jwroller
New Member
All I’ve done is point out their error.
You clearly lack any sort of sense of humour.All I’ve done is point out their error.
You do see where the original poster fell short right?
Or is this a circle jerk of nepotism and half baked attempts to disparage people you don’t know?
Should I have not stumbled upon this and expressed my thoughts?
Cowards tend to turn away when they have nothing to say.^fastest ignore I've ever done.
Exactly.Getting the damage fixed benefits both sides in the dispute. There is no need to wait to get it fixed.
I think jwroller told us everything. They are clearly connected to the whole fiasco to have such a visceral reaction to a tasteless joke.My guess: Roxy is suing the contractor Chandos, Chandos is suing the consultant Group2, neighboring property owner is suing everyone, and nobody is winning aside from the lawyers.
Seems the south building owner won't grant access until Roxy admits fault and fixes any damages to their building, and Roxy won't admit fault while the whole thing is in legal dispute for fear of admitting more liability than is necessary.It would be beneficial to have the south building made whole by addressing the damages they cause so they can move past it.
But like I previously stated access won’t be granted until there is a resolve in that regard.
Insurances don't work that way as they don't know what got damaged from the construction.I think jwroller told us everything. They are clearly connected to the whole fiasco to have such a visceral reaction to a tasteless joke.
Seems the south building owner won't grant access until Roxy admits fault and fixes any damages to their building, and Roxy won't admit fault while the whole thing is in legal dispute for fear of admitting more liability than is necessary.
The adult thing to do would be to get the buildings fixed, then let the lawyers sort out who pays after the fact.