Owner Bait and Switch 1

[bigmig]

I have been getting more and more projects that have common characteristics:

1. Owned by slum lords
2. Building Department has required them to hire an engineer because of life/safety issues reported by a complaining neighbor.
3. The owner conveys that they actually are interested in maintaining their building for the tenants life and property safety, despite the fact that they haven't done so in about 35 years, and every other sentence is "How much is this going to cost?".

I inspect these places, and issue a letter stating that their property is about to kill someone and that we need immediate shoring until a permanent fix can be implemented. Once the job is temporarily shored, the owner disappears into the horizon, never to be heard from again. In their mind the problem was "fixed", despite numerous points of communication stating that this is a temporary shoring fix. I feel frustrated because my recommendations for a permanent repair were ignored, the problem is not fixed, it is patched. I feel like the owner never had intended on fixing it, they just conveyed that to me to pacify me and the building department.

Do I go to the building department? If the building gets shut down, the owner's tenants move out, and then I get a letter from their lawyer stating that I just cost them $10,000 a month in rent for a problem that they shored per my directions.

What I want is for the building to be safe....permanently. How do I go about getting that to happen when the owner is too cheap and slimy to take that responsibility?

 

[CANPRO]

bigmig, see below link to the Elliot Lake Mall Collapse report. It was posted in the structural forum yesterday. It is worth a read and it is directly related to your question.

The owner of the mall did this very thing, and everyone involved seemed to play along. It sounds like you're doing the right thing...I think you should push the issue until it is fixed to your satisfaction. The owner likely won't respond to the issue until the City gets involved. I think you should forward your report and concerns to a City official, have them acknowledge the receipt of the report and concerns and then periodically followup (possibly copy your local professional association during correspondence). We are engineers, not the police...the local authorities need to step in at some point and make something happen. Good luck.

http://elliotlakeinquiry.ca/report/index.html

 

[msquared48]

Shut the project down and force the issue. This owner is probably foreign and will try to invoke the "I didn't know" song. That will not fly in a court of law here. He needs to read the writing on the wall. Better for the tenants to be forced out alive rather than in bodybags. Stand your ground. You are right here.

Mike McCann, PE, SE (WA)

 

[Canuck67]

Whenever I am in a similar situation and temporary shoring is immediately required, I put a clear time limit on the temporary support and the building department gets cc'd on the letter from the outset. A summary of the next steps required are identified in my report. The time limit is usually sufficient time to complete an indepth investigation, prepare repair specifications and tender the project. Depending on the severity of the situation and complexity/extent of the repairs, the time limit can be from 1 week to 6 months, but the time limit is always stated from the outset.

If the owner is conscientiously working towards a solution and the time limit is approaching, I will gladly extend it if safe to do so. If the time limit is approaching and nothing is being done, I followup with the building department a week or two before the deadline, in writing, and let them deal with it. In my jurisdiction, an engineer has no power to shut down anything, however, the building department and ministry of labour do and they generally take an engineers opinion very seriously. They are the ones making the decision, not you.

Whether you become open to legal ramifications depends on your performance. If your recommendations were found to be overly cautious and overblown, you may be open to legal action. If your recommendations were reasonable and well documented, you should have no worries. Where public safety is concerned, the possibility of future legal recourse against me, is of very little concern to my decision.

 

[SLTA]

bigmig, I think you're perfectly justified in going to to the building department with this. It hasn't been fixed; it's been TEMPORARILY shored. As long as you were clear, in writing, that the shoring was only supposed to be temporary, then you're not the bad guy if the building gets shut down.

Would you stand in court and say that you knew the temp shoring was there and no permanent solution was done?

Good luck - what a mess.

Please remember: we're not all guys!

 

[lacajun]

When people ask about cost too much they either:
[ul]
[li]Lack money[/li]
[li]Want to spend the money elsewhere[/li]
[/ul]

Wouldn't this ultimately fall under the OSHA aegis?

Pamela K. Quillin, P.E.
Quillin Engineering, LLC

 

[JStephen]

OSHA is concerned only with places of employment, not with residences.

 

[JayMaechtlen]

The term "temporary" is imprecise.
I've done temporary repairs for personal stuff that lasted for years.
In a professional situation, a real time period should be specified.
Regards
Jay

Jay Maechtlen

http://www.laserpubs.com/techcomm

 

[lacajun]

OSHA is concerned only with places of employment, not with residences.

I'm not too bright. Thx!

Pamela K. Quillin, P.E.
Quillin Engineering, LLC

 

[bridgebuster]

If OSHA could get their hands on residences they probably would.