Townhome Deck Collapse and Responsibility 16

[kylesito]

Was recently engaged to come investigate a lower level deck that had partially collapsed. The shear attachment at the ledger sheared off with two individuals standing near the patio door. The ledger was attached with concrete nails at several feet OC.

Thankfully the collapse was limited in that the lower level of the deck was only 2' off the ground and the two individuals weren't hurt. I was engaged by the property manager for that address and we decided it was best to do a complete replacement as we found numerous other problems (bad guardrail, 2nd level ledger attachment significantly under strength, main beam undersized, etc). In every way, these decks were built poorly with no adherence to code or even quality craftsmanship taken into account.

The trouble is, this one deck is one of 200 identical decks in this neighborhood.

Following my report, the property manager for this house notified the HOA but was ignored. I followed up with an email and was told the HOA was still controlled by the developer who is also the property manager of the majority of the homes here as well. This developer is also notorious for not following codes and essentially pays for his numerous lawsuits by building new buildings in the area.

Very troubled by the critical nature of the deficiencies in these decks, I reached out to the City inspectors but was told their jurisdiction doesn't extend to this area of the county.

Through a mutual friend, I sent a brief explanation to the County Commission but was also told there was no code enforcement they could offer.

I'm now at a loss for what I am obligated to do (both by code of ethics and a that of a decent person in the knowledge of a bad issue). This concerns me a lot. There are real problems with these decks and it won't be long before a second story portion collapses. And the nature of the neighborhood is such that there are also many families with young children making the burden even greater.

But I'm stuck. The developer is likely to sue me on some frivolous claim if I notify him of anything. But any public notice or such is bound to get noticed by him first. I am not sure it's appropriate to mail a letter to each owner as it seems as though I'm soliciting services. But I'm left with a huge burden to do something to prevent what I am sure will be a bad situation in the future.

Thoughts?


PE, SE
Eastern United States

"If a builder builds a house for someone, and does not construct it properly, and the house which he built falls in and kills its owner, then that builder shall be put to death!"
~Code of Hammurabi

 

[TerryScan]

Not my area of practice, but it is hard to believe the county does not have any building code requirements that cover decks above a certain height (the second story decks).

When we periodically hear of tragedies in this realm it is when someone has a party and there are lots of people on a second story deck (max. capacity), there may be music & dancing (additional stress) and the failure involves lots of victims. With 200 units, this does not seem like a far fetched scenario...more like a "when" than an "if" it happens.

 

[CWB1]

The quandary they are in likely is not that there isn't code, its likely that they simply cannot do anything to enforce it on existing homes.

 

[RobertHale]

I am curious, is this an issue with the design documents not matching the constructed condition, or are the design documents either calling out insufficient attachment or not specific enough that the connections are "nebulous?" Based on what you have already said, I would think the horse has already left the barn in terms of the contractor/developer suing you for notifying him. Have you talked to your insurance company about this?

Robert Hale, PE

 

[JedClampett]

I'd get me a good lawyer and protect yourself as best you can. The county doesn't care, the developer doesn't care (until they can blame you for something) and if you notify the owners, you're likely to involve yourself in ways you can't control.
If this was Star Trek, Captain Kirk would reprogram the software.

 

[icundiff]

Could you not reach out to the state board, in writing, explaining the situation to them?

 

[monkeydog]

Ah yes the Kobayashi Maru test.

 

[msquared48]

Make sugar out of lemons... Sounds like you need to start your own local deck repair company!

Seriously, talk to you lawyer, but the first thing here is to protect yourself.

Sounds like you have done your due diligence, so just do not expose yourself so much that you walk the plank so to speak. You cannot help anyone if you do not help yourself first.

Mike McCann, PE, SE (WA)

 

[Ron]

Several comments....
1. If you, as a licensed professional engineer, consider the conditions to be a threat to the health, safety or welfare of the public, then you have an obligation to report it. To whom? Tough question. Since there is a Homeowner's Association (even though developer controlled), they need to be notified by YOU....not the property manager, in writing and by certified mail, return receipt. Find out who issued the building permit for the construction....they should be able to enforce code compliance, even if after the fact. If you consider the conditions to be an imminent danger to Life Safety, then go to the county commission again and to the county sheriff or fire marshall.

2. West Virginia subscribes to the International Building Code by state law. The State Fire Commission is responsible for enforcing the code and interpreting conflicts. Contact them and let them know of this issue and that you can't seem to get anyone to heed your warnings.

3. If the county has no building department, the next best thing will be the Public Works director. He/She is likely to be a licensed engineer and will have the same obligations as you to raise the flag.

4. As others have noted, contact your attorney and your state engineering board and copy them on all correspondence.

Good luck! Let us know how it goes.

 

[JAE]

Good post by Ron.

Also another thought comes to mind here - as this seems to be a public safety issue with "no one at home".

One thing you could do is take the time to compose a letter and go door to door handing it out to the occupants:

Dear Occupant.
I am a licensed Professional Engineer in this state and was recently hired to investigate a deck collapse in your neighborhood. The collapse involved a particular type of connection between the deck and main home structure such that the deck dropped suddenly while persons were standing on it. Fortunately no one was hurt.

It is possible that your deck was constructed from similar plans and details and I am concerned that you may have a potentially unsafe deck that could pose a risk to you or others who use your deck.

As a licensed Professional Engineer, I am obligated, above all other things, to protect the public safety and welfare.
I have attempted to contact various entities and government officials and to inform them of this issue but thought I would also attempt inform the various occupants of homes with decks that were built similar to the one that failed.

I would recommend that you investigate the deck connection, either by yourself, if you feel qualified, or hire a qualified contractor or Professional Engineer.
I am not placing myself in a position to be hired for these inspections as I don't want this letter to be seen as an act of marketing, rather, as a public service under the auspices of my license.

If you, or your hired contractor/engineer have questions about this situation, please have them contact me at xxx-xxx-xxxx and I would be glad to describe to them the conditions that led to the particular deck collapse.

Sincerely,
kilesito

Yes, getting your attorney to review a letter like this might be a good idea. I would just worry that a "typical" attorney would tell you not to as they "typically" don't always and fully understand an engineer's obligation to the public.





Check out Eng-Tips Forum's Policies here:
faq731-376

 

[hokie66]

I like the idea of a letter to each property owner, but it would likely be more effective if the letter came from a lawyer. Sounds like a good situation for "leaking" your concerns to a class action law firm.

 

[Ron]

Good letter JAE!

 

[TehMightyEngineer]

Please update us on how this plays out. I'm exceedingly curious what your end solution is and how it is received.

Professional Engineer (ME, NH, MA) Structural Engineer (IL)
American Concrete Industries

https://www.facebook.com/AmericanConcrete/

 

[Forensic74]

Just another set of eyes here. IMHO, JAE's letter is speculative and inviting trouble. Look at the number of times it uses "possible" and "may have". As an engineer, we can really only comment on things we know. If someone tried to sue you for failing to notify on a structure you didn't even look at, I feel they'd be shot down instantly. By giving a icky squishy letter like this, I think you're going outside of the bounds of what you know.

 

[JAE]

Forensic74...I must disagree with you.

The OP stated above:

The trouble is, this one deck is one of 200 identical decks in this neighborhood.

So as an engineer who has positive knowledge that an identical deck failed, and that there are 200 identical decks in the neighborhood, and a common developer/builder, but "nobody is home" with regards to inspections, then as an engineer I am OBLIGATED by law to act to protect the public welfare and safety.

In this case, the engineer (the OP above) knows that the other decks are identical...I'm assuming that this would be a development of housing where the same builder, and probably many of the same construction crews, built these decks. Nothing squishy here - just a knowledge that there is a high probability of a safety concern.

In my "squishy" letter I use the word "possible" only once - In the situation described above I would have an opinion that there is a concern.
I use the phrase "may have" only once - in stating that the occupants may have a problem. Yes it is possible that the 199 other decks were built WAY BETTER. I would doubt it, though.

The letter is simply a public duty to save persons from injury or death.

One other note here - you fear that a letter would invite "trouble". As an engineer - despite any trouble - you are obligated to act to protect public safety even if it means you get fired, sued, etc. This is a classic engineering ethics principle.

Fear of trouble is no reason not to act.

I agree with you that we can't (or shouldn't) get sued for buildings that fail that we have no relationship to or have not "seen". However, given the OP's statement that this housing development had 200 "identical" decks, I think it would compel any other reasonable engineer to conclude (as a fact) that the other decks were built the same.

Check out Eng-Tips Forum's Policies here:
faq731-376

 

[CWB1]

So as an engineer who has positive knowledge that an identical deck failed

One deck fails, so the assumption automatically is that 200 more will? That is much like assuming since notification was made and he wasn't hired for the job that no action or notification was made. The OP notified the proper parties to fulfill his obligation, no need to become a social-justice warrior. Many would argue THAT is a far more unethical matter.

 

[JAE]

One deck fails, so the assumption automatically is that 200 more will?

No - only that a definite pattern of construction shows the probability is high that at least one other would fail.

This is no different than a company recalling all of set of products to deal with a possible safety issue (Takata, Cub Cadet, Mazda)

I think most "social justice warriers" are full of ...well. So don't put me with those jokers.

It is never unethical in any way for an engineer to warn others of a safety concern when they have positive evidence that there is a flawed construction condition.
In this case the OP indicates that they have positive evidences that 200 other decks were built by the same developer/builder.

The OP stated that:
1. They contacted the Homeowners Association, (controlled by the developer/builder) with no response.
2. They contacted the county commission with no response.
3. They contacted the city inspectors but found that the city has no jurisdiction.
4. The developer/builder is the property manager of the majority of the homes so has a vested interest (conflict of interest) in NOT responding to challenges to their work.
5. The developer/builder is notorious for not following codes.

So the OP has not really contacted anyone who also has an interest in the public safety & welfare, has authority to do something about it, and who gives a damn.

It would be unethical to stop there and do nothing as a licensed, professional engineer.


Check out Eng-Tips Forum's Policies here:
faq731-376

 

[dik]

It's a good letter JAE... mine would have been slightly different, and, as I suspect Ron's would... but essentially the same. I've copied it and modified it as a template, in case I ever need one like it. I'm a bit of a packrat.

The sad thing is that with all the regulation we are facing that there is no one to address the issue; it's either outside their jurisdiction or they cannot be bothered. Ron posted a couple of good contacts to move forward. Also a matter of advising whoever signed off on the permit.

Dik

 

[Forensic74]

JAE and OP, in my experience, townhome projects typically involve numerous subs with numerous crews and the quality of construction is vastly different. Particularly if you have phased construction of the neighborhood. Stating that the construction is IDENTICAL across all 200 units without at least inspecting a representative sample is a weak assumption and speculative. If you'd use the term "identical" in a courtroom, you would be grilled.

 

[dik]

I never use the word identical... about 45 years ago I did an engineering report for a lawyer (his house) and his only assurance from the contractor was that it would be constructed identically to another. The lawyer looked at the other...

Problems developed and I was asked to do a report... and the same errors were duplicated in the sample house...

Dik