Press enter to begin your search

New Year Brings Potential CCNA Change

Florida Statutes, Section 287.055, known as the Consultants' Competitive Negotiation Act ("CCNA"), provides a framework for the public procurement of professional services. Professional services are defined to include those services "within the practice of architecture, professional engineering, landscape architecture, or registered surveying and mapping". The CCNA provides that the price of the service is not a factor in the evaluation and ranking of the firms. Price may only be considered as part of the negotiation phase. Further, an agency is limited to negotiating price with one firm at a time. In other words, the only pricing that is received is from the top ranked firm, and pricing from the second ranked firm is not received unless negotiations with the first firm are formally terminated. There is a Bill pending in the Florida Legislature that would modify the above process. Specifically, Senate Bill No. 246 provides for proposed amendments to the CCNA, including...

New Year Brings Potential CCNA Change

Florida Statutes, Section 287.055, known as the Consultants' Competitive Negotiation Act ("CCNA"), provides a framework for the public procurement of professional services. Professional services are defined to include those services "within the practice of architecture, professional engineering, landscape architecture, or registered surveying and mapping". The CCNA provides that the price of the service is not a factor in the evaluation and ranking of the firms. Price may only be considered as part of the negotiation phase. Further, an agency is limited to negotiating price with one firm at a time. In other words, the only pricing that is received is from the top ranked firm, and pricing from the second ranked firm is not received unless negotiations with the first firm are formally terminated. There is a Bill pending in the Florida Legislature that would modify the above process. Specifically, Senate Bill No. 246 provides for proposed amendments to the CCNA, including...

Common Law Implied Warranties and Strict Liability

As the new year begins, and the legislative session draws near, the issue of common law implied warranties and the recent opinion in Lakeview Reserve Homeowners v. Maronda Homes, Inc., 48 So. 3d 902 (Fla. 5th DCA 2010), remain on the legislative agenda. Concerns are being raised as to whether Maronda creates a cause of action for “strict liability” against developers with regard to construction defect claims for improvements to subdivision common areas. For the reasons below it is my opinion that it does not and that my prior analysis as to why SB 1196 is a bad bill for homeowners remains accurate.    Under the existing case law, an implied warranty of fitness and merchantability: - extends to the purchase of new homes, Gable v. Silver, 258 So. 2d 11 (Fla. 4th DCA 1972);  - means that a home will be constructed in accordance with the specifications contained in the building plans filed with and approved by...

Defective Construction Products

Unfortunately for property owners, manufacturing and workmanship defects are prevalent in the building industry.Such defects not only represent a large cost to Community Associations and homeowners in terms of repairs, but they can also present serious health and safety issues and reduce the value of the property. I am going to identify and address, in a series of postings, some of the building products which have been alleged to be defective, and about which lawsuits have been filed.If your property was constructed with any of these materials, or you have an issue with a different material, it may be in your best interest to contact a professional in order to protect your rights and interests. If you are unsure whether any of these products were utilized in the construction of your home or condominium, it may be necessary to consult any warranty you may have, speak with your property manager or hire...

Legislative Proposal Could Wipe Out Common Area Warranties

Reacting to the Fifth District Court of Appeal's decision in Lakeview Reserve Homeowners v. Maronda Homes, 48 So. 3d 902 (Fla. 5th DCA 2010), discussed here, the legislature may consider a bill next year to prohibit implied warranties of fitness and merchantability from applying to streets, roads, sidewalks, drainage areas, utilities, or any other improvements that are not located on or under the lot on which a new home is constructed.  Senate Bill 1196 is the legislative bill that was proposed and can be found here.  The Lakeview case was appealed to the Florida Supreme Court and the oral argument was made just last week but the legislature may be moving forward without waiting for the court to rule. The bill is a bad deal for homeowner's for a number of reasons.  First, the proposed statute is not limited to Chapter 720 homeowner’s associations. As worded the limitations would negatively impact homeowner associations, condominiums, co-ops, timeshares and mobile home parks as the term...

THE LAW IS THE LAW, AND SOMETIMES IT ISN’T “FAIR”

Sometimes the law isn't as you would expect. In fact, sometimes the law can dictate a result that you think is unfair. Therefore, it is always best to have someone research what the law is, instead of assuming it says what you think would be fair. As an example, some might find the law regarding the recoverability of home office overhead damages counterintuitive....