I found Jon A Gratzol Company's website on a Google search.
Serving only Western Washington state, Jon has the same attitude I do when it comes to waterproofing; we're the most important guy on the job, and if you don't like it, we'll walk if the conditions aren't right to enable us to perform the quality job we expect to perform for you. If your not going to do your part, Hasta La Vista Baby...it's not worth putting our name onto your project that is destined to have problems later because of existing problems today.
Substrate, sloping, plywood type, gapping, all things discussed here is in Jon's booklet.
Read Jon's booklet and learn yourself something by clicking our headline to go to his pages. I recommend it.
The experts on pedestrian traffic coatings brings you the information you need on one website! We have information on all pedestrian traffic coatings manufacturer's, including Pli-Dek, West Coast Specialty Coating Systems, Desert Brand, Life Deck, Tufflex, Mer-Kote and Dex-O-Tex systems. Browse our website for articles, videos, news stories and more. We'll be updating and adding more pages soon so bookmark this site and come back and visit!
Monday, June 23, 2008
ASSOCIATION'S MAINTENANCE DUTIES- Reprinted from www.davis-stirling.com by Adams Kessler
From Adrian Adams desk comes this reminder to HOA's about maintenance responsibilities. For more articles, information, humor and more, visit our friends at
.
Reprinted from www.davis-stirling.com by Adams Kessler
ASSOCIATION'S MAINTENANCE DUTIES
Questions regarding maintenance duties are quite common. Operating through their boards of directors, associations have the following duties:
1. Duty to Inspect Common Areas. Boards must inspect the common areas every three years and prepare a reserve study listing all major components, the remaining useful life of those components and the cost to repair or replace them. Civil Code §1365.5(e)
2. Duty to Investigate Complaints. Whenever boards learn of common area problems, such as cracked sidewalks, roof leaks, plumbing backups, etc., they must investigate the problem. Corp. Code §7231(a) They don't need to personally inspect it, they can rely on managing agents, plumbers, etc. to investigate and report back to the board. If an owner reports a flood inside his/her unit, the board must determine if the leak is originating from (i) the owner's own plumbing, which is the owner's responsibility to repair, or (ii) the common area, which is the association's responsibility to repair. Civil Code §1364(a) Exclusive use common are will depend on your governing documents.
3. Duty to Repair. Regardless of fault, repairs must be made. If the leak is an owner's responsibility and he/she refuses to repair the damage, the board has three options: (i) initiate daily fines until the owner repairs the damage, (ii) repair the damage and bill the owner for reimbursement, and/or (iii) go into court for an order that the owner either repair the damage or step aside and allow the association to repair it (and assess the owner for reimbursement). The severity of the damage will determine the steps taken.
4. Duty to Disclose. If repairs to the common areas are deferred, the board must disclose to the membership the deferral and the board's plan for repairs. Civil Code §1365(a)(3)
Adrian Adams
Very truly yours,
Adrian Adams, Esq.
Adams Kessler PLC
.
Reprinted from www.davis-stirling.com by Adams Kessler
ASSOCIATION'S MAINTENANCE DUTIES
Questions regarding maintenance duties are quite common. Operating through their boards of directors, associations have the following duties:
1. Duty to Inspect Common Areas. Boards must inspect the common areas every three years and prepare a reserve study listing all major components, the remaining useful life of those components and the cost to repair or replace them. Civil Code §1365.5(e)
2. Duty to Investigate Complaints. Whenever boards learn of common area problems, such as cracked sidewalks, roof leaks, plumbing backups, etc., they must investigate the problem. Corp. Code §7231(a) They don't need to personally inspect it, they can rely on managing agents, plumbers, etc. to investigate and report back to the board. If an owner reports a flood inside his/her unit, the board must determine if the leak is originating from (i) the owner's own plumbing, which is the owner's responsibility to repair, or (ii) the common area, which is the association's responsibility to repair. Civil Code §1364(a) Exclusive use common are will depend on your governing documents.
3. Duty to Repair. Regardless of fault, repairs must be made. If the leak is an owner's responsibility and he/she refuses to repair the damage, the board has three options: (i) initiate daily fines until the owner repairs the damage, (ii) repair the damage and bill the owner for reimbursement, and/or (iii) go into court for an order that the owner either repair the damage or step aside and allow the association to repair it (and assess the owner for reimbursement). The severity of the damage will determine the steps taken.
4. Duty to Disclose. If repairs to the common areas are deferred, the board must disclose to the membership the deferral and the board's plan for repairs. Civil Code §1365(a)(3)
Adrian Adams
Very truly yours,
Adrian Adams, Esq.
Adams Kessler PLC
Sunday, June 22, 2008
AIA Trust's "White Paper" on Risk Management Ideas For Condominium Projects
Everyone has to deal with insurance and risk when building, developing and designing condo's-including the Architects. Very often builders form LLP's that just develop the condo you are looking to buy. When all the sales are closed, often the LLP is closed too, leaving entities that are still around to deal with the lawsuits from HOA attorney's.
This White paper from the AIA Trust, issued in April 2006 and authored by attorney G. William Quatman, FAIA, Esq of Shughart Thomson & Kilroy, P.C. in Kansas City MO, discusses the condo crisis and defect suits from the Architects' side and discusses how to deal with the problems in condo building.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Here are the highlights of the attached White Paper on risk management as relates
to condominium projects:
There has been incredible growth in the housing market nationwide. Construction
defect litigation has exploded in several states, drawing aggressive plaintiff law firms to
what has become a “cottage industry” of filing suits on behalf of condominium owners
and Homeowner Associations (“HOA”) against developers, contractors, architects and
others for actual or alleged defects. Some architects and contractors have dropped out of the condominium market due to suits and high insurance. Insurers for contractors have invoked exclusions in new policies for any residential construction and insurers for architects charge increased premiums and require a supplemental application for
condominium projects. With many condominium projects developed by single-purpose
LLC’s, which are dissolved after all the units are sold, the unit owners and HOA’s often have no recourse against the entity who sold them their unit. As a result, many sue the contractor and architect.
As of January 2006, a total of 27 State Legislatures have passed “Right-To-Cure” Acts
(or Construction Defect Acts) that are aimed to reduce suits by requiring the HOA and
the condominium unit owners to give advance written notice of a defect to the contractor prior to filing a lawsuit. In 14 states, the law also protects architects. See Appendix G for the full text of these statutes and hot links to the actual laws. These laws set out a pre-
claim procedure whereby the contractor (and sometimes the design professional) have
the right to inspect the property, conduct testing, and then offer to repair or settle the dispute, or to deny liability, before any lawsuit is filed. In a few states, the HOA must give advance notice to the unit owners and explain the options and the cost of litigation. In at least one state, the HOA board must send the owners a copy of the contractor’s responseto the claim and a vote is required before suit can be filed. These laws can greatly assist in reducing costly litigation, however in nearly 75% of the states there is currently no protection for the architect. AIA has lots of work to do in this area. Of the 27 states with “Right-To-Cure Laws”, only 14 of those include design defects or specific mention of architects.
CLICK THE HEADLINE TO READ THE ENTIRE PAPER AT AIA TRUST
This White paper from the AIA Trust, issued in April 2006 and authored by attorney G. William Quatman, FAIA, Esq of Shughart Thomson & Kilroy, P.C. in Kansas City MO, discusses the condo crisis and defect suits from the Architects' side and discusses how to deal with the problems in condo building.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Here are the highlights of the attached White Paper on risk management as relates
to condominium projects:
There has been incredible growth in the housing market nationwide. Construction
defect litigation has exploded in several states, drawing aggressive plaintiff law firms to
what has become a “cottage industry” of filing suits on behalf of condominium owners
and Homeowner Associations (“HOA”) against developers, contractors, architects and
others for actual or alleged defects. Some architects and contractors have dropped out of the condominium market due to suits and high insurance. Insurers for contractors have invoked exclusions in new policies for any residential construction and insurers for architects charge increased premiums and require a supplemental application for
condominium projects. With many condominium projects developed by single-purpose
LLC’s, which are dissolved after all the units are sold, the unit owners and HOA’s often have no recourse against the entity who sold them their unit. As a result, many sue the contractor and architect.
As of January 2006, a total of 27 State Legislatures have passed “Right-To-Cure” Acts
(or Construction Defect Acts) that are aimed to reduce suits by requiring the HOA and
the condominium unit owners to give advance written notice of a defect to the contractor prior to filing a lawsuit. In 14 states, the law also protects architects. See Appendix G for the full text of these statutes and hot links to the actual laws. These laws set out a pre-
claim procedure whereby the contractor (and sometimes the design professional) have
the right to inspect the property, conduct testing, and then offer to repair or settle the dispute, or to deny liability, before any lawsuit is filed. In a few states, the HOA must give advance notice to the unit owners and explain the options and the cost of litigation. In at least one state, the HOA board must send the owners a copy of the contractor’s responseto the claim and a vote is required before suit can be filed. These laws can greatly assist in reducing costly litigation, however in nearly 75% of the states there is currently no protection for the architect. AIA has lots of work to do in this area. Of the 27 states with “Right-To-Cure Laws”, only 14 of those include design defects or specific mention of architects.
CLICK THE HEADLINE TO READ THE ENTIRE PAPER AT AIA TRUST
Saturday, June 21, 2008
Roof Deck Rehab in Morro Bay
West Coast Waterproofing (805-331-0700) recently completed the replacement of a 1000 square foot roof deck in Morro Bay.
The house was built apx 12 years ago, using a Dex-O-Tex slip sheet system installed by a local contractor. The deck installation wasn't done correctly from the start, the owner had problems with the job from the get go, and Crossfield had to inspect the job and make recommendations to repair problems left from the original install. Sloping issues, venting the slip sheet and ponding water all contributed to the early demise of the decking system, leaving the owner with little choice but to repalce it way sooner than should have been necessary.
In looking at jobs, one thing I always ask about is what the intended use is going to be. One of the uses for this deck was that a hot tub would be placed on the membrane. That information should have been enough for the installer to realize that Dex-O-Tex Weatherwear's system probably wasn't a suitable choice for this install, as the slip sheet must be able to "move and slip" over the substrate. Since a heavy hot tub was going on, this would restrict the movement.
We recommended tearing off the existing membrane, reusing the flashings if possible.
After stripping it off, we found only a couple of rusted areas of flashings, replaced those and then installed a Desert Crete decking system over the plywood deck.
The new deck looks great, the owner is very happy and we're confident knowing that the home will be well protected for years to come.
West Coast and I would be happy to quote you on your next job. If your interested in our high quality work standards, using high quality waterproofing materials from reputable manufacturer's with 80+ years of manufacturing experience, you should call me.
Price or quality? You can't get quality and a low price, you can only achieve quality when the applicator has the time needed to do his job correctly. Details count in waterproofing and when price counts more over quality, quality suffers, and so will you and your client.
Builders and contractors with high standards who value quality over price should call; those who value price over quality should not disturb us and instead call our competitors who need work and will price your job for speed, not quality.
Former Mer-Kote Employee Busy in Court
Former Mer-Kote salesperson David Krubinski has been busy in court lately, judging from our review of cases in the So Cal court system.
A suit filed against former employer Mer-Ko Parx/LaHabra resulted in some type of settlement from what we can tell from the information at the court website,
and in Riverside County, an ongoing suit under the Negligence category has Mr. Krubinski listed as a plaintiff and a defendant, along with long time Mer-Ko applictator WICR, Inc listed as the same thing, plaintiff and defendant.
Looks like there will be some interesting twists and turns on this case...
see below for the public information I was able to find on court web sites.
Superior Court of California, County of Riverside
www.riverside.courts.ca.gov Page: 117
HONORABLE - Judge William R. Bailey
----------------------------------------------------------------------
DATE: 06/27/08 DEPT: 01
----------------------------------------------------------------------
1. CASE #: INC052479 TIME: 8:30
CATEGORY: Negligence
CASE NAME: KRUBINSKI VS AGNEW
HEARING: Trial Setting Conference
PARTIES: FIRMS/ATTORNEY'S
Plaintiff:
DAVID KRUBINSKI SEIFER & ASSOCIATES PLC
CAROL KRUBINSKI LAW OFFICE OF JOHN W. TOWER
PREMIER MECHANICAL SERVICES IN THE MORRISON LAW GROUP
MARVIN W AGNEW LAW OFFICES OF JOSEPH A ROMAN
WANKE INDUSTRIAL COMMERICIAL R LAW OFFICES OF JOSEPH A ROMAN
WICR & MWA CONTRACTING LAW OFFICES OF JOSEPH A ROMAN
MURDICA CUSTOM CONCRETE INC BREMER & WHYTE, LLP
DENNIS THERIEAU WAIT & COLFER
PANCHOS CONCRETE INC JAMPOL ZIMET SKANE & WILCOX LL
Defendant:
MARVIN W AGNEW LAW OFFICES OF JOSEPH A ROMAN
WANKE INDUSTRIAL COMMERICIAL R LAW OFFICES OF JOSEPH A ROMAN
WICR & MWA CONTRACTING LAW OFFICES OF JOSEPH A ROMAN
DEW ROOFING INC KOLETSKY MANCINI FELDMAN & MOR
PREMIER MECHANICAL SERVICES IN THE MORRISON LAW GROUP
DENNIS THERIEAU WAIT & COLFER
MURDICA CUSTOM CONCRETE INC BREMER & WHYTE, LLP
BENEDETTI CONSTRUCTION MANAGEM HUGHES LAW FIRM
TANDEM WEST GLASS INC WAIT & COLFER
MARC AVRIETTE & COMPANY BONETATI SASAKI KINCAID & KINC
CHARLES SCICLI PLUMBING LAW OFFICE OF MARK J. SKAPIK,
DAVID KRUBINSKI
CAROL KRUBINSKI
MARVIN W AGNEW LAW OFFICES OF JOSEPH A ROMAN
WANKE INDUSTRIAL COMMERCIAL RE LAW OFFICES OF JOSEPH A ROMAN
WICR & MWA CONTRACTING LAW OFFICES OF JOSEPH A ROMAN
DEW ROOFING INC KOLETSKY MANCINI FELDMAN & MOR
MURDICA CUSTOM CONCRETE INC BREMER & WHYTE, LLP
CHARLES SCICLI PLUMBING
CURTIS SHUPE PRO/PER
DENNIS LAW OFFICES OF WAIT & CHILDS
DEW ROOFING INC KOLETSKY MANCINI FELDMAN & MOR
PREMIER MECHANICAL SERVICES IN THE MORRISON LAW GROUP
DENNIS THERIEAU WAIT & CHILDS ATTORNEYS AT LAW
MURDICA CUSTOM CONCRETE INC BREMER & WHYTE, LLP
BENEDETTI CONSTRUCTION MANAGEM HUGHES LAW FIRM
TANDEM WEST GLASS INC LAW OFFICES OF WAIT & CHILDS
MARC AVRIETTE & COMPANY BONETATI SASAKI KINCAID & KINC
Superior Court of California, County of Riverside
www.riverside.courts.ca.gov Page: 118
_____________________________________________________________________________________
Case No. Case Title Case Type Filing Date Category
07CC09768 MAZOR-KRUBINSKI VS PAREXLAHABRA INC FRAUD 09/11/2007 CIVIL - UNLIMITED
Participants
Results 1 - 10 of 120000000000<>
Name Type Assoc Start Date End Date
LINDBORG & DRILL LLP ATTORNEY 09/11/2007
MER-KOTE PRODUCTS, INC DEFENDANT 09/11/2007
TIM MCDONALD DEFENDANT 09/11/2007
ALLEN MATKINS LECK GAMBLE MALLORY & NA ATTORNEY 10/03/2007
PAREXLAHABRA, INC DEFENDANT 09/11/2007
STONE ROSENBLATT CHA PLC ATTORNEY 10/03/2007
I.C.R. SERVICES LLC PLAINTIFF 09/11/2007
MATERIS-FRANCE DEFENDANT 09/11/2007
DAVID LEON MAZOR-KRUBINSKI PLAINTIFF 09/11/2007
PAT MILLER DEFENDANT 09/11/2007
Hearings
Results 1 - 10 of 280000000000<>
Event Scheduled Date Start Time Dept Judge
MOTION FOR SANCTIONS 05/27/2008 09:00 C33 GLASS
MOTION TO COMPEL RESPONSE TO REQUESTS FOR ADMISSIONS 05/27/2008 09:00 C33 GLASS
MOTION FOR TERMINATION OF SANCTIONS 05/27/2008 09:00 C33 GLASS
MOTION - OTHER 05/27/2008 09:00 C33 GLASS
MOTION FOR SANCTIONS 05/06/2008 09:00 C33
MOTION FOR SANCTIONS 05/06/2008 09:00 C33
MOTION TO COMPEL FURTHER RESPONSES TO FORM INTERROGATORIES 05/06/2008 09:00 C33
MOTION - OTHER 05/06/2008 09:00 C33
CHAMBERS WORK 04/28/2008 02:32 C33 GLASS
MOTION FOR PROTECTIVE ORDER 04/15/2008 09:00 C33 GLASS
Register of Actions
Results 1 - 10 of 191000000000<>
ROA # Docket Entry Filing Date Filing Party
196 CASE DISMISSED WITH DISPOSITION OF REQUEST FOR DISMISSAL 06/10/2008
195 REQUEST FOR DISMISSAL FILED BY PAREXLAHABRA, INC ON 06/09/2008 06/09/2008 PAREXLAHABRA, INC ON 06/09/2008
194 REQUEST FOR DISMISSAL FILED BY I.C.R. SERVICES LLC; MAZOR-KRUBINSKI, DAVID LEON ON 06/05/2008 06/05/2008 I.C.R. SERVICES LLC; MAZOR-KRUBINSKI, DAVID LEON ON 06/05/2008
193 REQUEST FOR DISMISSAL SUBMITTED BY PAREXLAHABRA, INC REJECTED ON 06/05/2008. 06/05/2008
192 NOTICE - OTHER (OF UNAVAILABILITY) FILED BY MCDONALD, TIM; MILLER, PAT ON 06/02/2008 06/02/2008 MCDONALD, TIM; MILLER, PAT ON 06/02/2008
191 MINUTES FINALIZED FOR MOTION FOR TERMINATION OF SANCTIONS 05/27/2008 09:00:00 AM. 05/29/2008
190 NOTICE OF RULING FILED BY MAZOR-KRUBINSKI, DAVID LEON ON 04/02/2008 04/02/2008 MAZOR-KRUBINSKI, DAVID LEON ON 04/02/2008
189 ORDER - OTHER (CASE MANAGEMENT ORDER) FILED BY PAREXLAHABRA, INC ON 05/09/2008 05/09/2008 PAREXLAHABRA, INC ON 05/09/2008
188 ORDER - OTHER (CASE MANAGEMENT ORDER) FILED BY MAZOR-KRUBINSKI, DAVID LEON ON 05/09/2008 05/09/2008 MAZOR-KRUBINSKI, DAVID LEON ON 05/09/2008
187 NOTICE OF SETTLEMENT FILED BY MCDONALD, TIM; MILLER, PAT ON 05/08/2008 05/08/2008 MCDONALD, TIM; MILLER, PAT ON 05/08/2008
A suit filed against former employer Mer-Ko Parx/LaHabra resulted in some type of settlement from what we can tell from the information at the court website,
and in Riverside County, an ongoing suit under the Negligence category has Mr. Krubinski listed as a plaintiff and a defendant, along with long time Mer-Ko applictator WICR, Inc listed as the same thing, plaintiff and defendant.
Looks like there will be some interesting twists and turns on this case...
see below for the public information I was able to find on court web sites.
Superior Court of California, County of Riverside
www.riverside.courts.ca.gov Page: 117
HONORABLE - Judge William R. Bailey
----------------------------------------------------------------------
DATE: 06/27/08 DEPT: 01
----------------------------------------------------------------------
1. CASE #: INC052479 TIME: 8:30
CATEGORY: Negligence
CASE NAME: KRUBINSKI VS AGNEW
HEARING: Trial Setting Conference
PARTIES: FIRMS/ATTORNEY'S
Plaintiff:
DAVID KRUBINSKI SEIFER & ASSOCIATES PLC
CAROL KRUBINSKI LAW OFFICE OF JOHN W. TOWER
PREMIER MECHANICAL SERVICES IN THE MORRISON LAW GROUP
MARVIN W AGNEW LAW OFFICES OF JOSEPH A ROMAN
WANKE INDUSTRIAL COMMERICIAL R LAW OFFICES OF JOSEPH A ROMAN
WICR & MWA CONTRACTING LAW OFFICES OF JOSEPH A ROMAN
MURDICA CUSTOM CONCRETE INC BREMER & WHYTE, LLP
DENNIS THERIEAU WAIT & COLFER
PANCHOS CONCRETE INC JAMPOL ZIMET SKANE & WILCOX LL
Defendant:
MARVIN W AGNEW LAW OFFICES OF JOSEPH A ROMAN
WANKE INDUSTRIAL COMMERICIAL R LAW OFFICES OF JOSEPH A ROMAN
WICR & MWA CONTRACTING LAW OFFICES OF JOSEPH A ROMAN
DEW ROOFING INC KOLETSKY MANCINI FELDMAN & MOR
PREMIER MECHANICAL SERVICES IN THE MORRISON LAW GROUP
DENNIS THERIEAU WAIT & COLFER
MURDICA CUSTOM CONCRETE INC BREMER & WHYTE, LLP
BENEDETTI CONSTRUCTION MANAGEM HUGHES LAW FIRM
TANDEM WEST GLASS INC WAIT & COLFER
MARC AVRIETTE & COMPANY BONETATI SASAKI KINCAID & KINC
CHARLES SCICLI PLUMBING LAW OFFICE OF MARK J. SKAPIK,
DAVID KRUBINSKI
CAROL KRUBINSKI
MARVIN W AGNEW LAW OFFICES OF JOSEPH A ROMAN
WANKE INDUSTRIAL COMMERCIAL RE LAW OFFICES OF JOSEPH A ROMAN
WICR & MWA CONTRACTING LAW OFFICES OF JOSEPH A ROMAN
DEW ROOFING INC KOLETSKY MANCINI FELDMAN & MOR
MURDICA CUSTOM CONCRETE INC BREMER & WHYTE, LLP
CHARLES SCICLI PLUMBING
CURTIS SHUPE PRO/PER
DENNIS LAW OFFICES OF WAIT & CHILDS
DEW ROOFING INC KOLETSKY MANCINI FELDMAN & MOR
PREMIER MECHANICAL SERVICES IN THE MORRISON LAW GROUP
DENNIS THERIEAU WAIT & CHILDS ATTORNEYS AT LAW
MURDICA CUSTOM CONCRETE INC BREMER & WHYTE, LLP
BENEDETTI CONSTRUCTION MANAGEM HUGHES LAW FIRM
TANDEM WEST GLASS INC LAW OFFICES OF WAIT & CHILDS
MARC AVRIETTE & COMPANY BONETATI SASAKI KINCAID & KINC
Superior Court of California, County of Riverside
www.riverside.courts.ca.gov Page: 118
_____________________________________________________________________________________
Case No. Case Title Case Type Filing Date Category
07CC09768 MAZOR-KRUBINSKI VS PAREXLAHABRA INC FRAUD 09/11/2007 CIVIL - UNLIMITED
Participants
Results 1 - 10 of 120000000000<
Name Type Assoc Start Date End Date
LINDBORG & DRILL LLP ATTORNEY 09/11/2007
MER-KOTE PRODUCTS, INC DEFENDANT 09/11/2007
TIM MCDONALD DEFENDANT 09/11/2007
ALLEN MATKINS LECK GAMBLE MALLORY & NA ATTORNEY 10/03/2007
PAREXLAHABRA, INC DEFENDANT 09/11/2007
STONE ROSENBLATT CHA PLC ATTORNEY 10/03/2007
I.C.R. SERVICES LLC PLAINTIFF 09/11/2007
MATERIS-FRANCE DEFENDANT 09/11/2007
DAVID LEON MAZOR-KRUBINSKI PLAINTIFF 09/11/2007
PAT MILLER DEFENDANT 09/11/2007
Hearings
Results 1 - 10 of 280000000000<
Event Scheduled Date Start Time Dept Judge
MOTION FOR SANCTIONS 05/27/2008 09:00 C33 GLASS
MOTION TO COMPEL RESPONSE TO REQUESTS FOR ADMISSIONS 05/27/2008 09:00 C33 GLASS
MOTION FOR TERMINATION OF SANCTIONS 05/27/2008 09:00 C33 GLASS
MOTION - OTHER 05/27/2008 09:00 C33 GLASS
MOTION FOR SANCTIONS 05/06/2008 09:00 C33
MOTION FOR SANCTIONS 05/06/2008 09:00 C33
MOTION TO COMPEL FURTHER RESPONSES TO FORM INTERROGATORIES 05/06/2008 09:00 C33
MOTION - OTHER 05/06/2008 09:00 C33
CHAMBERS WORK 04/28/2008 02:32 C33 GLASS
MOTION FOR PROTECTIVE ORDER 04/15/2008 09:00 C33 GLASS
Register of Actions
Results 1 - 10 of 191000000000<
ROA # Docket Entry Filing Date Filing Party
196 CASE DISMISSED WITH DISPOSITION OF REQUEST FOR DISMISSAL 06/10/2008
195 REQUEST FOR DISMISSAL FILED BY PAREXLAHABRA, INC ON 06/09/2008 06/09/2008 PAREXLAHABRA, INC ON 06/09/2008
194 REQUEST FOR DISMISSAL FILED BY I.C.R. SERVICES LLC; MAZOR-KRUBINSKI, DAVID LEON ON 06/05/2008 06/05/2008 I.C.R. SERVICES LLC; MAZOR-KRUBINSKI, DAVID LEON ON 06/05/2008
193 REQUEST FOR DISMISSAL SUBMITTED BY PAREXLAHABRA, INC REJECTED ON 06/05/2008. 06/05/2008
192 NOTICE - OTHER (OF UNAVAILABILITY) FILED BY MCDONALD, TIM; MILLER, PAT ON 06/02/2008 06/02/2008 MCDONALD, TIM; MILLER, PAT ON 06/02/2008
191 MINUTES FINALIZED FOR MOTION FOR TERMINATION OF SANCTIONS 05/27/2008 09:00:00 AM. 05/29/2008
190 NOTICE OF RULING FILED BY MAZOR-KRUBINSKI, DAVID LEON ON 04/02/2008 04/02/2008 MAZOR-KRUBINSKI, DAVID LEON ON 04/02/2008
189 ORDER - OTHER (CASE MANAGEMENT ORDER) FILED BY PAREXLAHABRA, INC ON 05/09/2008 05/09/2008 PAREXLAHABRA, INC ON 05/09/2008
188 ORDER - OTHER (CASE MANAGEMENT ORDER) FILED BY MAZOR-KRUBINSKI, DAVID LEON ON 05/09/2008 05/09/2008 MAZOR-KRUBINSKI, DAVID LEON ON 05/09/2008
187 NOTICE OF SETTLEMENT FILED BY MCDONALD, TIM; MILLER, PAT ON 05/08/2008 05/08/2008 MCDONALD, TIM; MILLER, PAT ON 05/08/2008
Friday, June 20, 2008
Deck Expert Continues Quest to Be Listed Applicator-Attends Mer-Ko/Parex "Fundamentals of Mer-Ko Seamless Decking & Waterproofing" Training Class
(click our headline to go to Mer-Ko's website)
Continuing my quest to understand Mer-Ko's deck systems and to become a listed applicator, I was in Torrance Thursday morning; the weather cooperated and while it was warm and sunny, left the thermostat turned down somewhat, unlike what most of California is feeling for heat currently.
Approximately 28-30 persons gathered under the outdoor tent to watch Mer-Ko's in house installer/product tester Ken Rhodes demonstrate the correct installation procedures for the Shur-deck and the Weather Deck systems, as well as the Pedestrian and Auto Deck urethane systems for use over plywood and concrete substrates.
I learned lots of new things, specifications have changed on these products as Mer-ko makes refinements and improvements, so installers take note. Seemingly simple things too, like when on a long run of laying down the slip sheet, if you run short, be sure to stagger the short laps to opposite ends of the deck.
Mer-Ko introduced their new "Prep-Seal", a required step now in the Shurdeck application over bare plywood as a moisture barrier so that the plywood doesn't absorb the water out of the Shurdeck construction coat.
Also introduced was Mer-Ko's new pigmented sealers; now manufactured and developed back in house, after being subbed out for a few years. Mer-Ko Business Manager Susan Foster told us the product was better and cost the same.
A mix of a couple architects, a couple HOA rehab contractors and Mer-Ko applicators were in attendance with myself and there was lots of questions thrown about, and I think it resulted in a nice meeting with everyone learning something new.
Mer-Ko talked more about their future plans and developments, it appears that being owned by a company with cash can make things happen, and things are happening at Mer-ko...
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)