UPDATE: This legal matter has been settled among the parties involved.
Original Article
The general contractor on a newly built Ponus Ridge home never got a chance to address what its owners in a lawsuit are calling major defects in the new construction, according to court documents filed on behalf of the builder.
429 Ponus Ridge. Credit: Michael Dinan
In responding to a lawsuit brought by Sean and Kelly McDevitt, an attorney representing Weston-based Kaeser Construction denied the allegations and said the home’s owners “have already received compensation from a third-party for any injuries or damages claimed in this action” and therefore “are not entitled to recovery for those same amounts from Kaeser.”
“[The McDevitts] failed to mitigate their damages by making timely repairs to alleged defects or offering Kaeser timely opportunity to cure the alleged defects,” reads part of the Special Defense for the construction company, filed last week by New Haven-based Brenner, Saltzman & Wallman LLP.
The McDevitts in March filed a civil lawsuit claiming that framing, plumbing and heating problems emerged soon after closing on a 5,558-square-foot Colonial at 429 Ponus Ridge for $2 million in July 2012. Though a Certificate of Occupancy had been issued by the town, the McDevitts say that in the course of making repairs after a burst pipe caused extensive damage, they discovered unlevel flooring and deviated from building plans. (Officials with the New Canaan Building Department have said they discovered no problems upon inspecting the house.)
In their lawsuit, the McDevitts also name as defendants a Wilton firm for what they’ve called faulty electrical work and a Milford-based company for plumbing and heating problems. Attorneys representing both of those companies have asked the court to make the homeowners specify just what they’re accused of doing wrong—a request that the plaintiffs’ owner lawyers are attempting to deny, court documents show.
The McDevitt’s complaint cites a state law designed to protect consumers against unfair or deceptive trade practices, saying Kaeser permitted workmanship that it “knew or should have known created defects on the premises.”
In its answer, Kaeser said the McDevitts “failed to provide timely notice of alleged defects in work performed by or on behalf of Kaeser and thus are barred from claiming a remedy for same under the New Home Warranty Act.”
“Plaintiffs are barred from claiming a remedy under the New Home Warrant Act for those alleged defects in workmanship which were open and obvious at the time that they closed on the premises,” according to the answer filed June 30 on behalf of Kaeser.
Here is Kaeser’s answer to the lawsuit:
http://nctest.proxy02.mageenet.net/wp-content/uploads/2015/07/Kaeser-answer.pdf