More Issues In the News

By Sarah Shew Wilson

Two engineers have called Chris and Luanne Gilbert's home in Bent Tree Plantation unsafe for occupancy.

But, after several years of unsuccessful legal battles, dealing with a contractor who went bankrupt and a building inspector who was temporarily suspended for approving their house, they said they have no choice but to continue living there.

The family's plight caught the attention of a consumer advocacy organization, the N.C. Public Interest Research Group (NCPIRG), which this week released a report calling for a “homeowners' bill of rights” that would protect North Carolina homeowners from bearing the burden of shoddy construction and negligent inspectors.

“This is where we were going to retire and raise our family,” Luanne said. “I had planned for my daughter to walk down the staircase on her wedding day. This was supposed to be our dream house.”

Construction problems

The Gilberts moved to Brunswick County from Palm Springs, Calif., five years ago, wanting to raise their two kids, now 7 and 8, in a quiet area near family. Chris Gilbert is a native of Wilmington and has a cousin who lives in the Bent Tree development.

The couple purchased plans for a the house from Better Homes and Gardens and hired a contractor, Ross-Markham from Kinston, which had built a bank in the area, Chris Gilbert said.

Construction began in 2001, and Chris Gilbert said he made frequent visits to the site to keep an eye on the progress.

“I noticed the house didn't look like the plans,” he recalled. “The stairs were supposed to turn.”

The Gilberts questioned the contractor who then went to headquarters, he said, to discuss it with the firm's engineers.

“He said that their engineers said the plans were faulty and that they would do their best to work around them,” Chris said.

“We thought we were just going to have to deal with it.”

Then, the couple noticed that the second story wasn't looking like the plans, either.

“He was trying to install a tub on a 5-foot-1 wall,” Chris recalled. “It was supposed to be 7-foot-1.”

The plans called for 9-foot ceilings on the first floor, but the builder constructed 11-foot ceilings.

“He kept saying it was the plans.”

When Chris found out that the ceiling was a foot higher than the state building code allowed, he called the contractor who, Chris said, told him “Oh. Well. What does that affect?”

The effect has been major. The second story “looks like a remodeled attic,” Chris said.

The windows in the upstairs room that was supposed to be their daughter's bedroom are nearly touching the floor. It's difficult to walk around upstairs without someone bumping his or her head. A powder room mirror sits at about neck level.

According to a private engineer hired by the Gilberts, Robert A. Dudek of Wilmington, “the [second story] rooms appear pushed into the ceiling framing.”

So instead of having their own rooms, Savannah and Nathan Gilbert sleep in bunk beds in what was supposed to be an office on the first floor.

Roof not up to code

Aside from such inconveniences, the major deficiency is the roof, which has been labeled unsafe for high winds.

According to Dudek's report, the roof was not constructed to the minimum standards required by the N.C. Residential Codes to protect from severe winds.

“It is the opinion of Dudek Consulting P.C. that this residence is unsafe for occupancy against a NCRC required design wind event and also against wind speed significantly below the required design wind speed of 130 mph.”

The Gilberts also asked an engineer from Boise Building Solutions, which manufactured the roof joists, to inspect the roof. According to his letter, he found that the joists were not used as recommended by the manufacturer.

“The Boise AJS roof joists as installed were grossly misused,” wrote Product Application Engineer C. Frank Powell. “Because [they] were not installed per Boise installation details, they are no longer covered by ‘the company's] warranty.”

Powell agreed that the home was unsafe.

A local company gave the Gilberts an estimate of $356,855 to remove and replace the roof and stated that “This estimate does not include any rearranging of the floor heights in the home. Š The cost estimate for fixing the floors and roof would be astronomical and beyond the scope of remodeling. A new home on the site would be the cheaper resolution.”

After documenting the problems with the house, the Gilberts wrote a letter to the builder asking him to fix the house and giving him three days to reply.

He asked for 10 extra days, which the family agreed to, and in that time, the company filed suit against the Gilberts and a lien against their property.

The Gilberts filed a complaint against Ross-Markham with the N.C. Licensing Board for General Contractors, but no hearing has been held. Two years ago, the company went bankrupt after another faulty construction job in Raleigh in which the bonding company seized the company's assets, according to the PIRG report.

The contractor has let his license expire and has not re-applied. But the Gilberts said they still don't understand why the licensing board didn't hold a hearing after their initial complaint.

Inspector faulted

The Gilberts also filed a complaint with the N.C. Code Officials Qualification Board against the county inspections department as well as a lawsuit against the county and several building inspectors.

The board sent an investigator to the house, who found 31 code violations, according to the PIRG report.

County building inspector Wilbur Vereen was brought before the qualifications board, which found that Vereen “failed to properly carry out his duties and responsibilities under [state law] and such failure constitutes gross negligence and gross incompetence.”

Vereen agreed to a voluntary consent order to settle the matter, not admitting any of the allegations or findings of the board but agreeing to a two-year suspension and to take and pass the board's Building Level I course and the state examination for Building Level I within the two years.

The Gilberts' lawsuit against the county and the inspectors alleged gross negligence and deceptive trade practices. But the county's insurance policy denied the Gilberts' claim, citing the common law principle of “sovereign immunity.”

County Attorney Huey Marshall explained that sovereign immunity applies to judges and whoever acts in a judicial or quasi-judicial manner.

“If a judge is not free from the threat of litigation, [he or she] is not able to make this kind of decision,” Marshall said.

Like judges, inspectors “have the liberty to exercise discretion without fear. If that liberty goes away, you'll see a lot of people leaving the inspections department.”

Because of that, the Gilberts' lawyer asked for and received a dismissal of the lawsuit.

Now, the Gilberts are left in a house with 31 code violations and a roof that is unsafe. The house is also losing value in a booming real estate market.

According to the Brunswick County tax department, between 2004 and 2005, the property's value dropped from $405,700 to $213,550.

During their legal fight, the Gilberts sold an adjacent property they were going to use for a playground in order to pay legal bills.

Catalyst for change

Rob Thompson, public interest advocate with NCPIRG, met the Gilberts through the Homeowners Against Deficient Development Group and included their story in the newly released report, “Who Pays for Faulty Construction? How North Carolina Families Bear the Burden of Shoddy Building Practices.”

The Gilberts' story is one of five case studies of North Carolinians who have paid the price for shoddy construction.

In addition to the stories, the report makes a variety of recommendations for policy changes that would make those responsible for the problems pay for them. (See box)

“Houses are the biggest purchases North Carolinians make and are one of the least protected goods on the market,” Thompson said. “Homeowners don't have the ability to hold people accountable. Everyone but the Gilberts is responsible, but they're the ones paying the price.”

Thompson said he hopes that the report will lead to “some real policy changes” that will protect North Carolina homeowners.

The Gilberts aren't the only ones in Brunswick County who are dealing with faulty construction and a mountain of legal bills trying to correct it.

David and Patty Rainey of Supply are involved in an ongoing lawsuit against a local licensed contractor and an unlicensed entity that they say actually built their house that has a number of code violations and other problems.

The county inspections department was taken out of that suit, citing governmental immunity.

A judge ruled in March that the suit against the contractor and the builder will go to trial.

Since a story about the Raineys appeared in the Beacon last month, the couple said they have received numerous calls from others in similar situations and have encouraged them to do something about it.

“They need to start speaking up,” Patty Rainey said recently. “It might cost you some money, but if you're going to roll over and let it happen, you can't complain about it.”