Investigating the Alleged Defect
A defect claim usually starts with a list: a homeowner's complaint letter, a punch list that never closed, a backcharge, or an insurance claim. Each item on that list is an allegation. Some will be true defects in the work. Some will be incomplete items. Some will turn out to be normal movement, later damage or conditions that meet the requirements after all.
Paul's job is to sort them out item by item, using the documents and the conditions in the field. He starts with the requirement that applied to the work, examines what was built, and explains whether the two match. That keeps the investigation focused on the work itself, which is where most defect disputes are won or lost.
Defect Categories Paul Supports
- Defective workmanship claims and the documentation behind them
- Poor construction workmanship and the observable conditions it leaves
- Improper installation contrary to specifications or manufacturer instructions
- Incomplete construction work, punch lists and scope discrepancies
- Defective carpentry and finishes: framing, trim, drywall, doors and millwork
- Defects on residential and commercial projects
Not Every Allegation Is Negligence or a Code Violation
Defect disputes are often framed in broad terms: the contractor was negligent, the work violates code. Sometimes that is accurate. Often it is not the right description. Whether a condition is a breach of contract, a departure from the specifications, a code issue or something else depends on the particular contract, the specification, the code adopted at the time of permit, the timing of the work and the site circumstances.
Paul describes each condition in those concrete terms. He identifies the requirement, the departure and its significance, and leaves the legal characterization to counsel and the court. That restraint makes his opinions harder to attack and more useful in negotiation.
Who Retains Paul
Paul is retained by attorneys representing owners, homebuyers, condominium and building owners, general contractors, subcontractors and insurers. Insurance professionals use his investigations to separate defective workmanship from covered damage and to document what correction requires. Property owners can contact him directly for an initial conversation, and he will recommend involving counsel where a matter is heading toward litigation.
His construction defect matters have included testimony at deposition and trial in the Circuit Court of Will County, Illinois, an AAA arbitration hearing, and a deposition in a Wyoming residential construction case.
A Contractor's Perspective on Defects
Paul is not an engineer or architect, and he does not offer structural, engineering or design opinions. He evaluates defects from the perspective of a licensed general contractor and union journeyman carpenter with more than 30 years of building, supervising and inspecting work, including as a General Foreman at O'Hare International Airport since 2007. That perspective is well suited to the most common defect question: was this work installed the way it was supposed to be?
To begin, send a conflict check request, download Paul's CV, or review the engagement fees.
Evidence Needed Before Repairs Begin
The most common mistake in a defect dispute is repairing the work before it is documented. Once a floor is replaced or a wall is opened and patched, the original condition is gone, and with it much of the evidence for both sides. Before repairs begin, the conditions should be photographed in context and close up, located on a plan, and where possible inspected by experts for the interested parties. Removed materials that may matter should be kept.
If repairs cannot wait, for example because of an active leak or a safety concern, careful documentation during the repair can preserve much of the evidence. Paul can document conditions before or during repairs so that the record is available when it is needed. See workmanship inspection and documentation for how that record is built.
Subcontractor Workmanship Disputes
On most projects the work in question was installed by a subcontractor, and the dispute may run between the owner and the general contractor, between the general contractor and the subcontractor, or among several subcontractors whose work meets at the same location. Paul identifies which trade performed each disputed item, how adjacent trades' work affected it, and what the subcontracts and scopes required. That analysis supports tender, indemnity and backcharge decisions that counsel makes.
