IRC Masonry Chimney Liability

[SpiderM]

I received a call today from an architectural client requesting my assistance. I thought it would be interesting to get input from others.

He, the architect, designed a house under the 2000 IRC (maybe the 2003, I don't know yet), hence no engineer. The chimney was about 42-43 feet tall of which about 15-16 feet were above the roof. The house experienced some 40mph winds and the chimney collapsed onto and into the house. Fortunately, no one was injuried.

The brick mason had modified the chimney slightly and made it tallerby a couple of feet. It was constructed of standard modular brick and there was no reinforcement.

The homeowner's insurance company sued the brick mason and now the mason's insurance company is sueing the architect (gee, who would have guessed that one).

Where does the liability fall? Of course, I'll have to study the IRC myself as well as the masonry code, but I was curious if anyone had any interesting comments or thoughts.

 

[hokie66]

I think the right pair are on the hook.

 

[JKStruct]

I agree with hokie.

For the record, I still consider myself a green engineer, but I believe I know enough to recognize that an unreinforced masonry chimney cantilevering 15' from the roof is a fallacy of logic and a recipe for disaster waiting to happen -- or in this case, one that's already happened.

It sounds like the liability is going to be determined by the courts. It'll get settled. The bottom line is that a competent structural engineer should have been retained to provide guidance in this matter. But such services were probably "out of the budget." How ironic is it that such out-of-budget services are quite marginalized by the situation with which both parties are currently facing?

 

[msquared48]

And what about the reviewing agency? Had they never seen a normal chimney? Is this project in Hawaii? There should have been some checks and balances here.

Mike McCann
MMC Engineering