1994, 12-16 Notice of TransmittalDATE -
TO .
RE .
NOTICE OF TRANSMITTAL
;rn/
/c OH,✓q
k),4/
A7TACHEDFIND--
SHOP DRAWINGS:
SPECIFICATIONS:
NUMBER OFF4GES(excluding cover)
REASONFOR TRANSMITTAL:
YOUR
APPROVAL
CORRECTIONS
NEEDED
REMARKS. -
YOUR USE /
INFORMATION
APPROVED
AS NOTED
i� n
u
111
SPOKN COUNTY
PRINTS/PLANS:
OTHER:
REVIEW &
COMMENT
OTHER
SENT BY:
COPY TO:
ItllqlMUIIUI!IIUI!IIUUUUIgIMIMItlMMMM�ItliINMtlIM ''tIMINIP9! I INIII!UUIVIIMINMhl' RPIIU ,4926 IffiUIIUUU IUUUCDUUINItlMIIUUUHilillE1 4YM11111113il111111 UUQIIIIMIIII@UUMWIUUUUU
SPOKANE COUNTY DIVISION OF BUILDINGS
W. 1026 BROADWAY AVENUESPOKANE, WASHINGTON 99260
(509) 456-3675
PADMINISTRATION FAX NO. n PERMIT CENTER FAX NO.
(509) 456-4703 (509) 324-3197
December 16, 1994
Don R. Shaw
Van Camp and Bennion
W 1707 Broadway
Spokane, Wa 99201
Spokane County vs. Smith
Dear Mr. Shaw:
Received your letter dated December 15, 1994. Basically your
letter is totally misrepresenting the facts and can only assume
you are still attempting to confuse the court. It is our
position that this entire matter is before Judge Wilson and our
only role at this time is to report accurately to the court of
work progression.
Regarding the Mechanical work, Mr. Smith stated to our
inspectors, Kevin Myre and Bill Benish, on November 21, 1994 that
he had a mechanical permit. Upon return to the office it was
confirmed that NO PERMIT had been issued. Mr. Smith was notified
on December 2, 1994 of the permit requirements. On December 7,
1994 a permit was issued for a gas furnace, water heater, and
piping in the south unit. As of this date, there have been no
called inspections. This permit is not part of or subject to any
pending enforcement action.
As you know and even eluded to us in conversations, there are
significant problems associated with the building construction.
You can best serve your client by encouraging him to complete the
work as directed by the court to make the residences habitable
for safe occupancy.
Sincerely
Thomas L. Davis,
Code Compliance Coordinator
c. Frank Christoff
c. Honorable Donna Wilson
c. Kevin Myre
tPV
Van Camp (R.
Bennion
TRIAL LAWYERS
W. 1707 BROADWAY
SPOKANE, WA 99201
TELEPHONE (509) 326-6935
FAX (509) 326-6978
W. Russell Van Camp
Irving H. Bennion
Dustin Deissner
* Bonnie Favor
also admitted in Idaho
Dr
Paralegals:
Sally Eva
Don R. Shaw
c 1Nlmina jo NOISIAl3
'661 g 1 o3a
A ltno33NV)lOds
a3A13:)38,
ere, ,
1 \ re qu 4 5 1.
VI- a do)il
15Dec941323
Thomas L. Davis
Code Compliance Coordinator
1026 W Broadway Ave
SPOKANE WA 99260
re: Winston A. Smith - 3514 N Edgerton Rd
Dear Tom:
Mr. Smith brought us a copy of your December 2nd letter
before he went to Georgia. He'll be back the first of the
year.
I am aware that the heating ducts and plumbing you and
Myre directed he do or have done has been worked on and
possibly is completed by this time.
After I read your letter and noted you were unable to
locate a permit, I attempted the same thing and came to
the same conclusion, there was no permit for the parcel
number your gave me.
It was a couple of days later when I discovered that the
Spokane County Parcel number you'd written in the letter
does not exist. There is no such number and hence no
property could be found using that number. I checked the
correct one and there is a valid permit for the work that
was done. I'm sure you know that by now, but we've not
received any corrections letter from your office notifying
the Court of the error and that a permit was issued.
Mr. Van Camp does feel that a letter should be addressed
to Judge Wilson telling her that probably someone in your
office just made a little mistake and looked under the
wrong parcel number, and that you'd found that indeed
there was a permit. You might add whether the work had
been inspected or not, and if it has if it passed.
As you surely are aware the estimate of a couple hundred
dollars that you and Mr. Myre made to Judge Wilson when
she was there is turning out to be a little shy of
actuality. Currently Mr. Smith's expenses have been
somewhere over $2,500.00 just for part of the materials.
There's quite a bit more that will have to be purchased
and the stairs will be $855.00 just by themselves.
I have found a specialty company that can obtain the
variety of smoke detectors that you and Chief Chase say
must be installed, and they estimate that they can do that
work for not more than $3,000.00, and maybe a few hundred
dollars less than that - a lot would depend on the labor
involved. I do understand from the electrical companies
that the new building code does require that type of
electrical wiring and installation. However Mr. Smith was
not aware that when he bought the residence at the start
of the 1980's, and it had been there for some time then,
that he'd be prosecuted for the house not being wired for
smoke detectors in accordance with a code that wouldn't be
enacted 10 or 15 years in the future.
Now if we may, we'd like to make some reply to your one
sided attempt to influence the Judge - viz., your letter
to Judge Wilson of 11/28/94.
When Mr. Myre was at Mr. Smith's on/11/21/941 he was
there to look at the work done on the St rage room along
the east side of the house, and the plumbing modification
in the main floor work area.
You've written that very little progress has been
made. You also estimate that only 20-25 sheets of drywall
had been installed. I'm somewhat embarrassed pointing
this out but that figure is rather like the estimate for
the costs of all the modifications made earlier to Judge
Wilson.
The original bid is turning out to be least 20 and
maybe as much as 30 times less than the actual cost. The
estimate of drywall used is more than 60% incorrect. The
parcel number is incorrect as set out in your letter to
Mr. Smith. When I tried to look I found it doesn't exist.
I'd think that in fairness to Mr. Smith, you should
correct the impression sought to be conveyed to the Judge.
The permit does exist. It's not Mr. Smith's fault that
the County tried to find it under a non-existant parcel
number.
Not that fire safety items were being checked, and
Mr. Myre never went upstairs into living portion of the
house, but whatever he reported to you, you've concluded
as constituting "virtually no life -safety corrections
having been made"? What did Mr. Myre see or note as not
having been done? He only looked in the storage room and
the work area. Did he note any of what had been done and
is there in plain sight? Your letter doesn't mention
anything in that regard.
lv
I know you received a copy of our letter to Chief
Chase two months ago, and I noted he has copies of your
correspondence to Mr. Smith and between you personally and
Judge Wilson. We are, of course, prohibited from directly
contacting a Judge in an ex parte manner.
In all events, I don't see anything in your letters
noting that Chief Chase has chosen to never replied to the
earlier letter on behalf of Mr. Smith. I have written
again, and possibly he will reply. I would appreciate it
if you would allow him to do that.
Tom, this is the same trouble that we've had since at
least the Fall of 1983 when I first came to work for
Mr. Van Camp. We'd get a letter from the County, reply
and ask to discuss resolving the matter, and never hear
from anyone. Not by phone, nor in writing - nothing.
Then in 6-8 months there'd be another letter from the
County, almost a duplicate of the one before. We'd reply,
ask the sender to contact us, and again never receive a
reply or hear from anyone for another 8-10 months and it
would repeat.
I was two years ago that someone in your department,
when I was there, said this case was a big mess because
the buildings had been there since the beginnig of time
(his characterization), so they kept shuffling it off to a
new man every so often. He'd write a letter and they'd
all try to forget about it and hope the whole thing would
go away. Possibly Chief Chase feels the same way?
I'd really like to get answers to the questions posed to
him, and if you'd tell him it's alright to do that I'd
appreciate it. Mr. Van Camp would also like to have a
copy of the particular code provisions that the County now
is seeking to apply to Mr. Smith's residence. With all
that's gone on, and I have asked for them in the past, we
really do feel we should see what the wording is of the
provisions he is supposed to have violated.
I didn't mean to get quite so wordy, but would appreciate
it if we could have those copies asked for, and if you'd
allow Chief Chase to reply to our letters.
."SHAW, JR., for
W. RUSSELL V CAMP
Attorney at Law
DRS