- Report: #734566
Complaint Review: Keating Engineering LLC - Eugene Oregon
Reported By:
bankrupt -
Eugene, Oregon, United States of America
Submitted:
Updated:
-
Author Not Confirmed
Why?
Keating Engineering LLC
159 E 16th Ave Eugene, 97401 Oregon, United States of America
Phone:
541-242-0613
Web:
http://keatingengineering.com
Categories:
Business Rating:
(0)
Tell us has your experience with this business or person been good?
Keating Engineering LLC Steve Keating provided (for fee) a 'structural engineering report' on New residential structure WITHOUT EVER LOOKING AT HOUSE PLANS Eugene, Oregon
Report Attachments
Steve Keating was hired to review the safety and Structural Integrity of a newly built home in Eugene Oregon, in December of 2009. In Mr Keatings own words, this was what he was hired to do:
Begin forwarded message:
From: <[email protected]>
Date: July 1, 2010 10:16:39 AM PDT
Subject: RE: December report for 255 Baxter Street
As I wrote, in the report:
Purpose of report: Foundations indicated cracking at old portion (north side) and center
of new wall on south side. Various framing issues in attic spaces,
cracks in drywall walls and ceilings, support of joist ends under older
portion of house.
Conditions of report: This is a limited report of the subject areas identified above, and its
scope is limited by the constraints of time, accessibility, and the
conditions which may only be inferred by structural or other
conditions which may be concealed by building finishes or finished
grades.
this was not, and was never represented as, and is not identified as, a "whole house" inspection. It was based on areas of concern that you identified, especially your apparent alarm at the attic framing issues. The front entry porch was unfinished, as was obvious and as you represented, and I did not address the unfinished work. The roof over the top of it was bearing on the adjacent wall and was not bearing on the porch pier pad. It appeared that it would not present problems before it was finished.
I would like to read the next report to see what the differences actually are.
Thanks,
Steve Keating
Mr Steve Keating charged the homeowner a great deal of money to inspect and write a report- whatever kind of report he calls it. The plans were available, and laid out on the kitchen island, but Mr Keating did not even glance at these. He did a 'walk through' and observed areas that were 'concerning' to the homeowner. The attic, foundation (a prior report just 5 weeks prior to S Keatings report describes 2 foundation cracks, one old, one new- at the time of Keating's report, there were too many to count, and Keating labeled them all as 'old'), numerous drywall cracks including the entire house cracked in half, floors dropping away, and ceiling edges lifting.
As a structural engineer, it is safe to say that a consumer would put their trust into this professional to do a job as it should be done according to their field. Steve Keating is a Licensed Structural Engineer. In the report that he provided to the homeowner, he gave his OPINION on the 17 documented fire hazards (as documented by the manufacture and another Home Inspection Report provided by a licensed professional) that areas of fire hazards weren't hazardous at all, and overall, the owner can CONFIDENTLY OCCUPY THE STRUCTURE.
He CHOSE NOT TO LOOK AT THE PLANS. If he had, he would have noticed that the engineered roof trusses were not revised to fit the updated wall widths, as required on the plans. He would have noticed that there were missing pier pads (hence the foundation cracking). He would have noticed that the underfloor framing had no continuous support (as issued in the correction memo by the city in May of 2010 on building permit #09-00329-01.
At least, It is hoped that he would have noticed. He is a licensed structural engineer, after all.
Incidentally, it is the architect, Tracy Smith Designs (and friend of Steve Keatings) who pointed out the missing pier pads, the missing truss hangers, and when reviewing Keating's report, wanted to know why Keating Hadn't looked at the plans - when Tracy reviewed the situation 4 months later). The homeowner learned a valuable lesson, in trusting that licensed engineers know WTH they are doing is not a safe bet.
Steve Keatings total lack of professional conduct allowed another 7 months to go by before another Engineer was called in collusion with a Reputable Contracting Company. Ironically, the second firm was under the house and in the attic for less than an hour before voicing his stunned disbelief at the construction and construction methods used in the home at 255 Baxter Street, in Eugene Or. On that July day in 2010, this engineer studied the plans (Unlike Keating) and quietly discussed with the homeowner the significant dangers in the structural defects within the home, concluding that the only way to repair the home would be to demolish it and begin again.
The homeowner, now bankrupt, walked away and allowed the bank to have the structure in foreclosure. If Steve Keating had actually provided Structural Engineering services that he was hired to provide 7 months prior, who knows? For whatever his reasons, Steve Keating chose to issue a report that allowed a family to be put at risk, and has made no apologies. He is an unreliable and deceptive engineer, at least in this documented example.....
Begin forwarded message:
From: <[email protected]>
Date: July 1, 2010 10:16:39 AM PDT
Subject: RE: December report for 255 Baxter Street
As I wrote, in the report:
Purpose of report: Foundations indicated cracking at old portion (north side) and center
of new wall on south side. Various framing issues in attic spaces,
cracks in drywall walls and ceilings, support of joist ends under older
portion of house.
Conditions of report: This is a limited report of the subject areas identified above, and its
scope is limited by the constraints of time, accessibility, and the
conditions which may only be inferred by structural or other
conditions which may be concealed by building finishes or finished
grades.
this was not, and was never represented as, and is not identified as, a "whole house" inspection. It was based on areas of concern that you identified, especially your apparent alarm at the attic framing issues. The front entry porch was unfinished, as was obvious and as you represented, and I did not address the unfinished work. The roof over the top of it was bearing on the adjacent wall and was not bearing on the porch pier pad. It appeared that it would not present problems before it was finished.
I would like to read the next report to see what the differences actually are.
Thanks,
Steve Keating
Mr Steve Keating charged the homeowner a great deal of money to inspect and write a report- whatever kind of report he calls it. The plans were available, and laid out on the kitchen island, but Mr Keating did not even glance at these. He did a 'walk through' and observed areas that were 'concerning' to the homeowner. The attic, foundation (a prior report just 5 weeks prior to S Keatings report describes 2 foundation cracks, one old, one new- at the time of Keating's report, there were too many to count, and Keating labeled them all as 'old'), numerous drywall cracks including the entire house cracked in half, floors dropping away, and ceiling edges lifting.
As a structural engineer, it is safe to say that a consumer would put their trust into this professional to do a job as it should be done according to their field. Steve Keating is a Licensed Structural Engineer. In the report that he provided to the homeowner, he gave his OPINION on the 17 documented fire hazards (as documented by the manufacture and another Home Inspection Report provided by a licensed professional) that areas of fire hazards weren't hazardous at all, and overall, the owner can CONFIDENTLY OCCUPY THE STRUCTURE.
He CHOSE NOT TO LOOK AT THE PLANS. If he had, he would have noticed that the engineered roof trusses were not revised to fit the updated wall widths, as required on the plans. He would have noticed that there were missing pier pads (hence the foundation cracking). He would have noticed that the underfloor framing had no continuous support (as issued in the correction memo by the city in May of 2010 on building permit #09-00329-01.
At least, It is hoped that he would have noticed. He is a licensed structural engineer, after all.
Incidentally, it is the architect, Tracy Smith Designs (and friend of Steve Keatings) who pointed out the missing pier pads, the missing truss hangers, and when reviewing Keating's report, wanted to know why Keating Hadn't looked at the plans - when Tracy reviewed the situation 4 months later). The homeowner learned a valuable lesson, in trusting that licensed engineers know WTH they are doing is not a safe bet.
Steve Keatings total lack of professional conduct allowed another 7 months to go by before another Engineer was called in collusion with a Reputable Contracting Company. Ironically, the second firm was under the house and in the attic for less than an hour before voicing his stunned disbelief at the construction and construction methods used in the home at 255 Baxter Street, in Eugene Or. On that July day in 2010, this engineer studied the plans (Unlike Keating) and quietly discussed with the homeowner the significant dangers in the structural defects within the home, concluding that the only way to repair the home would be to demolish it and begin again.
The homeowner, now bankrupt, walked away and allowed the bank to have the structure in foreclosure. If Steve Keating had actually provided Structural Engineering services that he was hired to provide 7 months prior, who knows? For whatever his reasons, Steve Keating chose to issue a report that allowed a family to be put at risk, and has made no apologies. He is an unreliable and deceptive engineer, at least in this documented example.....
Report Attachments
