Quote:
Posted By Jadedone4 on 06/14/2007 7:42 AM
David, I think that was what Paul and others are stating with the mentioning of the bonds with the local municipality. In my situation the clubhouse could not be "turned over" prior to the inspection - which INCLUDED that the HVAC, electric, plumbing, fire codes, etc - were properly inspected and passed by the local municipality. If you are stating that (possibly) that those above mentioned inspection occured, and then the system went bad during the period up to the bond (or pending) bond inspection - I do not understand how a warranty could have expired during that period (not to say that it did not occur, but that it would be odd). Part of the "turn-over" requirements is that a common structure be able to function as the plans called for it. Now you might not have the most energy-efficient unit in the clubhouse, as the developer/builder is not responsible to be "green," but the unit MUST function as specified by the manufacture, and per the site plans for transition to occur.
I would also seek legal counsel's opinion on whether or not a common element can be "turned-over" NOT free and clear with regards to the lien filed against the structure, due to lack of performance by the developer/builder. You might need to head down to the local Courthouse for exact and on file records of what has transpired, but that is only better information for your community.
.. here I thought that the Baltimore Colt's move out in the middle of the night to Indianapolis was cruel, and shady....
Jadedone,
Recently, two and a half years after it opened, the liens on the clubhouse were released. We do not have access to the settlement agreements with the subcontractors. A check of the county property records shows the developer still holds title. As to whether the HVAC system was inspected by the county and up to code, we have no way of knowing. We requested to have a homeowner who is certified as a Professional Engineer, and an associate of his who is an HVAC specialist inspect the system. The board turned down the request citing insurance and liability concerns since access to the HVAC equipment is via a ladder-like stairs to the attic of the clubhouse.
In addition to the high repair bills, the system clearly does not function "per the site plans". Here is why. The system not only heats and cools the clubhouse but also heats, cools and dehumidifies the indoor pool. The indoor pool enclosure is nearly all glass with multiple sliding doors (with screens) along both side walls and motorized roof panels that can be opened (with screens for the openings). There are no controls for the system accessible to the pool staff other than the button to open and close the roof. However, the pool staff has been forbidden to open any of the sliding doors or the roof because, when they do, the system continues to run and attempts to dehumidify the outside air causing the compressors to freeze up. It should have been installed with an automatic switch that cuts off the pool HVAC functions whenever the doors or roof are opened.
All of this has been documented in writing along with a spreadsheet summarizing all repair costs and submitted to the board and management agent. These documents included a request that the management agent pursue obtaining reimbursement from both the equipment manufacturer and the subcontractor who installed it. The management agent has replied that the board declines to pursue reimbursement.
It should be noted that we discovered that a similar community developed by the same builder in another state has has a lawsuit against the developer underway for defects in their clubhouse HVAC system. We would like to avoid the expense and delays of a lawsuit once the community transitions to homeowner control but it looks like that may be our only option. We have our doubts that the developer appointed Transition Committee will pass along all of the information that we gathered to the engineer hired (by the developer controlled board) to do the transition engineering study.
Dave