Only way to be sure it will not fall is to get either a competent contractor or a structural engineer and more than likely you will need to pay them. But if one fell I would get someone in there post-haste..........

Can you tell me what they would do that my husband couldn't? He has done construction work. Having once been married to a structural engineer who couldn't figure out how to build a stable cinder block/wooden shelf bookcase, I'm skeptical. Not to mention, I thought I had a competent contractor. How does one find a real one?

At this point you need to talk to your attorney. It sounds like he is in breach, and it is time to seek relief.

Getting a competent contractor is part checklist (reviews, referrals, work samples) and part relationship (do you like him, do his views on price/quality mirror yours?)

A beam was being held just by glue?!?

I'm assuming this isn't a structural beam. Is it just some kind of cosmetic thing that you stuck on your ceiling? A picture would help.

Yes, decorative, not structural, but the whole ceiling is covered in wooden planks and beams. We saw most of the work in progress and are pretty sure the majority was better anchored, but sheesh! Who would do this?!

Re how to get competent contractor: This was not our first rodeo. We checked reviews and referrals extensively and liked him and his views before we signed the contract. Given the many positives, I think he has gone off the deep end. I know he has had some personal problems. He started not showing up almost immediately, forgot things, made surprising mistakes, etc.

He is in breach. We have talked to both an atty (but not since this latest incident) and the state licensing agency. The latter's take was, contract, shmontract--you continued to let him work on the project and pay! Also, the contract calls for arbitration before any other measures. I feel like I now have to weigh my wallet against my personal safety, as I truly am afraid of him.

I'm guessing that they were planning to go back and add some more fasteners but they must have missed that beam.

Can you see if the other beams have been attached better?

As you said, just a little glue for that beam is ridiculous.

"Can you tell me what they would do that my husband couldn't?"

You asked what you should do, I offered advice. Your husband has been there thru entire process until this point so there is that. Also you did not mention when you posted the original post that this was a decorative beam and I assumed you meant a roof rafter or ceiling beam and were danger of the roof collapsing, hence my advice........

He used a solid 4x4? That is way too heavy for construction adhesive alone. Not really sure how it stayed up there in the first place. This is a serious risk, if someone is underneath when one falls, you are looking at major head injury. I agree with the cleat you fasten to the ceiling and the hollowed out decorative cover you attach to the cleat.

That is very scary! I'd hire a pro to check out the other beams and re-install this one properly. Additionally, I'd include those photos on your online reviews of said bad contractor. I hope you have a happy end to this!

Suzi,

Along with this, my photo collection from this project could possibly cause him to lose his license. Because he has been acting increasingly oddly, however, I'm afraid of how he'd react to any review. I'd at least love to post this on his Facebook page, to compare to the ones he posted showing off his great work. Can someone do that? Not a FB user.

Can the pros tell me, is this something the building inspector should have noticed (lack of nails, etc.)? Obviously they wouldn't know he just used glue. The resolution above may not be clear enough to see, but the squibbles of glue on one end of the beam aren't smooshed, so the contractor didn't even ensure that there was good contact.

is this something the building inspector should have noticed - I am going to give you two answers. First, it doesn't matter. Building inspectors have no duty to you and are essentially immune from any recourse. They are really only responsible for protecting the pubic good. So even if it something they absolutely should have caught it really doesn't change your position. Secondly, this is probably not something a building inspector would have seen, properly nailed, puttied and sanded would be very hard to notice without a detailed inspection.

Scrape the adhesive off the beam and ceiling. Apply construction adhesive to the beam and drive 2x4s under it to push is snug. Pre-drill angled holes through the top beam side and "toe nail" through them into the ceiling with finish screws, maybe 4 on each side. Fill the screw holes and forget it.

exactly what Joseph posted.

this would be the fix. who does it...that

we can't tell you.

but this:

" I'd at least love to post this on his Facebook page, to compare to the
ones he posted showing off his great work. Can someone do that? Not a
FB user."

can't speak for everyone, but my answer is no.best of luck.

Yes, thanks, done.

I would be more concerned about the rest of the beams especially the heavier ones you mentioned. This is far more than a breach of contract; it's negligence and would almost certainly cause his license to be suspended or revoked.

If you sent him the photos he might realize he is in serious jeopardy and come to his senses.

If you are going to reattach with screws into planks the contractor installed, first make sure the planks are properly secured to the framing above; they may have only been secured with finishing nails. I would prefer a more direct attachment to the framing.

I have been in a quandary about how to handle this. I agree that it is negligence, possibly criminal. I would prefer to pay someone else to do any remaining work than to trust him. He is either extremely deceptive or mentally ill (or both). We vetted him quite thoroughly, we thought, before hiring him. He got uniformly positive reviews from lots of former clients, though, granted, he wouldn't provide references from unhappy clients. Subcontractors seem to respect him. He is college educated and politically active in his trade (president of NARI chapter!!). Of course, none of those criteria ensure a good experience, but they point to a recent change in him. I'm not sure he would or can "come to his senses."

As for the other beams, because he likes to brag, he posted detailed photos and descriptions of how he installed the heavier beams, which involved other methods that seem secure. He was quite proud of himself. This also adds to the irony of the fallen beam.

feddup:

It's a fallen beam. Call the guy out, give him a chance to reinstall it and reinforce the others. It's the only fair thing to do.

We have called him to fix other things. He wouldn't even schedule a time for the punch list until he received a check. The contract says he doesn't get paid until he finishes the punch list. I doubt that he doesn't know what his contract says, yet he insists it says the opposite. I've tried being fair to him. He uses it as an excuse to be unfair to us.

fedup:

Send him a certified letter explaining that if the punch list isn't punched within the next two weeks, you will have it punched yourself and pay the contractor with the balance you owe him. He'll start punchin' like Ronda Rousey, trust me.

On the other hand, I get paid with other contractor's balances all the time.

That letter went out more than 2 weeks ago, with the advice of an attorney. His reply was nonsensical and nonfactual.

I understand why you take your industry's side, and asking me to be fair and give him a chance might be reasonable if this were the only major problem with his work, and the problem was, say, a leaky pipe. At best, this was gross negligence that easily could have maimed someone or worse.

feddup:

It's not only the fair thing, but in many states, it's required by law.

It's not only the fair thing, but in many states, it's required by law. - That is a gross oversimplification. Many states will require that you let a contractor fix certain deficiencies, I don't know of any state that would insist that you let a contractor fix negligence, and no state is going to require you to allow a contractor to fix gross negligence.

There is absolutely no way that the work meets the standard of reasonable care that would require the OP to allow him to fix it. Now I don't think this rises to gross negligence but I still can't think of any state that is going to require you to allow someone who is negligent another shot. Moreover, the OP states that she hired an attorney - I am betting he will help her out with what is legal and not legal. Maybe the advice should just be to make him aware of the situation and ask what he thinks.

Edit: @ Feddup - Can you throw up the finished version of your last photo. I just want to see how that trainwreck that is the last photo actually turned out.

Why is the last photo a trainwreck? Please explain.

There is a lot of rough work in the pictures. That doesn't necessarily mean anything if it all gets covered up. Just snap a quick picture of the finished work, I am not sure how he mounted it but I assume that there is another beam intersects it or some plate on the wall that is both cosmetic and structural and what we are looking at is a temporary support.

Why is the last photo a trainwreck?

That is incredibly sloppy work and makes me question his overall competence. What is wrong with that beam end? Is that chiseled away for no apparent reason, or does the end of the beam have a notched piece of scrap scabbed on to the end? If the latter, that beam is providing little in the way of structural support. In addition, it looks like the board that is screwed to the wall is held in place by sheetrock screws which are too brittle to be used structurally like that or bear weight in that fashion. If that is the final installation, it should never have been signed off on by the building inspector. That is totally unacceptable beam installation: it is both structurally unsound and possibly dangerous to the integrity of the building...and you. I guarantee that if you show that picture to a competent inspector or a competent builder they will be astounded.

In Florida, you must give a contractor a chance to make things right.

Joseph - I hate to sound like a broken record, but... You constantly give legal advice or advise people of laws that you have a very limited understanding of. The OP has an attorney, let the attorney handle it.

In this case the primary question becomes: is the OP's situation a contract deficiency or negligence? In most states, you are limited to collection of the contractor's reasonable cost to correct a deficiency. So most of the time, even in states that don't require you to allow the contractor to correct, you are very limited in collection. However, this goes out the window if you are suing for negligence. You don't have to allow someone who has done negligent work to correct, furthermore, when suing for negligent work you are not limited to the contractors cost to correct. While there is some flexibility for recourse in negligence, there is massive flexibility in gross negligence. So the further question is, was it gross negligence. Negligence is basically absence of reasonable care, while gross negligence includes absence of reasonable care that could result in foreseeable grave injury. He is definitely negligent and maybe grossly so.

Now, in addition to that, the refusal to return and fix items may be a constructive notice of a full breach. While the page you linked is correct, it is also obviously talking about a minor breach and not a material breach. Minor breaches can happen when both parties agree the contract is still in place but have a dispute over contract verbiage or duties. We are not privy to the communications between parties and can't advise whether the OP has to give notice to the contractor or not.

Maybe most importantly, the law is not nearly as black and white and people want to believe. Rulings will very rarely require good faith by one person to the bad faith of another. Even if every condition that you mention is correct, the OP might still be able to get repairs done and paid for by the contractor if the courts find the contractor acted in bad faith.

Finally, the OP is not asking anyone about recovery. You certainly don't have to allow your contractor to fix ANYTHING that you don't plan to seek remuneration for. If the OP is worried more about not dying than who is going to pay for not dying then the matter becomes moot.

bry911:

I think you need to hear yourself. We are talking about fallen decorative molding here. I don't need to be a lawyer to know that in this case, the legal and moral thing to do is to give the contractor a chance to fix this.

If I were a judge, the first words out of my mouth at the OP's lawsuit would be "Did you give Mr. Contractor a chance to make repairs?"

How do you know he didn't get a bad batch of adhesive? You don't. How do you know a teenager didn't knock this thing down in the middle of the night? You don't. Yet again here on Houzz, it's "Blame the Contractor First, Ask Questions Later."

Joseph - I think you need to hear yourself. You are now a judge. You manage to skip law school, an exam, and years of experience and make yourself a judge.

There is absolutely no moral obligation to the contractor. If you have ANY reason to believe that his work is insufficient then your moral obligation is to protect your family from harm. The idea that your moral obligation to a contractor's reputation exceeds that of your obligation to protect your family may be the most ridiculous thing I have ever read on Gardenweb. The right thing to do is to take action immediately to protect anyone from getting injured by falling beams and worry later about who has to pay.

It is not decorative molding...Molding is a strip of material with various profiles used to cover transitions between surfaces or for decoration. A 4 x 4 may well be decorative but it is not molding. A bad batch of construction adhesive wouldn't matter, construction adhesive will never be sufficient to glue suspended unsuported 4 x 4 boards length to width. The difference in board shrinkage alone would cause the adhesive to loosen over years. Even if it were sufficient, there is obviously not enough pressure applied to the boards to sufficiently spread the adhesive for full contact coverage.

Now as to blaming the contractor - Ask feddup how annoyed she has gotten with me because I refused to blame the contractor for work she felt was his fault. Or just look back over her previous posts. I don't always blame the contractor but look at the work in that last picture that the OP posted and tell me that you would accept that work on your job.

Always defending the contractor is no different than always blaming the contractor. If you pick your side despite the facts, then you are biased, which side you are biased on doesn't really matter.

Edit: Since we are talking about what you would do if you were a judge. No judge that I have ever seen would respond the way you purportedly would. The problem is the duty to mitigate damages. If you are made aware of the danger that someone could be harmed by a falling beam, then you have a duty to mitigate the possible damage that could be done by another beam falling. I think a large beam that was on the ceiling and is now, after a loud bang, on the floor, might be construed as being made aware of a problem. The contractor's only defense against someone getting hurt now, is that knowing of the danger the OP didn't act to mitigate further injury by immediately fixing all of the beams.

Anyone who glues 2 things together, even a kindergartener attaching construction paper to cardboard, knows those 2 items need to make contact, ideally for more than a couple seconds. It is clear from the fallen beam (it's a solid wooden beam) and from the part of the ceiling from which it fell, that no contact was ever made between the 2 items on at least 25% of the beam's length. That's aside from whether the beam was attached properly, if the appropriate materials were used, etc.

@ feddup

Of all the problems you have had, some of which I admit that I thought you were overreacting to, this one supports action against the contractor more than any other. Others may feel differently, but I feel strongly that the falling beam plus the picture you posted are clear indications of substandard work, and naturally call into question all of the work.

"If you have ANY reason to believe that his work is insufficient then your moral obligation is to protect your family from harm."

bry911:

You really need to familiarize yourself with "qualifiers".

The way you use "ANY" above would mean that since the color of the tile grout is half a shade different than shown on the package, you don't owe the $50,000.00 balance on your addition. That's what "ANY" means.

I'd be willing to bet that it was "reasoning" like yours that caused the Florida legislature to wisely protect honest contractors from unscrupulous homeowners.

Joseph, That is just silly. He said nothing of the sort. He didn't say not to pay the balance on an addition because the grout is wrong. That has nothing to do with protecting oneself from harm. No one would reasonably conclude that the wrong grout color is harmful, but one could argue that a do-over or credit for the grout is due if the spec'd grout color wasn't used.

@ Joseph Corlett, LLC - The way you use "ANY" above would mean that since the color of the tile grout is half a shade different than shown on the package, you don't owe the $50,000.00 balance on your addition.

I know it is sensational to take a single word out of context and try to make a ridiculous argument from it, but it is not so effective when everyone can see the post you are misquoting. First, I clearly say that you have a duty to protect your family. I am not sure how a different shade of grout is a health danger, but if it were then you absolutely have a duty. Second, I said nothing about who has to pay for it. In fact, I specifically say, "The right thing to do is to take action immediately to protect anyone from getting injured by falling beams and worry later about who has to pay."

Really in the end, you are the person who needs to learn qualifiers. You have no obligation in any state to let anyone ever fix a problem that they created. The law that you are misrepresenting only has to do with financial reimbursement. You just assumed we were all talking about money. In fact, money is mentioned very infrequently in this thread. Many people have said pay to get it fixed now and worry about who is responsible later. You, however, can't look past, this might cost the contractor money, to get to make sure you are safe. That is simply crazy. You are telling me that if you walked into your house and a decorative 4 x 4 beam was sitting beside your child's bed, you would say, "well we better call the contractor who did the work and see when he can get here to fix this before the two above the bed fall on our kid."

I don't think you would. I think you would fix the problem, look for other problems, and only later try to figure out who is responsible for fixing and/or paying.

Edit: I'd be willing to bet that it was "reasoning" like yours that caused the Florida legislature to wisely protect honest contractors from unscrupulous homeowners. - This is another absolutely ridiculous misrepresentation of the law. First, Florida didn't do anything special, right to repair laws have been around a long time. Second, the Florida right to repair laws don't protect anyone. You have the exact same recourse under Florida's right to repair law that you do without it. The Florida, statute even says clearly that it creates "no additional rights."

The Florida right to repair laws serve one purpose, and one purpose only, to reduce court loads, it exists only to create dialogue between the two parties, in fact, the Florida statute affords absolutely no power to the contractor. It is actually one of the weakest as the homeowner can simply reject ANY offer from the contractor and sue without further notice. Many states set limits on recoverability, establish lower statutes of limitation, and establish affirmative defenses for contractors. Florida doesn't, I guess they were not that worried about protecting contractors, or maybe Florida felt the homeowners were not the unscrupulous ones. I don't know.