2927 W Pikes Peak Ave

When someone makes a statement against their own interest — especially in writing — it can be used as evidence against them in court or arbitration. Lowell's email saying he was "waiting to hear from Petrichor if the ducts can fit" is a direct written admission that the architect and engineer had not checked their plans against each other before giving them to SHC. CWAM will use this to say: "We couldn't do our job because the plans were never finished." This is one of the strongest documents in the file.

When an inspector puts a hold on an inspection, no further work in that area can be covered up — no insulation, no drywall — until the hold is cleared. Bryan Hunt needs to send PPRBD a letter explaining and authorizing the pipe size that was installed. Until he does, the hold stays open. If the hold is still open at Final inspection, PPRBD will not issue a Certificate of Occupancy (CO) — meaning the daycare legally cannot open. As of Jul 22, Bryan has not sent the letter. SHC should be demanding it in writing with a deadline.

A COI (Certificate of Insurance) is the document that proves a subcontractor has insurance coverage. SHC's contract with Summit Fire required them to keep valid insurance at all times. When Summit Fire's coverage expired, SHC had no proof of coverage. If a Summit Fire worker had been injured or caused damage on site during that gap period, SHC could have been held financially responsible — not Summit Fire. SHC did the right thing by notifying owners immediately and getting a new COI by May 12. But the gap period needs to be checked to confirm nothing happened during it.

Jordan Johnson (Summit Fire) asked in writing for the document that required concealment of basement pipe. SHC has not produced it. Without that document, Summit Fire's argument is: "Casey told us May 27 that surface mounting was approved. You stopped us on Jun 9 with no valid justification." If SHC tries to charge Summit Fire $500/day for Jun 9–22, Summit Fire will demand payment for those same 13 days from SHC — and they'll have Casey's May 27 approval in their hand when they do it.

Courts and arbitrators look closely at whether the party claiming a default gave clear, repeated warnings before taking action. Sending a second notice after CWAM ignored the first one shows SHC followed the contract's cure process step by step. It also locks in Jun 30 as a formal on-the-record deadline — CWAM cannot later claim they didn't understand the first notice was serious or that the deadline wasn't real.

Counter-claim: CWAM isn't just defending the default notice — they're turning it around. They're saying: "You accused us of being late, but your architect (Lowell) and engineer (Bryan) caused the delays, not us. You owe US money." If CWAM's counter-claim succeeds in arbitration, SHC might end up paying CWAM instead of collecting from them.

AAA Arbitration (§21): Under the subcontract, disputes go to the American Arbitration Association — not court. A private, binding arbitration process where a neutral arbitrator decides. It's faster than court but the decision is usually final. SHC needs its formal response to CWAM in place before arbitration is formally triggered.

CWAM installed ERV exhaust outputs closer together than the plan specified, and wrote their own note saying it's fine. The problem: CWAM decided this unilaterally, without getting Bryan Hunt (the engineer) to confirm it in writing. If there's a performance problem later — or if an inspector questions the spacing — SHC is in a weaker position because there's no engineer letter on file saying the deviation was acceptable. SHC should request that Bryan review and confirm CWAM's field deviation in writing before the project closes.

Liability allocation means figuring out who is legally responsible when something goes wrong — and which party's insurance pays. Someone connected a gas line to the fire sprinkler system, which is dangerous and incorrect. Each trade on this job (plumbing, HVAC, fire suppression) has specific scope. Until we know which trade made the connection, we don't know who is responsible for the rework cost or any downstream liability. Kelly Walsh noted that Summit Fire found the problem — not SHC's PM — which raises a question about field oversight. Identifying the responsible party matters before SHC pays for anything.