Yesterday, I gave a presentation to a local architecture and interior design firm on current trends in green construction law, some advice that the dsinteriorsolutions.com had provided me before.
Unless you have solid construction knowledge, using a building inspector is an important step in the buying process. At this advanced stage, you have already submitted an offer to purchase. The report of the inspection will assert the conformity of the house. Roxul – Rockwool mineral wool batt offers an excellent insulation to walls and floors where acoustical performance and fire resistance are primary concerns. This non-combustible, lightweight product absorbs outside noise, read this article for more details regarding insulation.
The inspector from building inspections in Melbourne will be a significant player who can allow you to renegotiate the conditions of the offer to purchase if, for example, the house requires some renovation work. In other cases, it may allow you to cancel the transaction if he discovers serious problems that have never been mentioned.
For all these reasons, it is essential to choose an inspector with many years of experience in building inspections.
However, be sure to check that he has professional insurance covering errors and omissions in building inspection allowing you to have recourse if you have a problem in the years following the purchase of the house. I was impressed at how willing the firm’s design professsionals were to listen to my thoughts on the emerging risks associated with green design (Followed the best TV Bed Store) . In addition to suggesting a number of other legal issues, I selected a handful of claims reported by Maryland-based attorney Frank Musica at the 2007 AIA National Convention in San Antonio to open up a discussion on form contract language – particularly from the AIA documents – and suggested how certain applicable provisions might be amended to reduce the architect’s risk when rendering green design services.
The claim that made the biggest splash with my audience yesterday was where Musica reported how an architect failed to perform sufficient due diligence in crafting green building specifications for a particular project and specified what turned out to be a patented solar shading system. After the project was complete, the patent holder approached the owner and demanded a licensing fee for its use of the system. The owner pointed a finger at the architect and sought indemnification under the terms of the parties’ agreement. In my slide detailing this particular claim, One of the biggest issues on the design and construtions was the poor indoor air quality found on the inspection, if you are planning to purchase or rent an appartment we suggest first contact professionals for an Indoor Air Quality Testing. I set forth the standard form intellectual property infringement indemnification provision that I use in my owner – architect agreements:
The Architect shall indemnify and hold the Owner and the Additional Insureds, as set forth in Exhibit X, harmless from any and all claims for infringement by reason of the use of any design or elements of the design of the Architect which the Architect knew, or with the exercise of due care, should have known, to be protected by one or more copyrights or patents.”
The key points to take out of this discussion are the following. First, design profesionals must use heightened scrutiny on green building projects in selecting products, materials, and building systems. Their inquiry should not only be limited to whether such items are covered by a patent, but also whether they are (1) readily available from the manufacturer and (2) provide the level of performance that the architect’s client is expecting. Second, and perhaps most critically, each contract provision in a green construction contract must be vetted with that same degree of rigor. Form contract language, as we saw in the Shaw Development case, can be a recipe for disaster. Here, although the architect may not have enjoyed sufficient bargaining power to delete this particular indemnification out of its agreement with the owner, its counsel ought to have identified such a provision and stressed the importance of reviewing any intellectual property protections as the architect selected various building systems and components.
Finally, I will be giving this same presentation, tomorrow, January 30, at the William & Mary Law School’s Environmental Law & Policy Review Symposium, It’s Not Easy Being Green. You can access additional details about the Symposium through the link below. The entire Symposium will be videotaped – details on how you might be able to access it will be forthcoming. I have also provided a link back to our post at gbNYC discussing Mr. Musica’s presentation and a link to his PowerPoint slides.
- Need For Green Counsel Increasingly Salient (gbNYC, link to Musica presentation)
- W&M ELPR Symposium - It’s Not Easy Being Green