Reader comments
Lindon family's sinking-home nightmare brings $3.1 million award

Bob G | 5:17 a.m. Oct. 11, 2008

Too bad they didn't include the city in the law suit. Cities are resonsible for zoning and how land is developed, they have all the USGS land reports designating unsafe building sites. Cities are liable for allowing the building and developing of the land within their jurisdiction. Home owners and buyers should not need to or have to obatain a geological report, the city already has this knowledge. City officials and engineers know full well how risky developing the areas in their jurisdiction is, they wrote the zoning laws but continue to violate them. And cities allow the continued practice of putting homeowners and buyers at risk on land that should not be developed or have restricted developement. Cities are gambling that homeowners will not be able to afford a court battle beacuse of its violations and corruption. Its unconcionalbe that cities coninously violate the trust of its citizens and allow such developement.

No Chicken Little Here!!!! | 5:56 a.m. Oct. 11, 2008

Wait until the first major earthquake hits the Point of the Mountain area and the mountains of gravel flow like water brom beneath all the homes on the benches from Higland through Draper and into Sandy. Who's going to pick up the tab for that......not to mention the potential loss of lives. Geologists till are stating that it's a definite when not if occurance.

Anonymous | 7:18 a.m. Oct. 11, 2008

I hope this is a lesson to developers, builder, cities, and buyers.

Homes weren't meant to be built on a hillside or in a river bottom.

The pioneers understood that.

Why can't we?

Comments continue below

Pleased | 7:45 a.m. Oct. 11, 2008

It's very nice to see that they rcouped some money from the developer, but I think the reward was exhorbitant. They should have to pay for all repairs to get the house in perfect order, but a couple mil for pain and suffering when there was no loss of life or limb seems pretty ridiculous. Oh wait, I guess that will all go to the lawyer anyway.

emotional distress? | 8:11 a.m. Oct. 11, 2008

what a waste of money. We all have distress. Ambulance chasing lawyers are another reason this economy has gone south.

These people should learn that they don't need a 6500 square foot mansion if they don't have enough in the bank to take care of emergencies. They are another reason for the credit crisis.

Losers all around us.

Anonymous | 8:57 a.m. Oct. 11, 2008

That is too much of an award. I wonder how much they got from the parties that settled out of court. While I agree that they deserve more than what should have been the value of the house and the repairs put in, over 2 million is ridiculous.

HOome owner | 9:07 a.m. Oct. 11, 2008

Let this be a warning to all incompetent and dishonest architects, contractors and developers, and there are many, that they can be held responsible for their acts. Good for the Hesses and the legal system.

Anonymous | 10:43 a.m. Oct. 11, 2008

Lots of big expensive homes up there, wonder if the other high foothill homes are sinking also? A little hint next time, buy a home in the foothills at the mouth of a canyon, get your own geological report.

Anonymous | 10:56 a.m. Oct. 11, 2008

If these real estate developers find Utah won't put up with their wanton ways, they can always go to New York make a lucrative living on wall street.

Anonymous | 11:21 a.m. Oct. 11, 2008

Lawyers will be appealing this one P.D.Q. While I feel sorry for the family and all the stress this caused - 3.1 million is far too large of an award.

Robert Wells | 11:25 a.m. Oct. 11, 2008

"Anonymous" and "Emotional Distress"....
I wish I were there to see the day that either of you runs afoul of profit criminals or negligent stupidity. I wonder who you are going to call or negotiate with or will you just give up your rights to be made whole again. Thats why they are called victims.

sickening | 11:34 a.m. Oct. 11, 2008

2 million is ridiculous. These people make me sick. Lawsuits have gotten ridiculous.

Cynthia | 12:02 p.m. Oct. 11, 2008

I agree with every comment here: City should be included in the suit, we allow development in areas that shouldn't be developed, this home is far bigger than any family needs, the award was too big, and there is greed showing up in every corner--attorney, client/buyer, developer, city. This is truly sad

To Pleased & emotional distress? | 12:09 p.m. Oct. 11, 2008

I hope neither of you holier-than-thou idiots are never on a jury for anything. Neither of you know the facts surrounding this case. Hopefully neither of you will have to face similar circumstances or have the need to be recompensed for others' neglect.

And by-the-way Ms. emotional distress? this was not an emergency. All I can say to you is if you think there are losers all around you do know it takes one to know one.

Appleseed | 12:26 p.m. Oct. 11, 2008

Not sure why a jury has to be the one to decide a $ amount. Is it legal for an arbitrator who can be fair and balanced be the one to set a more realistic $ amount. Way too much money awarded here. The problem is that the family will probably not see the money. Between apeals and bankruptcy laws, the money will probably not end up in this families hands.

I think there are ways to be more responsible and accountable in cases such as these.

Award too high | 1:10 p.m. Oct. 11, 2008

The award amount was too high. Especially the distress portion. Way too much money.

Anonymous | 1:16 p.m. Oct. 11, 2008

"$2.65 million was for mental distress, pain and suffering. That's significant."

That's insane.

no wonder America's going down the tubes.

Sinking lakebed | 1:28 p.m. Oct. 11, 2008

All of you blaming the people who live on the benches: your homes on the flats will sink, when there's a major earthquake. Remember the Mexico City earthquake a few years ago? Buildings tilted and sank because they were on a dry lakebed. Same as the Salt Lake Valley.

I applaud the jury. The builder and engineers were derelict in their duties.

To: "Anonymous" and "Emotional Distress". You think like you do, UNTIL it happens to you.

whatever | 1:35 p.m. Oct. 11, 2008

I know the Hesses and they did try mediation.. nothing was offered!
It is easy to make judgement when you don't know all the facts! Why are you sticking up for those who take advantage of homeowners? You must not own your own home! And it's not just the home, what about future yard or fencing? Wouldn't everything sink????

Stinking Swamp: | 4:00 p.m. Oct. 11, 2008

Ref:Sinking Lakebed
Get you facts straight. Mexico is built on an older city that was built on a swamp........not a dry lakebed. The geology is totally different. Those benches are not talice slopes broken off from solid rock they are enormous gravel beds deposited on the edge of a deep ancient inland sea.

HSFAN | 4:02 p.m. Oct. 11, 2008

You can tell the difference between those bloggers who own a home and those who do not! Builders should have had enough integrity to mediate....anything less shows your culpability!

6500 Sq Ft? | 4:50 p.m. Oct. 11, 2008

Cry me a river. Unless they have about 18 kids that's way more gaudy than necessary for a house. If they had the money to put up a mansion like that then they should have also had the sense to put it on solid ground. Another story of sad rich brats trying to keep ahead of the Jones's

Anonymous | 6:01 p.m. Oct. 11, 2008

This article made me stressed, can sue the newspaper for $5?

Um?? | 6:14 p.m. Oct. 11, 2008

Does anyone really need a 6500 square foot house?

Ernest T. Bass | 6:19 p.m. Oct. 11, 2008

Who on earth needs a 6500 sq ft home? A family of three?
They should be ashamed on themselves.

yes | 7:05 p.m. Oct. 11, 2008

I'm glad that the Hess's got their house problems addressed and taken care of. The home builders should never have built the house in that place. Horray for the Hess family.

Give me a break | 7:41 p.m. Oct. 11, 2008

While it is always nice to see justice done, I am truly appalled with some of the small issues which form part of the story. For example, if this family only has one child, 6500 sq ft home...why would they need to sell a ring? I do not want to be judgemental but it sure sounds like some of these "emotional distresses" were a bit contrived...the knowledgable lawyer who helped them seems to me to be a good coach. I sure hope I am wrong and that the ditsresses that resulted in such an exorbent punitive damage where not part of an elaborate orchestration on part of the victims and their slick legal counsel.

Brady | 8:49 p.m. Oct. 11, 2008

Knowing some of the parties in this case, my understanding is that the attorney's for the defendant's in this were unethical in the way that they dealt with the case. They purposefully engaged in tactics intended to cause emotional distress for the many years that this was litigated, and they did so with the approval of their client. Thus, this case wasn't merely about the issues with the house. This also considered the hassle that this family had to deal with.

As for the size of the home, my understanding is that this family is similar to a "Brady Bunch" family with multiple children from previous marriages that frequently stay with them. Either way, they paid for a house, they paid for the land and neither was delivered.

The attorney that won this case has a very good reputation within the legal community, and is not the greedy person that many have characterized him as.

Who cares? | 9:00 p.m. Oct. 11, 2008

what size of home they have...even if it were 1500 square feet and it began to sink, that is absolutely EMOTIONAL DISTRESS. Good for the Hess Family...I hope you get every penny!! And to all of you who are hung up on the house size...GET OVER IT!!

Wow! | 9:18 p.m. Oct. 11, 2008

These comments about the award are over the top. Let me tell you if I had to come home everyday for years to see my house falling apart, exorbitant bills pilling up just to keep the thing together and having to deal with an incompetent developer, builder, engineer, and their lawyers I would want blood. No amount of money can replace or begin to compensate for the mental nightmare this family went through. A jury awarded this, they did the right thing.

Rxidawyo | 9:19 p.m. Oct. 11, 2008

I believe it's unfortunate for this family that their house had settled as it did. I am in the construction field and am saddened that the developer hadn't been up front with the soil report. I am completely opposed to government declaring any portion of usable land unfit for development as had been commented on in an earlier comment, but their must be responsibility taken by the property owner that if the property has some future unkown problem devolope they are at loss not any one else. The fact is, in this case, the developer knew the soils would cause a potential problem. A 6500 SF house is going to be heavy, thus it sank.
It would seem obvious that if a developer was required to get the soil tested, then the results would cover their butts from lawsuits if infact they had been forthright in revealing the results of the test. The lawsuit is therefore totaly fair.
The 3.1 million dollar award is absurd. That is why the premiums for all fields of insurance are so high. It seems fair that the cost to fix the house be awarded ($500,000), plus additional expenses, and maybe even criminal charges.

Rich I am not | 10:21 p.m. Oct. 11, 2008

All of you who say that they don't need a 6500 sf home make me shake my head with wonderment. Why do any of you care how big a house they build. So what if they have 2 children, 3 or 10. Does that matter?

Why are so many of you concerned about what others spend on things? Some of the most prideful people in this world are those in the lower economic classes. Why is that?

I think the settlement was fair considering the stress they went through. Now, I doubt they will receive anywhere close to the amount awarded.

To Bob G | 11:09 p.m. Oct. 11, 2008

I'm sorry Bob, but I disagree with your blaming the Cities as you have in other posts. When a City uses USGS or other geological maps that are not meant to be used at a small scale to totally prohibit development, they usually get sued. It is called an uncompensated taking of property and the U.S. Supreme Court has ruled against cities in several such cases. BTW, much of the Canberra Heights area in Lindon has employed appropriate engineering mitigation measures in construction.

While zoning and subdivision laws should absolutely use reasonable regulations to regulate development in geologically hazardous areas, your State Legislature has continually undermined the ability of cities to regulate these areas with radical pro-developer/anti-environmental laws (in the past few legisative sessions). Yet few people have taken much notice of these issues. Cities often WANT to enact tough environmental legislation, but are severely limited by recent state laws. Look up the Utah Property Rights Coalition, and the politicians associated with it. The first call to make if we want to prevent these problems in the future should be to our representatives in the State Legislature.

Bobby | 12:20 a.m. Oct. 12, 2008

I heard of a case where an influential member of a community wanted to build a retirement home. He had to get a test of the soil, and did and the recommendation was not suitable for building. This man used his influence and got a building permit anyway. When the building was condemned, he sued the city and won. So much personal responsibility. Comments early about "who cares how someone spend their money." In a socialized world we live in, everything involving money is every bodies business.

Emotional Distress FOR SURE! | 12:43 a.m. Oct. 12, 2008

You know, before I started remodeling my house I would have said that over $3 million for emotional distress, etc was way over the top.

However, in remodeling my home I've worked with MULTIPLE unethical contractors (trust me, the list of problems we've had is incredibly, INCREDIBLY long, and most of it simply deals with human beings who want to be paid immediately but who don't want to do a decent job) and I can tell you, the emotional distress is very, very real and it isn't fluff to deal with.

Just ask my wife. She's been in remodeling hell for 2 years plus!

I bet this family deserved every penny they got once you consider lawyer fees and repairs that still must be made to the home, and damage to any home, let a lone a 6,500 square foot one is going to waaaay extensive and it ain't gonna be cheap.

magnus | 1:37 a.m. Oct. 12, 2008

I agree that the "emotional damage" fee seems a bit steep. It seems to me like about half of that would be more than fair.

No wonder the const of health care adn every kind of insurance is going up. Every time someone makes a mistake they have to pay 10 times what the mistake actually cost.

I think we need to stop trying to put a price on "emotional distress". It's ambiguous and unfair.

If someone wins a settlement like this they should recieve the entire cost of all actuall damage and all legal fees plus an additional amount based on a fixed interest rate (like 10%) calculated from the date of the event for the damages untill the time the judgement is delivered. That way people would get a little extra for their lost time and trouble and the party being sued would be more desirous to move things along rather than drag it out for years.

If that was done in this case I would probably put the final settlement at around $1 Million, and I think that sounds fair.

Anonymous | 9:12 a.m. Oct. 12, 2008

Mark and Marilyn are in our neighborhood. This sad issue has devastated them, taking everything they had to keep their home from falling over. At one time, you could roll a bowling ball from one end of the home to the other because the decline was 5.5 inches. Can you imagine spending your life's savings and all of your hopes and dreams on your dream home, only to have it turn into a nightmare home? The pain and suffering settlement is well deserved. These are good people who are not out to gouge the legal system; they are simply trying to get their lives back and their dream home returned to the standard it should have been when they walked through the door the first day.

non judgemental | 4:01 p.m. Oct. 12, 2008

Some of these comments make me wonder what is in people's hearts? There was a jury of people like you and I who listened to all of the evidence and came up with a verdict and the amount they felt the Hess's should receive! Unless you sat on that jury and heard everything, you have no right to disagree with them! I hope you never need to go thru this kind of thing the Hess's have. And if you do... may your peirs judge you as you have judged this family! Good luck in life!

Living a nightmare | 7:38 a.m. Oct. 13, 2008

I hope the appeal is denied, so this family can go on with their lives. It's difficult enough in these times, just to live our busy and stressful lives. I am impressed with the way they seemed to try to fix things, instead of rush to sue like most Americans. Now that it's gone to court, they should simply be paid so they can live their life in a good home that they had worked toward for so many years.

In my prayers

Justice | 1:18 p.m. Oct. 13, 2008

It doesnt matter if these people live in a 1000 square foot home or a 8500 square foot home what the developer and architect did was wrong, the reason we are in this economic mess is because developers have created a large part of the housing downfall.. I work with developers everyday and I hear horror stories from homeowners everyday about sneaky underhanded cost saving money making short cuts that ultimatley effect the homeowners in one way or another, This is why many home owners are walking away from their investments.. I may not live in a 6500 square foot home but I still empathize with anyone who has been screwed over by a contractor or developer too bad they didnt go after the city as well, I think the amount was far too low for the stress that was caused to this poor family when the developer new the risks and didnt bother telling the home owner about them.,...I hope their check is in the mail...

B.H. | 10:28 p.m. Oct. 13, 2008

all you haters out there need to shut up... something great happened to a good family and you are baggin on em??? ya way to show maturity people... you are all just jealous.

Cindy | 7:01 a.m. Oct. 14, 2008

Those who feel the award was too high haven't lived through a legal case where the other side employed unethical/illegal tactics. Also most court awards are never paid in full. Somehow this will end up getting reduced, maybe appealed, delayed. The homeowners will get part of that if they collect, the operative word being "if." Sometimes they do not collect even if the judgment stands, because the other side may not pay. It's not as cut and dried as all that.

Also, the city probably has sovereign immunity as most govt entities do, from being sued, or from being sued for very much. Most claims made on a govt agency have such narrow requirements that few lawyers will take them on.

It's really no one's business how big their house was and comments about it seem like petty jealousy. As long as people come by their income honestly it's no one's biz how they spend it.

The builder built the house wrong, and lied. He should pay and pay a lot. IMO such builders should go to jail.

Anonymous | 8:37 p.m. Oct. 15, 2008

Who are you people to judge the Hess family?? You don't know them personally and have no idea what they have been throgh for the last 4 years. They are good people who have worked hard for what they have to see it just crumble in front of them. They didn't ask for the amount. That is what a jury debated and awarded them!

It's sad how easy it is for people to judge when they have no idea what has really gone on..

M.O. | 11:58 p.m. Nov. 1, 2008

Live in a house that can't be heated during a Utah winter, then live in the same house that can't be cooled during a Utah summer and then lets talk about whether or not the pain and suffering award is justified. The point is the developer (who made millions of dollars developing Canberra) chose not to reveal information that would have kept this family from building on this site and it is the homeowner who lives with the results of the that negligence. Anyone who knows what the Hess's have gone through (including the jury) would tell you they deserved every penny!

Add your comment

Comments are monitored. Any comments found to be abusive, offensive, off-topic, misrepresentative, more than 200 words or containing URLs will not be posted.

Words Remaining

E-mail address: For internal use only. We may want to contact you to publish your comment (not your e-mail address) in the newspaper or for a separate story idea.