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 ...

EPA Starts Assessing Fines for RRP Violations


From Mark Paskell's blog: 

The press release below came from the EPA.  It has been hard to persuade contractors that they need to become certified when it did not appear that the Renovation, Repair and Painting Rule was being enforced.  Now, there have been two substantial fines publicized: one in Connecticut last month ($30,700) and the one listed below.  It is time to have your contracts reviewed, insert clauses to protect you under the new law, and have your insurance policy reviewed for lead coverage!

Kansas City, Kan., March 31, 2011) – Window World of St. Louis, Inc., has agreed to pay a $19,529 civil penalty to the United States to settle allegations that it failed to notify owners and occupants of at least 20 St. Louis area residential properties built before 1978 of lead-based paint risks prior to performing renovation work at those locations.
According to an administrative consent agreement filed by EPA Region 7 in Kansas City, Kan., the window replacement company, located in Maryland Heights, Mo., was legally required to provide owners and residents of the properties with an EPA-approved lead hazard information pamphlet before starting renovations at the properties.
Provision of the lead hazard information pamphlet to property owners and occupants is one requirement of the Residential Lead-Based Paint Hazard Reduction Act, which Congress passed in 1992 as an amendment of the federal Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA).
The regulation is intended to protect owners and occupants of residential properties, child care facilities and schools built before 1978 from health risks associated with lead-based paint. Lead-based paint was banned for residential use in the United States in 1978. Most homes built before 1978 contain some amount of lead-based paint, and subsequent renovation activity of such properties can cause occupants to be exposed to dust, chips and debris that contain lead.
The Residential Lead-Based Paint Hazard Reduction Act requires renovators of such properties to obtain certified training, follow safe work practices, and take specific steps to make owners and occupants aware of health risks associated with lead exposure before renovation work occurs.
As part of its settlement with EPA, and in addition to paying the $19,529 civil penalty, Window World of St. Louis has agreed to perform a supplemental environmental project, through which it will spend an estimated $20,048 to replace a total of 73 old windows contaminated with lead paint at three group home facilities operated by the non-profit social services organization Youth in Need. Those facilities are located at 1420 N. 3rd Street, 516 Jefferson Street, and 529 Jefferson Street, in St. Charles, Mo.

Popular posts from this blog

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

What are the eligibility requirements for the LEED Green Associate exam? http://www.green-buildings.com/content/78626-what-are-eligibility-requirements-leed-green-associate-exam After March 31st, 2009, candidates for the LEED Green Associate (GA) credentials must fulfill eligibility requirements. LEED Green Associate candidates are required to do ONE (1) of the following: Option 1: You must be (or have previously been) employed in a sustainable field of work This is perhaps one of the more nebulous requirements posed by the GBCI, because no definition of a "sustainable field of work" is given. The USGBC does state that the company needs to "relate to environmentalism or the green building industry". If you are in any doubt that your profession would qualify, contact the GBCI at gbci.org or by calling 1-800-795-1746. Option 2: You must be (or have been) involved in a LEED Certification Project To prove eligibility by way of LEED project involvement, you must have bee...
Read more

When the Homeowner is a Bully

I've seen a new trend in contractor disputes lately, and it isn't pretty.  Some homeowners are making unreasonable demands on contractors, and bullying them into doing work without getting paid.  They unreasonably withhold payments, or impose penalties for delays that they cause.  They expect contractors to do all kinds of extra work without being paid or changing the completion date. I have had a series of these recently.  What is a contractor to do? When first meeting with a homeowner, trust your instincts.  If you are sensing red flags, do not take the job. Never let the work get ahead of the money.  If there is a change order, make sure that the payment is contemporaneous with the work. Make sure that all change orders are in writing and reflect any change in the contract price and date of substantial completion. Include a provision in your contract that entitles you to get attorney's fees if you have to go after a client for payment. Make sure t...
Read more

Should a Contractor Have the Homeowner Test for Lead?

I would like to learn more about the advisability of lead testing.  Homeowners might not want their homes tested for lead, because it becomes public record, and may interfere with the sale of a home or the ability to obtain a mortgage or homeowners insurance.  In addition, I strongly advise contractors not to do the testing themselves.  Let the homeowner pay an independent company to do it.  Otherwise if the GC brings a claim against a lead testing company for a false negative, the company might state that the GC did not use the test kit properly.  If the homeowner does have the house tested, consider refusing to do the work unless the homeowner has lead abatement work done.
Read more