View Single Post
  #62  
Old 05-27-2010, 06:50 AM
pddadmin pddadmin is offline
Administrator
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 160
Default Bixby vs Rutherford 2

A second case filed by the Rutherfords to include a second property that Bixby contracted on in Grass Valley CA

Quote:

Plaintiff is
informed and believes and on that basis alleges, that defendant,
by and through the conduct herein alleged above, wrongfully
discriminated against plaintiff on the basis of her disabilities.
BIXBY's acts and/or omissions have denied plaintiff her rights
under Civil Code Section 51, to be free of discrimination based
on race, color, religion, ancestry, national origin and/or
Quote:

disability.


Quote:

15. When BIXBY talked RUTHERFORD into using BIXBY
2 CONSTRUCTION to complete the repairs at Mill Street, he promised
3 he would be utilizing the same equipment as proposed by the
4 contractor first contacted by RUTHERFORD. That initial contract
5 which was given to Bixby provided for the installation of a 3 Ton
6 HVAC system. BIXBY has acknowledged that the competing estimate
7 provided for a 3 Ton HVAC unit, but intentionally instructed his
8 workers to install a 2 ^^ Ton unit. The 2
H Ton unit is inadequate
9 to cool the building in the summer and has already broken down on
10 at least three occasions, wherein RUTHERFORD has incurred repair
Quote:

11 costs because BIXBY did not respond to the warranty call.


Quote:

16. BIXBY has further breached the terms of the Contract by
13 deviating from the approved plans and requests of RUTHERFORD.
14 There were no requests for changes to the mezzanine area, either
15 downstairs or upstairs, yet BIXBY has invoiced RUTHERFORD for
16 over $11,000 in Change Orders when there was no authorization to
17 initiate and/or complete such work. Said conduct further
Quote:

18 breaches the construction Contract


Quote:

BIXBY created
26 false invoices and labor charges totaling $35,597.61 for
Quote:

27 electrical related work. BIXBY has overbilled the electrical by


Quote:

23. BIXBY's conduct and work product as herein alleged
7 above falls below the standard of care required of licensed
8 general contractors and, as such, was negligent. BIXBY
9 negligently caused damage to the plaintiff by failing to
10 reasonably perform the duties owed RUTHERFORD under the Contract.
11 Before filing this lawsuit, plaintiff retained the services of a
12 licenced inspector, who is also a licenced contractor, to
13 complete and inspect the work performed by BIXBY. In addition to
14 the wrongful conduct alleged hereinabove, the inspection revealed
15 improper use of wood piers used to support the structural
16 foundation and the weakening of the structural system caused by
17 excessive cutting and notching of wooden beams. The report
18 further pointed out below standard patching of the PVC plumbing
19 system and leaking water pipes that had been recently installed.
20 In general, the independent inspection report reveals poor
21 workmanship that falls below the standard of care required, for,
Quote:

22 but not limited to painting, tile work, molding and drywall.
Attached Files
File Type: pdf Bixby vs Rutherford 2.pdf (457.3 KB, 2972 views)
Reply With Quote