• Welcome to The Building Code Forum

    Your premier resource for building code knowledge.

    This forum remains free to the public thanks to the generous support of our Sawhorse Members and Corporate Sponsors. Their contributions help keep this community thriving and accessible.

    Want enhanced access to expert discussions and exclusive features? Learn more about the benefits here.

    Ready to upgrade? Log in and upgrade now.

It's a tear down?

There is more to the story. When Mark H sees this I’m pretty sure he will be able to flesh it out.
 
Been building since 2012? Got a problem there.

On the foundation, all he has to do is show proper engineered design and proof of compliance by a competent third party inspector.
 
This is from LA Times in June. The former construction manager is turning against him.

In his newly released declaration in the Bel-Air case, Linch also stated that there should have been twice as many piles — a kind of column that extends into bedrock to support a structure — to hold up a house as big as what Hadid ultimately built.

Those piles should have been driven deeper, he added. And the piles have “less rebar than the minimum required” under L.A. building codes, but Hadid “asked me not to tell anyone about the problem,” Linch alleged in the declaration.

“Because I believe the piles are inadequate to support the house, I believe the house is unsafe and that the entire house must be demolished,” Linch said.

The former construction manager also claimed that Hadid created fake inspection reports showing the piles going deeper than the original documents indicated, turned in another falsified record to the city to understate how much grading was done, and hid pages from the plans where an inspector had written “not approved.”
 
This smells in so many ways, he may have had the gold but his underware was always out there for all to see.
He thinks "the emperor has no clothes and should be ignored; then again The city really dropped the ball in so many ways too.
 
e hilton said:
This is from LA Times in June. The former construction manager is turning against him.

In his newly released declaration in the Bel-Air case, Linch also stated that there should have been twice as many piles — a kind of column that extends into bedrock to support a structure — to hold up a house as big as what Hadid ultimately built.

Those piles should have been driven deeper, he added. And the piles have “less rebar than the minimum required” under L.A. building codes, but Hadid “asked me not to tell anyone about the problem,” Linch alleged in the declaration.

“Because I believe the piles are inadequate to support the house, I believe the house is unsafe and that the entire house must be demolished,” Linch said.

The former construction manager also claimed that Hadid created fake inspection reports showing the piles going deeper than the original documents indicated, turned in another falsified record to the city to understate how much grading was done, and hid pages from the plans where an inspector had written “not approved.”
Click to expand...
It appears that Linch is not to be trusted.
 
And just how much and for how long was Lynch paid to look the other way? And what of the subs who didn't build to plan as alledged and where were the city inspectors?
 
Mr Hadid responded that he was the victim of "witch hunt" and the neighbors' claims were "total nonsense."
"Witch Hunt", Where have we heard that lately?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top