LEED Fraud Class Action

[conarb]

It's finally happened, Henry Gifford has filled a class action lawsuit against the USGBC, if you remember I posted his findings a couple of years ago; unfortunately, I don't think he has a chance in Hell of getting his class certified, during the Reagan administration congress passed pro-business regulations making classes very difficult to certify.

The U.S. Green Building Council (USGBC) and its founders have been named as defendants in a class action lawsuit filed in federal court. Filed on behalf of mechanical systems designer Henry Gifford, owner of Gifford Fuel Saving, the lawsuit was stamped on October 8, 2010 at the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York. Among other allegations, the suit argues that USGBC is fraudulently misleading consumers and fraudulently misrepresenting energy performance of buildings certified under its LEED rating systems, and that LEED is harming the environment by leading consumers away from using proven energy-saving strategies.¹

Gifford is well-respected in the energy field, and hopefully it will be a start in an avalanche of fraud lawsuits against all of the green rating organizations and their certified raters, I am more concerned about the placing of toxic products into homes that are carcinogenic or make people sick in other ways.

¹ http://www.buildinggreen.com/auth/article.cfm/2010/10/14/USGBC-LEED-Targeted-by-Class-Action-Suit/?redirsupercede=0&utm_source=BuildingGreen.com%20Bulletin&utm_campaign=1f6c39f5b9-Breaking_Class_Action_Suit10_14_2010&utm_medium=emai

 

[conarb]

The following people will be included in the class action lawsuit against the USGBC:

Court documents note that the class-action suit is brought on behalf of the following classes:

• "All those who paid for LEED certification for property they own in reliance on defendant's deceptive marketing claims that LEED-certified properties use 25 percent less energy and achieve CO2 emissions reductions over non-LEED-certified properties …
  
• All persons who design energy-efficient buildings and whose livelihoods are injured by USGBC's monopolization of the market through fraudulent and intentionally misleading representations in the marketing and promotion of their LEED product line …
  
• All taxpayers whose city and state tax dollars are spent on the costs of LEED certification in publicly commissioned buildings …; and
  
• Trades injured by USGBC's deceptive trade practices because they lose money and valuable time to comply with LEED specifications and the buildings they do build do not use 25 percent less energy, or any less energy, than non-LEED certified properties."¹
  

¹ http://www.usgnn.com/newsLEED20101021.htm

 

[Architect1281]

So the orginization that charges you to learn its opinion

charges more to maintain it's theories with continuing required minimum propaganda.

charges more to bless a project you keep score of using an agency supplied scorecard.

pats you on the back for doing the right thing.

then picks your pocket for a certificate of color, or mineral

provides no guarrantee other than the tail lights

may not be omniscient

I'm Crushed, I'm Dissapointed, I'm .. I'm LLLLLLLLLOOOOOOOOOOOLLLLLLLLLLMMMMMMMAAAAAAAAAAAAOOOOOOOO!

 

[Architect1281]

Conarb

RI Adopted the IGCC as an option for private and as a Goal; (Mostly Required) for Public structures.

It mentions LEED but allows alternatly recognized methods of attainment.

In my opinion it may actually provide a better product to the public sector of construction which has been run by the

lowest bid method or what I call the CATNAP theory of construction

Cheapest

Available

Technology

Necessaty to

Avoid

Prosecution.

If more attention is paid to envelope and enclosure

and commissioning is properly performed (we get what we were supposed to get working the way its supposed to work)

then its purpose will be well served.

You can keep your Green Roof's and Bicycle racks

Give me waterproof and working facility every day!

 

[conarb]

Architect:

The radical greens are now fighting amongst themselves, The Sierra Club (now known as "Big Green") is suing to prevent California's Green Code from taking effect:

The Sierra Club and Natural Resources Defense Council are among six groups waging a last-minute campaign to derail some of the rules, saying they aren't tough enough.¹

The word is that the USGBC is funding the lawsuits.

¹ http://articles.latimes.com/2010/jan/11/business/la-fi-green-building11-2010jan11/2

 

[Architect1281]

HAS anyone been watching the code action ICC energy hearings on the net

I have because my Boss Jack Leyden was just elected to the ICC board (COngratulations!!!!!!!!!!!)

my only comment on that endless process RE the 30% reduction issues is

Its a good thing they dont allow firearms in the facility. OMG!

 

[conarb]

Here is a green lawyers analysis of the chances of Henry Gifford's class getting certified. Any here who have paid to get LEED Certified will automatically be plaintiffs, unless they elect to opt out and bring their own individual action.

Gifford is attempting to certify four separate classes: 1. All persons who paid for LEED certification in reliance on alleged deceptive marketing related to energy performance in LEED buildings.

2. "All persons who design energy-efficient buildings and whose livelihoods are injured by USGBC's monopolization of the market through fraudulent and intentionally misleading representations in the marketing and promotion of the LEED product line. . ."

3. All taxpayers whose city and state tax dollars are spent on the costs of LEED certification in publicly-commissioned buildings.

4. Trades injured by USGBC's alleged deceptive trade practices because the trades lose money and time in having to comply with LEED certification even though the buildings are allegedly not saving energy.

Were I to put money on it I'd wager that he doesn't get certified, the attorney explains the reasons in the article, during the Reagan administration Congress really made it tough to certify a class, and when the Democrats have been in power they haven't rolled those laws back, a friend who used to do class action law got out, the "Commonality of Damages" requirement is just too tough to prove for certification.

Here is something that is very unfair:

4. Trades injured by USGBC's alleged deceptive trade practices because the trades lose money and time in having to comply with LEED certification even though the buildings are allegedly not saving energy.

If it does get certified, and they do bankrupt the USGBC, when the monies are divied up that Oakland contractor who supposedly lost $2.4 million dollars would get the same payout as a contractor who made money on a project(s), he would be better off to opt out and file his own lawsuit, if he's got any money left.

 

[peach]

Had a very interesting meeting yesterday; Lots of property owners are really unhappy with USGBC and the LEED rating; this lawsuit will probably get alot of traction. For a not for profit organization, it sounds like USGBC has ALOT of money stored up.. from such sources as charging $50 for every question they answer.. OH WAIT.. what a racket!

I will expect a $5 check from Jeff every time I post.. same thing.. EXCEPT.. I will never bill Jeff... so I guess it's not the same thing at all.

 

[mark handler]

Lawsuit against LEED amended, no longer seeks class-action status

A federal lawsuit filed in October 2010 against the U.S. Green Building Council and other defendants has been amended to focus solely on a claim of false advertising and is no longer a class-action suit. The original suit, which focused on allegedly fraudulent claims of the LEED rating system, was amended February 7, 2011.

http://www.buildinggreen.com/auth/article.cfm/2011/2/8/New-Plaintiffs-Join-Amended-LEED-Lawsuit-Gifford-USGBC-AP/