Vegas builders launch quality initiative

Grace Leong

Thursday, Oct. 4, 2001 | 9:33 a.m.

The Southern Nevada Home Builders Association said Wednesday it's starting a program to improve the quality of local construction work and expand the number of qualified workers in its industry.

But the home builders are skeptical that the improvements will result in fewer construction defect lawsuits, which are now clogging Las Vegas courts by the dozens.

Dubbed the Quality Assurance Program, the association -- which comprises more than 200 homebuilders in the Las Vegas area -- said the program provides training to industry workers and helps homebuilders and trade contractors meet "ISO-9000" or national certification standards.

Mark Doppe, president of the homebuilders association, said the program addresses a potential shortfall in qualified construction labor in the Las Vegas area.

"We're concerned that the construction trade isn't viewed in the same positive light as it used to be. The focus now is on hi-tech rather than skilled trades. So young people aren't choosing the construction trade like they used to," he said. "A large part of our ability to deliver homes at reasonable prices is our ability to attract sufficient qualified labor. If we don't take steps to add dignity to our profession, we won't have the workers we need in the future."

Doppe blamed the proliferation of construction defect lawsuits in the Las Vegas area on current Nevada legislation that allows homeowners to seek legal recourse if a construction defect problem emerged within 10 years of the date of completion of the project.

Within that legislation, there are no provisions requiring homeowners to try to have problems fixed before they sue, he said.

"It's not our primary intent to bring down the number of defect cases with this program. Those suits have a lot more to do with lawyers and the fact that a lot of insurance companies are prime targets of such lawsuits," he said.

"Often times, home builders are prevented from fixing the problem because by the time they hear about the problem, the lawyer is already involved," Doppe said. "The homeowners ought to give the home builder a chance to fix the problem, if they don't, then sue them. But nine out of 10 times, home builders would rather fix the problem than go to court."

But Roger Grant, a construction defect attorney, disagreed, saying most home builders tend to either shift the blame to subcontractors, or ignore the problem because the repairs can be expensive.

"Water intrusion and mold are the most typical problems that cause homeowners to call us. They'd ask us to do an investigation and make demands on the builders to make repairs," Grant said.

"If the mold is toxic, that can cost $3,000-$10,000 per condominium to clean up," he said. "And if it's a water intrusion problem, then the builder will have to tear off stucco from around the window, replace the waterproof paper that's placed around the window to direct water away from it, put the stucco back and paint over it. If you're doing that for 10-20 windows a home, it gets expensive."

He said the volume of construction defect litigation will likely decline once the quality of local construction and that of customer service improves.

"Customer service in the home building industry is poor. Homeowners are often told they're on their own because their warranties have expired or because home builders say they aren't at fault, or ignore their calls," Grant said. "Under such circumstances, homeowners are more likely to call an attorney."

But Doppe said attorneys often target condominium associations because the condominiums and the land on which they sit is usually owned by the homeowners association and managed by a three-to five-member boards. This means if the attorneys convince the board that it has a fiduciary duty to file a lawsuit, they would automatically win 200-300 homeowners as clients, he said.

Grant disagreed. "Condominium owners have to vote for the condominium association to go ahead with a construction defect suit. If 51 percent didn't want litigation, the board could vote that down but it rarely happens."

archive