$22.6M Settlement, Reply to off board post.

[Guest guest]

I received this email from someone off board regarding the LA Mold Lawsuit Discussion. When I went to reply, I got an error message saying the email was no longer valid. So, I am deleting the name of the sender and posting here, so they may read my response.

Sharon

Here is what I got:

Whose Mold Is It???I caught the very end of the report on Good Morning America where teh reporter was holding a piece of wood (2x4?) from this home. It was severly rotted. In light of the settlement, I pose the following question?How did anyone determine if the mold was "lumberyard mold" (mold growth on the wood when it was delivered to the job site), "construction mold" (mold that grew during construction of the home) or "leaking home mold" (mold that grew due to poor construction practices)? If the drainage plane is properly installed (building wrap, flashings, etc.) then water CANNOT GET ONTO THE INTERIOR OF THE WALL and mold CANNOT GROW. Sure appears (to me) that the builder (and subs) are at fault. I believe that we all agree that mold spores on on every surface of every piece of building material in a home. Control the water and you control the mold growth. To quote Joe Lstiburek from one of his seminars, "If you flash, you save your cash".Funny how this simple concept is not part of the discussion or if it is, it is buried in the "fine print". Every builder is now open to getting sued for one tiny mold spot on a joist in the basement. Now every prospective home buyer will become a mold detective. Oh well, I guess it means more work for the firm I work. Most of the effort will be educating the buyer about mold; not always easy when thes saw it on GMA (or pick any other media).

****************

Dear Mr. xxxxxxxxx,

Although I have not read the court docs yet and do not yet have privvy to all info, as I understand it, there was some evidence that the lumber was not stored properly and that contributed to the problem. Although, that could not have been the whole problem because there were 16 other defendants who settled for a whopping $9.6M before this case even went to trial.

Builders are no more likely to get sued for a tiny spot of mold on lumber than they ever were. That doesn't happen because it is highly unlikely that someone will get sick from a tiny spot of mold. However, we will probably see an increase in the price of lumber because of all the nonexistant "frivilous lawsuits" being claimed over the matter.

I know the pubilicized version of what is going on out here over this issue is that people are greedy litigators and their lawyers are scum who will take any case, even without merit.

If you look closely, that is not even close to logical. Besides being very sick, people go through sheer hell in the litigation process of mold cases. They have every crevice of their lives examined by the defense attorneys. These mold cases are complex litigation and are very expensive to litigate. I have been told this one was $800K in costs, not including attorney's fees. Most owner occupied mold cases are around $50K to $90K in costs.

Unlike defense attorneys, who are paid by the hour, plaintiff attorneys do not get paid unless they win. So it is not likely in mold cases that someone would be willing to risk that much money or that an attorney would be willing to put up his own money and time for a bogus case. These things are hard enough to win when they are legit, with some of those who represent the defense being high paid hired guns. (I say some, because not all who rep the defense fall into this catagory)

So to get back to the original proposition. No, builders are at no greater risk of getting sued for a little spot of mold then they were before. However, if they are a builder or lumber company who has truly screwed up big time, then yes, the stakes are now higher....as they should be.

I wish someone could explain that to the building industry. I would anticipate a bit of hysteria running through their veins about now because of the misinformation mill. I would also think their insurers probably have their calculators going - computing the anticipated premium increase - while they are telling the builders it all the scum sucking plaintiff's bar's fault for the increase in premiums (and increased insurance company profit margins)

In this case, it looks to me and the defendants claims there was an element of the insurance company leaving their client out to dry. This lumber company should have asked for Cumis Counsel. (sp?)

No doubt, there will be residual lawsuits from this one. Many times, there are.

Manhattan Beach family wins $22.6 million suit the local version.

Sharon