jerryc41 Loc: Catskill Mts of NY

I read an interesting article last night about the collapse. Structural defects were well-known for years. The board of directors got estimates for repairs, but all the tenants had to agree, since they owned the building and would be paying. This dragged on for years, with board members resigning over it. As time went on, the cost increased as the building's condition got worse, so resistance to paying for it increased. Residents would have had to pay tens of thousands of dollars each. There are lawsuits, but who can they sew? It's an awful situation.

joehel2 Loc: Cherry Hill, NJ

I saw one story that cited a cost of $80,000 - $300,000 per owner to bring the property up to spec.

Delderby Loc: Derby UK

Yes - in the UK, a prospective property purchaser will usually have the property surveyed by a professional. If a mortgage is involved then the building society will insist on this as part of the formalities. If a problem has been missed it will be covered by the surveyors liability insurance or by his professional institution.
However, if the resident is renting, then he/she has the opportunity to vacate, if the owners fail to maintain the property, without incurring a penalty.

Kmgw9v Loc: Miami, Florida

There are many more aging sea-saturated buildings along the coast in the same situation. They have not fallen, but a Pandora’s box has been opened.

PaulBrit Loc: Merlin, Southern Oregon

And it may be a while before the lid of Pandora’s box is re-closed!

Seriously, is there a source of information for your estimate of those “aging sea-saturated buildings” and, in particular, what is the effect of sea level rise? I am in the middle of writing a book on climate change so my interest in your (and others) replies is more than just curiosity!

elliott937 Loc: St. Louis

Calling it 'aging sea-saturated building' is so accurate. Built on a concrete slab, sitting on sand, and right next to rising water. And the water will continue to rise.

Kmgw9v Loc: Miami, Florida

Additionally—rebar will rust, expand, causing shifts and cracking of concrete. There is no cheap and easy fix. There is little reason to to believe that these buildings will start falling in mass, but the possibility of more tragedy has been made apparent.

sb Loc: Florida's East Coast

Imagine - one estimate was $16 million for repairs - given 160 units (I do not know the exact number) that is a $100,000 assessment per unit! That would be very difficult for a lot of those folks to come up with! We may see a lot of empty condo units in the future - who would want to purchase a unit in a 40-year old building even if it is right on the beach?

Longshadow Loc: Audubon, PA, United States

Obviously many, many people.

CWGordon

I was recently contemplating purchase of a beachside condo in Florida. I changed my mind.
Initially, my concern was rising water levels combined with the more serious storms resulting from climate change. I had never considered the types of issues that haunted this building and led to its’ collapse.

Law School students are taught that you must have three things present to successfully sue under Tort Theories (Civil Law for this kind of issue, Personal Injury, etc.):
1. A duty
2. (that is) Breached
3. (consequent) Damages/Injury/loss
We have all of those present in the case of a building collapse, I think. Who or what entity had a duty? Likely the Condo Owners Association. If they kept trying to get the owners to pay up, did they breach their duty to ensure the building was safe? Probably not. Surely there are horrific damages to both life and property. So, you have 2 out of 3 requirements met, duty and damages. However, a major question remains regarding whether there was an actual breach of that duty. Case seems weak, already. Seems like Inspectors did their duty, but you can argue they missed how imminent the collapse was. So, maybe, but unlikely that it is their fault. Apparently, they advised regarding continual deterioration of building. Liability looks weak here.

All good law school professors advise that their is an unwritten, but very real 4th prong to this test in evaluating whether there is a strong, weak, or any case, at all. That is:
4. “Deep Pockets” / Money
If you clearly had the 3 mentioned hereinabove, is there an entity that had a duty, breached it, and that that had directly led to the damages or injuries, does that entity have any money to pay as compensation for damages/injury and pain and suffering? Good question. The Condo Assoc. apparently had not enough money to fix the much needed repairs. The owners who might have assessments against them to pay a court-ordered judgement are mostly now dead. Would an insurance company be responsible? Maybe. But, Insurance companies are not in the business of paying claims. They will surely argue that the Owners, and everyone else they can think of, is responsible for not repairing KNOWN structural defects. They only are responsible to pay up for damages from HIDDEN defects. This is a strong argument. W/o knowing exactly what the policy states, I cannot predict with certainty what their coverage will be, if any at all. We shall see, but don’t hold your breath. This will be lengthy litigation and expensive to hire good lawyers and experts by plaintiffs. Defense entities will have no problem hiring attorneys and experts. Even if costly, engineers, experts, etc. involved in this disaster most likely have insurance that will be obligated to pay for their defense costs. Professional Liability (malpractice) Policies they are usually called. Things are looking pretty bleak here for plaintiffs, so far.

Maybe Florida has liability. Maybe they should have inspected and condemned the building long ago. Maybe those that were hired by Condo Assoc. should have reported their findings to the State of Florida. Maybe they did. Maybe they had no legal obligation, in Florida, to do so. Maybe they met all their legal obligations. Idon’t think we will have such answers for years.

All I have mentioned is nothing compared to the issues raised and argued in the Courts. I don’t know much, but between experts, lawyers, court costs, this is a big deal. Will plaintiff attorneys be able to fill the bill for the years of delays and procedures and motions filed by defense teams or will they give up or not really enter the fray. Will a big-time firm do the case for the publicity it might gain them? These and many more questions remain to be answered. Depositions, Discovery, Requests for Documents all are efforts just to get enough information to determine whether it is worth pursuing or to find out if there are any deep pockets, anywhere. This process alone could be extremely lengthy.

What will this case do to insurance and increased inspection costs and condo fees nationally? How will this affect condo owner fees and sales prices?
Plenty of questions. Currently, few answers.

Kmgw9v Loc: Miami, Florida

Pandora’s box.

Toment Loc: FL, IL

I’m thinking more of Damocles….

Archboo3 Loc: Central Florida

Would the Condo assoc. be required by law to maintain a fund for just such repairs?

dpfoto Loc: Cape Coral, FL

I wonder if the condo association has insurance.

Personally, I would never, ever, EVER buy a condo, OR a house with a HOA gestapo. (Just my personal opinion.)

rmalarz Loc: Tempe, Arizona

Jerry, all one has to do is look at where this building, and many other buildings, are located. One has to realize that the ocean water doesn't stop where we see it on the beach. It extends a considerable distance inland. Thus, these buildings are sitting on a concrete foundation that is floating on the ground beneath which is in contact with the water table. Stability may be there, but only for a limited time.
--Bob