Where We Are
In the past two weeks, CFSIC has disbursed more than $2 million in new construction deposits (now that we are out of suspension for new Participation Agreements), construction progress payments on work already underway, and payments to Type 2 claimants.
We have communicated with all claimants who were in line prior to our Participation Agreement suspension as to the status of their claims, and we have set the probable schedule with new claimants in line for their Participation Agreements to be authorized.
We have committed to construction and reimbursement equaling $15 million…which means we’ve committed $15 million of the $20 million in Bond Commission allotment we received on September 21.
We continue to be suspension for the taking of new applications under the program, and this will continue for at least four more months, until, through the process of claimants obtaining final construction proposals, we can adjust our reserves to below expected revenue to be received between now and our sunset date of June 30, 2022.
The Reuse of Extracted Concrete
We’ve been made aware of a continuing concern, voiced primarily on social media, that no one is policing the issue of the possible reuse, in residential dwellings, of extracted concrete from foundation remediation projects.
While there is no 100% guarantee that extracted concrete is not being secretly reused in residential dwellings, there are two factors that argue against this happening.
First, CFSIC’s enabling legislation prohibits it. The legal penalties for reuse, upon discovery, would be severe.
Secondly, it is simply not economically feasible to reuse excavated concrete from an impaired foundation due to the presence of dirt and other fill material, as well as rebar and other twisted metal and debris. In short, it would be senseless to haul material away to some secret place and spend a fortune trying to sift through and separate twisted material from extracted concrete in order to sift through it for the sole purpose of reusing it. Any contractor doing this would render himself uncompetitive.
Since January 10, CFSIC has been made aware of four matters where the homeowner claimant and the contractor in question have been in dispute about the general quality of workmanship.
CFSIC is not a party to the construction contract entered into between a contractor and a homeowner. We believe that homeowners should check references, and use all Internet and other means at their disposal to verify the credentials and experience of any contractor chosen.
Homeowners should additionally ask for evidences of liability insurance, including general liability as well as products and completed operations coverage, and, of course, evidence of workers’ compensation and employer’s liability insurance.
Contractors working on CFSIC-approved projects have much to lose by allegations of bad workmanship. Homeowners have much to lose if they do not carefully check references.
With respect to three of the four matters referenced above, CFSIC has assisted the homeowner claimant and the contractor in attempting to come to an appropriate resolution. We are guided, at all times, by whether a town building inspector will be able to supply a Certificate of Completion on the project question. When he or she cannot, at any stage of construction, the process for CFSIC stops. No more funds are disbursed or can be disbursed under our protocols until the matter is rectified.
In three of the four cases noted above, CFSIC has assisted in the negotiation of a resolution to the dispute, inclusive of the choice of a new contractor and the return of any funds expended by CFSIC, which has, in turn, enabled work that was partially underway to be continued rapidly, and for CFSIC’s cap of $175,000, in each case, not to be exceeded.
The fourth dispute of the four noted above is currently in process, and will, we feel, also be resolved in a favorable way for the claimant homeowner.
It is important to understand that, from a legal perspective, any dispute between a claimant and contractor is contractual in nature…and involves, first and foremost, the two parties to the contract.
We do not reveal claimant information at any point. We also believe it is important that disputes between claimants and contractors not be aired publicly, which not only compromises claimant confidentiality, but inflames disputes to a point where they are more difficult to reconcile in the claimant’s favor.
We have already seen this happen…where ill-informed and misinformed commentary on social media has caused a dispute that could have been resolved quickly in the homeowner’s favor to take longer than it needed to. In this regard, discussions conducted on social media by misinformed persons, including, unfortunately, elected officials, are not only unhelpful, but are counterproductive. There is a process in place to manage what is a confidential transaction between a homeowner and a contractor. Airing a dispute in public accomplishes nothing. In fact, it places the homeowner, as well as others airing unsupported opinions, in potential legal jeopardy, which should be avoided for the obvious reasons.
CFSIC’s Annual Report
CFSIC’s 2019 Audited Financial
If you have any questions about the operation of the program, ESIS is your best source of information on your claim, and their phone number and email are shown below.
As you work through the information and application process (understanding that we are in suspension for the taking of new applications), here’s how you can get help:
– Call ESIS (the claim adjuster) at: 844-763-1207
– Email ESIS at: firstname.lastname@example.org
– Email CFSIC at: email@example.com