Posts

Showing posts from April, 2007

The Change Order

I once had a construction lawyer say to me, "If there were one thing I would say to both contractors and homeowners to prevent problems during construction projects, it would be, 'All change orders should be in writing!" One day, I will go through my active cases and figure out how many of the disputes could have been prevented if the parties were to follow that rule. Homeowners frequently believe that items are included or will not cost extra. Contractors submit bills after the fact for "extras" that were unanticipated. Then the misunderstandings occur. Change orders should include a full description of the new work to be done, the types of materials to be used, and how the change will affect the expected completion date. They should spell out the additional price for labor and materials. Finally, they should be signed off on by all parties. If subcontractors are to be used to affect the change orders, I would note that down as well. It does not imply dis

OSHA and the Home Improvement Contractor-- Part 2

Image
Maybe home improvement workers are immortal. Look at the attached photo. These guys are on the third floor. Maybe they are not affected by gravity. If you cannot spot OSHA violations in this picture, you need to get some training. Protection against falls is something OSHA emphasizes all the time. It is one of their biggest concerns. They look for fall hazards on every construction inspection, and they almost always find them. Between October 1, 2006 and January 31, 2007 8 workers died from falls in New England. Violations of fall–protection rules are among those most frequently cited by OSHA for residential construction. One worker fell to his death while cleaning gutters. 4 workers died in separate incidents while performing residential roofing work. In one recent fatality a worker fell 2 stories from a roof when his step ladder slipped. (Did you notice the unopened step ladder in the photo? It was used for access to the roof. It is very unstable when used folded up. It would not tak

The Home Improvement Contractor Arbitration Program

In Massachusetts, the state runs a Home Improvement Contractor Arbitration Program that gives homeowners and contractors an alternative to filing suit when a dispute arises. This program has many advantages. For one thing, the cost of filing for arbitration is generally less expensive than filing suit. Once the application is filed, the state oversees the process, and it is usually fairly efficient. Unlike litigation, there is usually little discovery (the exchange of information) which allows the parties to control costs. The program allows for a half-day hearing, and the arbitrator can opt to make a site visit. The arbitrator is also authorized to award double or triple damages and costs under M.G.L. c. 93A. The arbitrator cannot award attorney's fees. The arbitrator's award is appealable (unlike most arbitrations), and the parties are entitled to a new trial if the decision is appealed. All findings of fact issuing from arbitration shall be taken as prima facie evidence in a

The Arbitration Clause and the Contractor

In Massachusetts, the homeowner has a presumptive right to pursue his or her claim through the Home Improvement Contractor Arbitration Program. However, if the contractor wants to go through the arbitration program, he must insert a clause in his contract that states that he is entitled to do so. The state of Massachusetts has a model home improvement contract on its website, and there is a sample clause that most contractors insert in their contracts. It states as follows: The Contractor and Homeowner hereby mutually agree in advance that in the event the Contractor has a dispute concerning the contract, the Contractor may submit such dispute to a private arbitration service, which has been approved by the Secretary of the Office of Consumer Affairs and Business Regulations. The consumer shall be required to submit to such arbitration as provided in M.G.L. c. 142A. Most contractors think that this clause would require the homeowner to go through arbitration if they have a dispute.