Litigation-I Win, You Lose vs. Mediation-Win/Win

Image
  Litigation is a zero-sum game.  It destroys relationships and fosters enmity between the parties.  Parties rarely walk away happy.  Even if they win, the expense of litigation is enormous, and collecting on judgments is difficult. Disputes ultimately resolve, but the focus on winning at any cost can lead to prolonged legal battles.  Living with a lawsuit causes ongoing stress, which can distract you from your business and even have an effect on your health. In a courtroom, the final decision lies with a judge or jury who may not fully grasp the complexities of the case. Parties relinquish control over the outcome, potentially leaving them dissatisfied with the final judgment. Mediation has the opposite effect.   Rather than polarizing people, it enables the parties to attack the issues and not each other.     The process promotes open communication, collaboration and problem-solving, which enables parties to actively participate in crafting mutually beneficial solutions.   It res

Lead-Based Paint Renovation, Repair and Painting Program Rule

As promised, I have been spending the last few weeks learning about the new Renovation, Repair and Painting Program that is going into effect on April 22, 2010. Contractors are scrambling to become certified and make themselves familiar with the law's requirements. It is my responsibility to read the law and try to predict where the legal issues will arise so that construction companies can protect themselves.

The first question is, in which situations does the Lead-Based Paint Renovation, Repair and Painting Program Rule apply? Directly from the EPA’s literature on the subject:

The Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA) addresses lead-based paint hazards created by renovation, repair, and painting activities that disturb lead-based paint in target housing and child-occupied facilities. ‘‘Target housing’’ is defined in TSCA section 401 as any housing constructed before 1978, except housing for the elderly or persons with disabilities (unless any child under age 6 resides or is expected to reside in such housing) or any 0-bedroom (studio for example) dwelling. Under this rule, a child-occupied facility is a building, or a portion of a building, constructed prior to 1978, visited regularly by the same child, under 6 years of age, on at least two different days within any week (Sunday through Saturday period), provided that each day’s visit lasts at least 3 hours and the combined weekly visits last at least 6 hours, and the combined annual visits last at least 60 hours. Child-occupied facilities may be located in public or commercial buildings or in target housing. In addition, it applies in residences where pregnant women reside.

It applies to interiors where more than 6 sq. ft. of painted surface or 20 sq. ft. of exterior painted surface will be disturbed.

The Rule does not apply to those who are not doing work for compensation, so homeowners renovating their own homes are exempt. It does not apply to post 1978 buildings, new construction, minor repairs or facilities not occupied by children under 6 or pregnant women. It also would not cover minor repairs or work that does not disturb painted surfaces. Contractors need to be careful however, because they cannot simply rely on homeowner assurances that there are no children under 6 or pregnant women who reside at the premises, or that the home was built after 1978 if there seems to be evidence to the contrary.

Popular posts from this blog

Eligibility Requirements for the LEED Green Associate Exam from Green Building Education and Training

Should a Contractor Have the Homeowner Test for Lead?

When the Homeowner is a Bully