From the day it was started, this custom home was in a state of flux. The owners were micromanaging every detail, down to the number of nails per stud and the placement of every marble flooring tile. This project had a long list of changes and adjustments that had been requested, directed, and specified by the owners during construction. The drywall finish was originally specified as skim coat, smooth wall with round corner bead. The wall paint was originally specified as flat latex, but the owners upgraded to eggshell enamel. More than 80 recessed cans had been added to the family room to highlight walls, ceilings, and objects d’art.
The crux of the owner’s punch list was the fact that the high walls and vaulted ceilings throughout the home showed small surface inconsistencies in sunlight and shadowing from the intense halogen lighting of the recessed cans.
The builder reviewed the situation with the drywall and painting subcontractors. Some of the drywall seams and tape joints were just barely visible in intense light but were undetectable with a carpenter’s square and level. All the tradesmen agreed that the work was excellent, but they nonetheless agreed to try to bring the drywall surfaces to the owners’ stratospheric standards. The trades went above and beyond the call of duty and surpassed the acceptable standards for drywall surfaces for any kind of high-end construction. It was to no avail. The Demlers insisted that the walls and ceilings should be smooth to the degree that no imperfections in texture could be detectable under any circumstances.
The project dilemma was reviewed by the registrar of contractors, the architect, the bank inspector, and several independent construction consultants. All arrived at the same conclusion. The drywall surfaces in the home were 99.99 percent uniform and the craftsmanship was impeccable. This fell on deaf ears. The Demlers had painted themselves into such a corner that there was no backing down. They still refused to pay.
The dispute was now at a turning point. Should Jon and Jim sue to collect the final payment? Or should they move on and write this off as a one-in-a-million circumstance? After some agonizing debate, the builders threw in the towel and forfeited the final draw. The expense, time commitment, and mental anguish of legal proceedings were deemed not worth the unpaid money.
But this experience did have an ultimately valuable outcome for the builders: It drove Jon and Jim to re-evaluate their client communications and to adjust their project documents in a way that would protect them in the future. They realized that this circumstance could have been avoided if their original specifications and change orders had included wording that would establish the limits of real world applications of various materials and techniques and that would communicate the level of workmanship the owners could reasonably expect.
All experienced construction professionals know that smooth drywall is never 100 percent smooth. It’s installed and finished by human hands and inherently has some flaws and variations. Tiny flaws become exaggerated when the surface is exposed to the light from recessed cans. That light will cast shadows and highlight any imperfection down to 1/100 inch, and the reflection off high-gloss enamel paint just adds to the problem. That combination of factors should have been communicated to the owners before this chain of events unfolded. Our experienced builders overlooked the fact that the combination of a smooth wall with so many ceiling cans and high-gloss paint could converge and result in an imperfect situation. A simple conversation, followed up with a written explanation of the limitations of what the owners were requesting, would have given the Demlers a better understanding of the situation and left the builder in a more defendable position.
In light of this story, maybe it’s time to re-evaluate and refine your own project documents. Are there areas where you can add clarifying language that will explain the limitations of what you can deliver? For example, you might add bullet points to your specs that detail what a client can expect from concretework. Include the industry’s standard of acceptable workmanship for that material. Explain that sometimes it cracks, and what type and size crack constitutes a warranty issue and what is a cosmetic issue. Once those simple clarifying words are incorporated into your specifications and change orders, you’ll be in a better position to keep minor problems from exploding into major ones.
Dennis A. Dixon is an author, contractor, and speaker with 22 years of experience in the building industry. You can e-mail him at dixven@aol.com.
