• FreeAdvice has a new Terms of Service and Privacy Policy, effective May 25, 2018.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our Terms of Service and use of cookies.

Can the Bank be held responsible for releasing funds - without inspection?

Accident - Bankruptcy - Criminal Law / DUI - Business - Consumer - Employment - Family - Immigration - Real Estate - Tax - Traffic - Wills   Please click a topic or scroll down for more.

tcrjmom

Junior Member
ARIZONA -

The house is not complete - it has been sitting for over a year. The contractor did not Compact the soil, lay the ABC Rock, install the Rebar Netting, or pour enough concrete - as per the plans. The contractor is suing me and the AZ ROC because, his license has been revoked.

My Construction Loan Contract (in the Construction Draw Schedule) states:

First Disbursement: 20% will be disbursed upon acceptable certification by Borrower or the contractor or city building inspector, and the Banks' Inspector, as appropriate, that the following have been completed:
A: All footings, foundation walls, piers and any other foundation work;
B: All underground piping for plumbing, heating and cooling in place, and plumbing tested with water to a height of not less than forty-two inches above floor level;
C: All sub-base material in place and compacted, except at exposed items, insulation strips, screeds and other work preparatory to pouring floor slab completed;
D: All excavation completed and concrete platforms, patio floors, and carport/garage slab poured.

The bank has given the contractor three out of the five draws and they do not seem to care about the problems _ as long as we continue to pay the monthly construction loan.
 
Last edited:


HappyHusband

Senior Member
tcrjmom said:
ARIZONA -

The house is not complete - it has been sitting for over a year. The contractor did not Compact the soil, lay the ABC Rock, install the Rebar Netting, or pour enough concrete - as per the plans. The contractor is suing me and the AZ ROC because, his license has been revoked.

My Construction Loan Contract (in the Construction Draw Schedule) states:

First Disbursement: 20% will be disbursed upon acceptable certification by Borrower or the contractor or city building inspector, and the Banks' Inspector, as appropriate, that the following have been completed:
A: All footings, foundation walls, piers and any other foundation work;
B: All underground piping for plumbing, heating and cooling in place, and plumbing tested with water to a height of not less than forty-two inches above floor level;
C: All sub-base material in place and compacted, except at exposed items, insulation strips, screeds and other work preparatory to pouring floor slab completed;
D: All excavation completed and concrete platforms, patio floors, and carport/garage slab poured.

The bank has given the contractor three out of the five draws and they do not seem to care about the problems _ as long as we continue to pay the monthly construction loan.
Your issue with construction quality and schedule should be taken up with the contractor.
The bank's inspector is not your construction inspector.

Why is the contractor suing you?
 

tcrjmom

Junior Member
Thank you for your response

The contractor has named AZ ROC and me in a suite, because his license has been revoked. A Superior Court Judge stayed the Revocation; however, he imposed a Cash Bond. The Contractor does not want to place a Cash Bond so he has requested a De Novo trial - it has now been sent to the Attorney General for Review. I filed my original complaint with the Registrar of Contractors in June of 2005. The attorney that I have to help defend me is stating that I should just take my losses and let the contractor finish the house. The Engineer that inspected the house stated that the house should not be completed before fixing the concrete problems - he stated that the house is going to continue to move. In addition, he believed that the inspector would not sign off on the house with the current problems. I contacted the bank and they stated that they inspected the house before allowing the contractor to receive the funds. I can't believe that they did inspect it because none of the prep work was done before the concrete was poured.
 

HappyHusband

Senior Member
tcrjmom said:
The contractor has named AZ ROC and me in a suite, because his license has been revoked. A Superior Court Judge stayed the Revocation; however, he imposed a Cash Bond. The Contractor does not want to place a Cash Bond so he has requested a De Novo trial - it has now been sent to the Attorney General for Review. I filed my original complaint with the Registrar of Contractors in June of 2005. The attorney that I have to help defend me is stating that I should just take my losses and let the contractor finish the house. The Engineer that inspected the house stated that the house should not be completed before fixing the concrete problems - he stated that the house is going to continue to move. In addition, he believed that the inspector would not sign off on the house with the current problems. I contacted the bank and they stated that they inspected the house before allowing the contractor to receive the funds. I can't believe that they did inspect it because none of the prep work was done before the concrete was poured.
The contractor is suing you because his license has been revoked. Huh?

I contacted the bank and they stated that they inspected the house before allowing the contractor to receive the funds. I can't believe that they did inspect it because none of the prep work was done before the concrete was poured.

The bank's inspection is not the same as an engineer's or code inspector's inspection.
The contractor asked for payment on the foundation draw, the bank looks at it, Yep, the foundation is in, Pay them. The frame's up, Pay them. The bank inspector is not going to know that the prep work wasn't done, all they can see is the finished foundation.
The bank's approval of the draw is not approval of the quality of construction.
 

Buk1000

Member
IMO the builder suing the homeowner because AZROC disciplined him is probably more along the lines of a SLAPP suit. http://www.casp.net/ Site has a link to various state's statutes regarding SLAPP suits.
 

tcrjmom

Junior Member
Too bad I'm not in California

Unfortunately, my house in Arizona and they do not have good laws to protect the consumer!
 

Find the Right Lawyer for Your Legal Issue!

Fast, Free, and Confidential
data-ad-format="auto">
Top