing and drywall stage. “Pretreatment” will include but not limited to: crawl space, framing, and drywall to ensure the domain has adequate protection from mold growth.
Mold Legislation
United States:
June 2002, Congressman John Conyers, Jr. (D-MI) unveiled the U.S. Toxic Mold Safety and Protection Act, HR 5040, known as the “Melina Act”. This is the first federal bill introduced to address indoor mold growth and implications for IAQ professional remediators.
California:
October 2001, California became the first state to pass mold legislation into law (Toxic Mold Protection Act, Senate Bill 732). The regulations address the toxic mold issue and provides guidelines for: How much mold is harmful to your health, how to assess and remediate toxic mold, how to educate the public about toxic mold, as well as disclosures for the presence of toxic molds with respect to real estate transactions.
Nevada:
2001 Statutes of Nevada, Page 2991) (Senate Bill 584) An act relating to projects of capital improvement that, among other things, appropriates funds for the Department of Human Resources that are to be used for mold remediation and prevention.
Illinois:
(Illinois Public Act 92-0008) (HB 3440) An appropriations bill, Section 18. The following named amounts...are reappropriated from the Build Illinois Bond Fund to the Capital Development Board for the Department of Veterans' Affairs for upgrading HVAC systems and removing fungi…
Maryland:
(Senate Bill 283) A bill for the purpose of establishing, for a limited time, a task force to study the nature, location, and extent of health and environmental risks posed to workers as a result of molds, spores, and other toxic organisms located in the HVAC systems of office buildings. A final report will include, among other things, recommendations for appropriate remedies, both physical and legislative
Texas:
Texas Homeowners insurance Policy Restructuring. Texas Department of Insurance Commissioner, Jose Montemayor, ordered changes that retain coverage for removal of mold, related to certain water damage, and provide options to purchase additional
coverage.
Summary
Advanced Environmental Solutions (AES) will provide developers with preventative “sealant” pretreatments and mold remediation for all new home construction. We will provide the service within full compliance of all subcontractor requirements mandated by your state.
AES will provide a cost effective, proactive response to the increasing “Toxic Mold Litigation” trends sweeping the nations courts. Advance Environmental Solutions with your assistance, will provide: education, awareness, and preventative “sealant” treatments for future home constructions while maintaining the excellence consumers expect from the residential and commercial development industry. |
|
|
Copyright © 2005 AES, Inc. All rights reserved.
