Source: The Derry News (NH), December 13, 2012
Posted on: http://envfpn.advisen.com
Two years after the federal government adopted stricter lead-paint rules, a local contractor is one of only a few in New Hampshire to be fined for violating new regulations.
But Mark DiMinico, owner of Exterior Images in Derry, contends he’s being penalized unfairly. The painting contractor claims he had to pay more than $3,000 in fines for work done by another contractor years ago.
“I was pretty upset that they would find me guilty,” he said. “It’s just not the kind of business I run.”
DiMinico and his company have been cited by the Environmental Protection Agency for failing to make sure lead paint was properly removed from an apartment building at 7 Central St.
Exterior Images was cited for not notifying the occupants the work was taking place, including posting signs, according to the EPA. The firm also failed to cover the ground with plastic sheeting and to make sure potentially harmful lead particles weren’t released into the environment, the EPA said.
The EPA tightened its regulations because many homes being renovated have lead paint, which has been prohibited since 1978. Lead paint has been linked to developmental problems in young children.
The new regulations are punishable by a $37,500 for each day a firm fails to correct a violation, which some local contractors have said would easily put them out of business. Contractors also must wear protective clothing, use special equipment, and take a daylong training course to prove they know to prevent lead contamination.…
A general contractor (GC) constructed a new 750-megawatt natural gas-fired power facility on a 47-acre site in New England. The GC’s responsibilities on the project included design (subcontracted), construction, and all equipment installation. The design professional (DP)was contracted directly with the GC to provide the design services. The DP’s design error primarily caused delays and cost overruns totaling approximately $9,000,000. The DP was insured with a project professional liability policy for $4,500,000. The GC triggered that policy, and the GC was responsible for the balance of the damages via their practice program.
This is a claim scenario developed from a single claim or several claims and has been developed for illustrative purposes only.…
Claims Magazine (06/10); Brownlee, Ken
Ken Brownlee discusses the plethora of natural disasters throughout the U.S. as well as the ins-and-outs of being prepared with the proper insurance. Central New England recently faced a bout of devastating floods, and Brownlee expects that most residents did not have flood insurance. As a result, the cash-strapped states will be forced to raise taxes and, because some areas have been declared federal disaster zones, the rest of the nation will have to pay up as well. Floods have long been on the list of natural disasters to have insurance for, but “every time there is a major flood, there are those who thought it would never happen to them, and who did not purchase flood insurance.” Brownlee next touches on man-made disasters, some of which are covered by insurance already and some of which pose challenges for insurance coverage. Product or pollution liability, airline crashes and bridge collapses are all purely man-made and are covered. Things like grassland and forest fires as well as mudslides, which can be a combination of man-made and natural disasters, are often not covered. Insureds and insurance adjusters must plan ahead with the knowledge that both of these perils — man-made and natural disasters — are not covered under the same form. Thus, homeowners must adjust their policies accordingly. Mother Nature, according to Brownlee, has an entire cookbook full of damage recipes: floods, tornadoes, hurricanes, tsunamis, mudslides, earthquakes, freezes, droughts, snow, rockslides, and the perils of active volcanoes. For Brownlee, this all serves to reaffirm the importance of having key claims personnel to work with insureds who have faced natural disasters.…