For homeowner’s damaged by a home improvement contractor working on their their primary residence, don’t forget their License Bond as security. For these homeowner’s, the available License Bond proceeds are the full sum of the bond or $12,500.00. The legislature should probably at least double this bond amount, but for now this is the limit. There are a few other categories of claimants who can pursue that full License Bond sum, such as unpaid employees of the contractor. But a more common example, is the homeowner who hires a home improvement contractor, who abandons the job half way to completion or who causes more damage then they are fixing! Keep in mind, this can be a contractor of different trades such as roofer, plumber or painter. See, B&P Code Section 7071.5 and 7071.6 for more details. If you need to pursue such a claim, call an experienced Construction Law Attorney.
– All Rights Reserved © 2015 by Michael L. Mau, Esq. and The Mau Law Firm
In Beacon Residential Community Assoc. v. Skidmore, Owings & Merrill (No. S208173), the California Supreme Court expanded the potential liability of architects who are the primary designers of a residential building, typically a condominium development. The Supreme Court held that an architect owes a duty of care to future homeowners in the design of a residential building where, the architect is a principal architect on the project, that is, the architect, in providing professional design services, is not subordinate to other design professionals. The duty of care extends to such architects even when they do not actually build the project or exercise ultimate control over construction.
– All Rights Reserved © 2014 by Michael L. Mau, Esq. and The Mau Law Firm