Found This Good Slide Presentation at the Oregon Association of Home Inspectors

This slide presentation by Jim Katen of the Oregon Association of Home Inspectors discuses waterproof decks and their issues.

Take a look by clicking here to OASHI.org's website page

RCI, Inc. And The SWR Institute To Offer Webinar Series

June 29, 2010

Air Barriers: Condensation, Water Intrusion and Energy Efficiency
Raleigh, NC – In July, RCI, Inc. and the Sealant, Waterproofing & Restoration Institute (SWRInstitute) will release the first in a series of several collaborative Webinar programs.
Air Barriers: Condensation, Water Intrusion and Energy Efficiency is a two part Webinar series. Part one will be broadcast Tuesday, July 20, 2010 and part two will be hosted Tuesday, July 27, 2010. Both segments will run from 1:00 – 2:00 PM (EDT).
Air Barriers: Condensation, Water Intrusion and Energy Efficiency will focus on the critical performance of air barrier systems in building envelopes.
Participants will receive one hour of AIA/CES and RCI CEH credit per Webinar.
Moderators for both Web sessions will be David Boyer of PROSOCO, Inc. and Kami Farahmandpour of Building Technology Consultants, PC.
A strategic alliance between RCI and SWRInstitute furthers the goals of both organizations – to promote standards for those involved with sealants, waterproofing, building exteriors and restoration.
For more information regarding specific content and registration for these programs, visit: http://www.swrionline.org/program/Webinar.asp.
RCI and SWRInstitute have begun collectively developing educational documents and programs for sealant, waterproofing, building exterior, and restoration practitioners. For more information on these professional groups, visit: www.rci-online.org and www.swrionline.org.
SOURCE: SWRInstitute and RCI, Inc.

Connecticut Condo Owners Learn the Hard Way That Contractors Without Proper Insurance Can Screw Them Over

You've Been Warned...Read This and Learn...

...The roofing contractor working on the building in October lacked the proper insurance, so owners of all 100 units in the Twin Oaks complex -- not just the 20 in building 106 -- are on the hook for the repair bill. A special $400-plus monthly charge was imposed by the condo association in January to raise $200,000 for emergency roof work, utility safety tests and repairs.

This saddled owners with the added burden of the special assessment on top of mortgage payments and the $300 monthly common fees, without having relief from rental income in 106 Oakwood to defray costs.
Two of the owners in 106 are now in court, facing foreclosure.
The special assessment is an added burden for owners in all five Twin Oaks buildings.
""People were barely making it before," an elderly owner on a unit in neighboring 102 Oakwood Ave. said Friday. "Mother Nature did the damage, but the innocent have to pay the bill."

'It Was Bad'

Contractor KLS LLC of Wethersfield lacked proper insurance for roofing work being done at the time of the storms, though that wasn't determined until after the deluge. The company had coverage for snowplowing and landscaping but not for roofing work, according to the Newington insurance agency, Connecticut Insurance Exchange, listed on the KLS permit applications on file with the West Hartford building department.

Glenn Terk, the contractor's attorney, said Friday that he advised his client not to discuss the issue publicly because of the "potential for litigation." Terk noted that no civil actions have been filed against his client, who had done roofing work in the past for Twin Oaks.

But someone is to blame, Pastor said, and not the tenants, who were just living their lives.

"The contractor was chosen by somebody," he said. "Is this whole thing an issue of building management, of the roof not being properly maintained and so it needed repairs? Is it the condo association? Is it the roofer, for obvious reasons? Everybody is going to blame everybody, but how complicated is it?"

READ THE WHOLE STORY AT THE HARTFORD COURANT BY CLICKING HERE

RIP-Poor Flashing Job Dooms Tiled Deck in Arroyo Grande

This is a deck in Arroyo Grande. The only indication of any problems was the rusted flashings. Then Central Coast Waterproofing  started demoing the deck. The damage hidden behind the stucco was stunning!

It's just a lousy flashing and wrapping job that combined to deliver a knockout-the beams are so rotted, I don't know wht the deck was still standing...

Major repairs are required before I can install the waterproofing. Stay tuned...

From Community Associations Network-Lawsuit Filed By Laguna Woods Says Professional Community Management Employees Got Paid 5 Million over 10 Years in "Incentives"

You decide, does this type of arrangement benefit a HOA or are they getting screwed? PCM in Orange County had some arrangement where employees got paid incentives-Under the plan, PCM paid employees 30 percent of the savings if projects in the community came in under budget, and the community received the remaining savings.

The problem I see here is there is a definite cause for employees to use vendors against one another, and those who might be in favor with PCM could possibly get special consideration. 

Dirty, stinks and they can say they disclosed to the Boards, but I say unethical.

Read the article starting here
LAGUNA WOODS – The boards of Laguna Woods Village's four homeowners associations were told in closed sessions about an incentive plan that paid property management employees more than $5 million over the course of a decade, said Jerry Storage, general manager for Professional Community Management.
Storage released a statement Monday responding to a lawsuit against PCM filed by one of the associations, Third Laguna Hills Mutual, claiming fraud, negligence and elder abuse. Third Mutual, which governs more than 6,000 condominium units in the community, claimed the management company breached its fiduciary duty by not disclosing to board members and residents an employee incentive plan, according to the statement released Friday.

READ THE REST BY CLICKING HERE

From Davis Stirling.com-Growing Pot On Balconies/Patios

Reprinted from Davis-Stirling.com by Adams Kessler PLC

SMOKING POT

QUESTION: We have a resident who is smoking "pot" and growing marijuana on his patio (2 large plants) in full view of residents. He says he has a permit to do so. Is this allowed?

ANSWER: When faced with a similar situation, one of my condo boards approved, provided the resident shared his stash. Other boards, however, may wish to prohibit the growing and smoking of pot on balconies.

Federal Law. The Controlled Substances Act makes it unlawful to manufacture, distribute, dispense, or possess any controlled substance. 21 U.S.C. 801. The federal government does not recognize any acceptable medical use for marijuana. 21 U.S.C. 812(b)(1). California, on the other hand, legalized marijuana for medical purposes.

Medical Marijuana. Medical marijuana is authorized by Health & Safety Code 11362.5 et. seq. for the treatment of serious medical conditions, and is administered by California's Department of Public Health. Upon obtaining a recommendation from their physician for use of medicinal marijuana, patients may apply for and be issued a medical marijuana identification card. ID cards may be verified at www.calmmp.ca.gov. With one exception, qualified patients may possess no more than eight ounces of dried marijuana. H&S Code 11362.77(a).

Restrictions. Just because someone has a permit to use medical marijuana does not mean he can light up whenever and wherever he wants. For example, users cannot smoke a joint in a courtroom or inside any governmental buildings (Gov. Code 7597), or within 20 feet of a main exit, entrance, or operable window of any public buildings (Gov. Code 7597), or in any workplace (Labor Code 6404.5), or on school grounds, or while operating a vehicle (H&S 11362.79). Reasonable restrictions may be imposed on the use of medical marijuana.

Quiet Enjoyment. Based on the nuisance provisions in CC&Rs, secondhand smoke, whether cigarette, cigar, marijuana or otherwise, that drifts into the windows of other units, balconies, or common areas can be restricted. Members have a right to the quiet enjoyment of their own units and should not have to endure the problems associated with secondhand smoke wafting into their units. If associations prohibit smoking on balconies, it should be all smoking, not just marijuana. Otherwise, the restriction may be struck down as discriminatory.

Reasonable Accommodation. An association's power to prohibit medical marijuana inside units is less clear. Health & Safety Code 11362.79 implies that smoking medical marijuana in one's residence is allowed. As a result, boards should not prohibit pot smoking in units but, instead, should address the nuisance aspects. As long as the smoke does not create a nuisance and provided the person has been authorized to use medical marijuana, smoking it in a unit should be allowed.

Inside Units - Nuisance. If the user cannot confine the smoke to his own unit, the smoke becomes a nuisance that must be abated. The smoker can be required to take appropriate measures to cease his violation of the CC&Rs. The person may need to run HEPA filters inside his unit, seal all penetrations in walls, ceilings and floors, and install weather stripping and door sweeps on doors to stop smoke from migrating into the common areas and surrounding units.

Growing Pot. Qualified persons are allowed to cultivate marijuana (H&S 11362.775) but may not keep more than six mature or 12 immature plants (H&S 11362.77(a)). Just as smoking marijuana has limitations, growing it can be regulated. Boards could require that plants be grown in the person's unit and not on balconies.

RECOMMENDATION: Boards who encounter this issue should seek legal counsel.