Avoiding wrongful liability

Avoiding wrongful liability

by proper documentation

Brandeis Building Historic building built in 1906. Ten story tall building was under renovation to

convert into high profile lofts. Boone Brothers was awarded the contract to

re-roof the Brandeis building, part ballast, part fully adhered E.P.D.M..

BBR does a pre-job roof inspection with the general contractor, then work progresses as normal.

Friday May 25, 2006 Roof was structurally sloped. There were only two 16” drains on the roof

and the plumbers were switching which drain to use.

BBR foreman confirmed with the mechanical contractor-plumbing division while they were present with him which drain on the roof that they wanted opened up.

Friday May 25, 2006 cont. BBR foreman also confirmed with the general

contractor that they were opening up that specific drain.

BBR foreman did daily safety inspection reports and daily foreman journal documentation entries confirm this information.

Friday night

Thunderstorm -with three inches of rain.

Saturday May 26, 2006 Guard for the building found leak (“like a

waterfall” 10th 9th and 8th floor) and called the general contractor. Approx 4am.

General contractor found leak coming from roof drain- pressure tester and called plumbers.

Plumbers sent a emergency repairman to fix leak.

Saturday May 26, 2006 cont. Emergency plumber

repairman comes approx 4-5am and replaces pressure tester with a solid pipe.

Emergency plumber repairman(who was never been on the job says it’s the roofers fault).

General contractor calls BBR emergency number at approx 6- 6:15: am.

Saturday May 26, 2006 cont. BBR Service Dept Foreman arrives at approx

6:45. Photographs drain area and calls BBR

Superintendent and says there is major water infiltration issues approx 7am.

Superintendent calls job foreman and other foreman to help with the issue.

Plumber blames BBR again for opening the roof drain.

Saturday May 26, 2006 cont. BBR Service Dept. Foreman does not

comment on issue because he has never been on the job before (training).

Superintendent arrives on the jobsite with job foreman and two additional foremen at approx 7:30-7:45 am.

BBR takes pictures of the pressure tester, drain and open penetrations that the mechanical contractor/plumber left in place.

Saturday May 26, 2006 cont. Review water damage throughout the building

extensive damage on 10th, 9th, and 8th floors. Superintendent and project foreman speak with

general contractor about water infiltration, general contractor views documentation and agrees damage is done by pressure tester.

BBR contacts Hettrick, Cyr and Gallagher Bassett to apprise them of the situation.

Boone Brothers investigates the rest of the job for the next few hours taking pictures of laps to prove all were sealed and finding open penetrations in curbs as well.

Monday May 26, 2006 CNA assigns an investigator the claim to

protect BBR from wrongful accusations. Original plumber shows up to jobsite unaware

of the weekend issues and admits to general contractor that the leak was their fault and they left the pressure tester in without securing it properly.

Days following

CNA investigator visits BBR to review documentation and photos.

Visits jobsite and completes his investigation.

CNA concludes even without the plumbers admission that BBR was at no fault.

Total Costs Because of proper documentation and a quick

incident response, BBR only incurred a cost from the CNA investigation at approx $700.

Cost for plumber: 6 lofts valued at $450,000 approx 20-25%

damage conservative estimate damage $540,000-$675,000.