NetNews Usenet Archive 1992 #20/NN_1992_20.iso/spool/triangle/general/579

Text File | 1992-09-15 | 5.6 KB | 116 lines

Newsgroups: triangle.general
Path: sparky!uunet!concert!sas!mozart.unx.sas.com!sasghw
From: [e-mail] (Greg Wust)
Subject: Re: PULTE homes
Originator: [e-mail]
Sender: [e-mail] (Noter of Newsworthy Events)
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Date: Tue, 15 Sep 1992 16:11:32 GMT
Distribution: triangle
References: <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
Nntp-Posting-Host: pica.unx.sas.com
Organization: SAS Institute Inc.
Lines: 101


Warning - long, but informative, append.

I wasn't going to get into this but after reading the flame about
George Birmingham below, I could not resist.

We bought a house from Key Homes in Durham eight years ago that
"supposedly" met ALL building codes.  Within a few months of our moving
in, it literally began collapsing around us due to the hundreds of
problems and code violations (like girders hanging in mid air and not
on piers).  All we wanted was out but Key Homes wanted us to take the
blame since the city had passed it.  Turned into a major public issue
and law suit with several building inspectors getting canned, Key Homes
going bankrupt, and us settling out of court.

Through it all, we had MANY inspectors look at our home including
George Birmingham and through it all, he was the ONLY one we found to
be knowledgable, capable, and skilled in his trade.  I attribute our
ability to get the situation corrected in the city, Key Homes, and
our personal lives to the fear George strikes in builders and inspectors
due to his knowledge and skill.  He truly caters to the homeowners and
does not budge one little bit just to make a builder happy.  As he once
said to me, when you spend hundreds of thousands on a house that you
want to outlive the mortgage, you should not have to compromise just
because the builder hires inept subcontractors.

(More stuff interspursed below)

In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (Darrell Massengill) writes:
|> In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] writes:
|> >In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Eli Mantel) writes:
|> >>Here's what I learned from the experience:
|> >>  1.  The various HOW-type programs are worthless, except perhaps
|> >>      for problems reported during the first year IF the builder
|> >>      has gone bankrupt.

Totally true - HOW does NOTHING for the home owner!  It is an insurance
type program for the builders! And most builders will say "HOW says all
I have to fix is this" regardless of the problem.

|> >>  2.  Get your complaints to the builder in during that first year...
|> >>      the only problem with this is that their "repairs" are so shoddy.
|> >>      I don't know whether it helps to file a lawsuit during that first
|> >>      year, but it is definitely necessary to be assertive.

Worse yet, my current builder (Signature) said when we handed him
a list (which his own foreman generated with us), that we had three
choices - accept what he choses to fix, leave the house and force him
to buy it back on a contract violation issue, or sue him.  But, since
you cannot recover attorney's costs and such in these types of claims,
you will come out the loser.  Additionally, since your house is now
tainted from a public lawsuit, you will accept a big loss if you try
to sell.

BTW, in our case, the foreman was so embarassed by Signature's actions
that he personally came in and corrected everything.

|> >>  3.  Using the home inspection services prior to purchasing a home from
|> >>      the builder aren't much help.

I totally disagree.  I'm in my third house (due to IBM relocations) and
have found the past two pre-purchase inspections to be worth every
penny.  Allows you to force the builder to correct to inspector's
approval (who will know when it is fixed) and not your's, he finds things
hidden that are manifested in other ways, justifies forcing the builder
to escrow money on purchase until ALL repairs are done to satisfaction
(something most builders will not even do anymore on their own), and
provides you some piece of mind that someone who works strictly for you
and is knowledgable about construction gives the okay.  (NOTE: In case
you did not know, City Inspectors are paid by the builders, not you
so their loyalties run to their employers!)

|> >
|> >As to point no. 3, you must have gotten a poor inspection service.
|> >Get the right person to do this properly before signing anything.  As
|> >before, I recommend George Birmingham (in the Durham phone book).
|> >The unscrupulous builders and *all* the real estate agents hate him
|> >because he torpedoes so many deals by exposing shoddy workmanship
|> >and code violations on houses.  He is perfect if you are buying, but
|> >don't let him on your property if you are selling!   :-)
|> >--
|> >John Posthill  [e-mail]
|>
|> I'll put my 2 cents in about Birmingham.  I had experience with him
|> several years back when selling a home and I was not impressed.  I
|>
|>  (flame deleted)
|>
|> Some builders build to the minimum and others go beyond that.

This is 100% the truth - code is a minimal standard so when a house
doesn't even meet code . . .  :-O  (Oh No. . .)

|> Darrell Massengill    Manager of Image Processing   SAS Institute Inc.
|> [e-mail]  [phone] x7658          SAS Campus Dr, Cary, NC
--
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Greg Wust                              SAS Institute Inc
Publications Programmer                SAS Campus Drive, Cary NC 27513
[e-mail]   x7012             919-677-8000
-----------------------------------------------------------------------