Construction attorney David Haber interviewed by WPLG local discusses legal issues stemming from Surfside building collapse. He tells the last thing any condominium board wants to do is levy an expensive assessment against the residents for anything that doesn't immediately affect market value of the building. They'll try anything from complete denial to patchwork repairs to avoid having to take on a huge remediation bill. So unless the building is in very obvious danger of imminent collapse, it won't get done. Board members are highly political and unqualified to make the decisions they do, this is the microcosm part. Interview was generally bad mainly because of that stupid woman who kept asking question obviously beyond the expertise of a specialist attorney. The attorney can't know if a 40 year recertification is frequent enough. But he does know the lawsuits are really going to be flying. The building insurer doesn't have to pay a dime if they can show the building was not being kept in a state of good general repair. Which it obviously wasn't. And any homeowner insurance the residents had usually only covers their belongings, it doesn't cover the market value of their condo.
Champlain Towers Catastrophe Microcosm Of Global Response To Climate Change
Jun 27, 2021
Last reply: 5 years ago
9 Replies
Interview:
formatting link
Leave it to NYPost to dig up dirt on the developers, principal was Canadian evading law:
Developers of doomed Fla. tower were once accused of paying off officials: report
formatting link
I've never insured a condo, so I can't say for certain, but I expect you are confusing condo insurance with apartment insurance.
A friend had a town house that was a condo. She had insurance for the home as well as contents.
here insurance for the building is required, that and external maintenance, etc. is by the home owners association. contents is insured (voluntarily) by each owner or if it is rented out renter. afair temporary rehousing in case the building damaged is paid by content insurance
A distinction is usually made wrt "owner" vs. "complex" properties and liabilities.
The complex may cover the outside grounds, walls and roof -- along with any "common facilities" (club house, swimming pool, golf course, etc.). This, of course, part of the monthly "fee" that residents must remit.
The (individual property) "owner" is liable for the interior of their unit. E.g., install a waterbed and have it leak, that's YOUR problem (and your expense). Fire/smoke? Liability (a visitor trips on your staircase and breaks a leg)? Vandalism/theft?
One of the hassles about "community living" is that you need to develop concensus to coerce the "complex" to undertake repairs or other actions that *you* might want (but your neighbors might not -- cuz they end up sharing the cost of those).
I'd be curious as to how ceilings/floors are handled in multistory units; am I responsible for the floor below me while the person above is responsible for my "ceiling"?
It will be interesting to see what happens to insurance rates (in Fla) as a consequence of all this. Insurers really are hesitant to spend money if they can find a way NOT to!
here fire insurance (on the building not content) is on the mandatory HOA insurance
I know that say a water leak that damages my floors ceiling or kitchen is covered by the building insurance because it is part of the building
It should have been clear from the context I was repeating what the attorney expert in these matters said.
U.S. is more complicated in U.S. as the individual states regulate their insurance industry. They're not wildly different, because they all adopt model code templates more or less, but there are differences.
Join the Discussion
Have something to add? Share your thoughts — no account required.
Didn't find your answer?
Ask the community — no account required