jerryc41 wrote:
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.
I read an interesting article last night about the... (
show quote)
You're right, who can they sue?
whfowle
Loc: Tampa first, now Albuquerque
When I was living in Florida as a child, I remember rumors that the whole state was sitting on water. I know that I only had to dig down about a foot in my yard to reach wet sand.
ClarkJohnson wrote:
...no real interest in long term issues.
Yes. That's the key. Is "long term" ten years from now or 1:30 AM tomorrow? Everything breaks down without maintenance.
We had a timeshare in VA, and we got a substantial bill after hurricane damage.
Delderby wrote:
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.
Delderby said: " in the UK, a prospective property purchaser will usually have the property surveyed by a professional."
I think these were condos. Each party owns/buys a vary small portion of the building. Generally, no survey of the building prior to their buying this small piece. Each party tends to look only at their little piece....and not concern themselves with the rest of the structure....until tragedy strikes or a large assessment is levied.
whfowle wrote:
When I was living in Florida as a child, I remember rumors that the whole state was sitting on water. I know that I only had to dig down about a foot in my yard to reach wet sand.
I grew up on Long Island, and it was the same there. Dig down a foot and hit water.
Kmgw9v wrote:
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.
I'm not sure how much "sea-saturation" there was, but one of the problems I see was that the deck wasn't graded so water would run off causing puddling and degradation of the concrete and rebar supporting it.
Kmgw9v wrote:
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.
High humidity and salt air may also be contributors to the deterioration.
HOHIMER wrote:
High humidity and salt air may also be contributors to the deterioration.
Let's face it. Nature is constantly working against us.
With what we know today about the effects of climate change, why anyone would want a seaside residence is beyond understanding. I’m surprised that such developments are still going on or that financing is available for them.
Stan
I’m not sure, but I think that here in Florida, a condominium board can take whatever measures are needed to maintain the property, even if the owners don’t want to. The problem may have been that the second engineer reported that the building was safe, thus making it impossible for the board to move under emergency maintenance rules.
Soul Dr.
Loc: Beautiful Shenandoah Valley
It's going to be very interesting to see who is going be left holding the bag for this mess.
I'm sure there is going to be a lot of finger pointing.🤦
Will
jerryc41 wrote:
Let's face it. Nature is constantly working against us.
Mother Nature has no obligation to us. It's the other way around. And we are doing a very poor job of working
with her.
The question on insurance is an interesting one. In Hawaii there are places you can build (Courts ruled your land), but can not get insurance. I wonder do state laws control this? Also, most insurance has loopholes, Act of God (Sink hole?), neglience on part of owner (I believe), if so does not repairing things, count?, etc.
I bring up laws, because maybe insurance companies must insure these places or leave state???
I read that Fed. flood insurance requires rebuiding in same place unless you can get exceptions, reason why same places destroyed over and over. Assume this what localities wanted, if half the town could leave, you get no taxes plus trashed neighborhoods etc.
jerryc41 wrote:
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.
I read an interesting article last night about the... (
show quote)
The story is wrong. is claiming that all tenants would have to agree for such repairs. The elected board has the legal authority under state law to contract for the repairs and assess every unit owner for their fair share of the costs. The real truth is probably that the board members, who are also owners, knew that the cost would be so much that they didn't want to pay their own share.
ecblackiii wrote:
The story is wrong. is claiming that all tenants would have to agree for such repairs. The elected board has the legal authority under state law to contract for the repairs and assess every unit owner for their fair share of the costs. The real truth is probably that the board members, who are also owners, knew that the cost would be so much that they didn't want to pay their own share.
There may be some truth there, but more than half board did quit at one point. A bigger problem I believe is expecting people to do what no one else wants done. These are friends and neighbors saying no. How many people, unless you absolutely knew it was an emminent life and death situation, would override the majority and order what needed to be done be done. There needs to be a system where someone outside the owners says do this now. Even then there would lawsuits, etc., and whether the politicians would back that person is a big question.
If you want to reply, then
register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.