kwash
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Aug 1, 2011
- Messages
- 114
- Reaction score
- 731
I think “service call” just means an appointment, not an actual telephone call.Wouldn't that be an email then?
I think “service call” just means an appointment, not an actual telephone call.Wouldn't that be an email then?
I assume the Sherman’s had a contract with the services company and Allan was the preferred person already trusted to enter the Sherman residence unaccompanied. In many case’s scheduling is done via a ticketing program/application, meaning Allan would only see his current week or day in his calendar. He would not see the year and all 4 bookings, he would receive a ticket/ work order to go onsite, perform the work described in the work order and close the ticket, this is how one gets paid, updated and closed tickets. These are normally sent the day of the service or the night before, if parts or installation is required notification could be earlier.ii. Allan receives service calls and on Friday December 15th he received a service
call through his tablet to attend 50 Old Colony Road, a house he has been taking
care of for approximately 20 years.
Who made a service call to him on that day? It wasn't BS and HS since they were already dead in the pool room.
Also, wasn't the HVAC system the problem for which BS won a large settlement from the house builders originally several years earlier? Floor plans of the house's basement would help to determine from where access to the furnace room was possible from.
I think that seeing the house put up for sale could have ignited long dormant anger from one of the parties who were sued. In particular, the asking price could show that the property that was allegedly defective was actually a valuable asset.I assume the Sherman’s had a contract with the services company and Allan was the preferred person already trusted to enter the Sherman residence unaccompanied. In many case’s scheduling is done via a ticketing program/application, meaning Allan would only see his current week or day in his calendar. He would not see the year and all 4 bookings, he would receive a ticket/ work order to go onsite, perform the work described in the work order and close the ticket, this is how one gets paid, updated and closed tickets. These are normally sent the day of the service or the night before, if parts or installation is required notification could be earlier.
Not sure it was the HVAC only, the pool was leaking, just one of the deficiency he sued for.
IMO Initial issues BS had and won court battles / judgement on, had to be fixed. He sued for the monies to fix what he felt was poor design, the judge found the work needed to fix the problems was over 80% of the original cost. ( breaking up concrete to get to plumbing and then fix to look perfect would be expensive BS did not make up a number). Many of us have experienced that to fix imperfections is much more expensive and the work had to be done for the Sherman’s to live in the home. So they used the judgement money to fix their home to their expectations.
These contractors, the designers at minimum had to have insurance (today we have errors and omissions insurance) and I assume did not pay all these millions out of pocket. IMO BS would not hire them with out it, it is a mandatory requirement in most bids of this dollar value.
I cannot get a clear logical impression in my mind why a person involved in a 20+ yr old closed court case would get so angry and need revenge now because the house was for sale. It is not unheard of someone inflicting revenge decades later, but why, and why did they not then seek more revenge on the children for demolishing it? Do we know if anyone attempted to block the demolition of the home? Again if yes, for what purpose, what are they thinking,they do not want anyone other than the Sherman’s to live in it, so kill them and convince the estate and family to destroy it? What would anyone gain from this?
In the trades, the term 'service call' does not refer to text, email, telephone or other communication.Wouldn't that be an email then?
For whatever reason this detail often gets lost. It was a court judgment to fix deficiencies, awarded by a judge. Barry did not get the home for free. He paid for it to be built, and the original work was deficient to an extent that it required repairs at significant cost. A judge found the original contractors were liable for the cost.IMO Initial issues BS had and won court battles / judgement on, had to be fixed. He sued for the monies to fix what he felt was poor design, the judge found the work needed to fix the problems was over 80% of the original cost. ( breaking up concrete to get to plumbing and then fix to look perfect would be expensive BS did not make up a number). Many of us have experienced that to fix imperfections is much more expensive and the work had to be done for the Sherman’s to live in the home. So they used the judgement money to fix their home to their expectations.
Good analogy thanks. I wish you get a deli sandwich for $5 these days!For whatever reason this detail often gets lost. It was a court judgment to fix deficiencies, awarded by a judge. Barry did not get the home for free. He paid for it to be built, and the original work was deficient to an extent that it required repairs at significant cost. A judge found the original contractors were liable for the cost.
The contractors may well have been angry about it 20 years ago, or even again when the house went up for sale, but the Shermans definitely paid whatever they paid for it.
A simpler example: Imagine that you order a sandwich at a deli and pay $5 for it. When the sandwich comes it’s not what you ordered. The deli needs to make a new one that *is* what you ordered, at its own cost, but you still paid $5. The deli may well be out the money for the first sandwich made in error, but you did not get anything for free.
Was BS forced to have the repairs carried out (by another company) in return for the compensation for damages according to the court ruling?For whatever reason this detail often gets lost. It was a court judgment to fix deficiencies, awarded by a judge. Barry did not get the home for free. He paid for it to be built, and the original work was deficient to an extent that it required repairs at significant cost. A judge found the original contractors were liable for the cost.
The contractors may well have been angry about it 20 years ago, or even again when the house went up for sale, but the Shermans definitely paid whatever they paid for it.
A simpler example: Imagine that you order a sandwich at a deli and pay $5 for it. When the sandwich comes it’s not what you ordered. The deli needs to make a new one that *is* what you ordered, at its own cost, but you still paid $5. The deli may well be out the money for the first sandwich made in error, but you did not get anything for free.
The only opinion regarding "igniting long dormant anger" is the fact as we age, the likelihood that we resort to violence, such as a revenge killing, diminishes greatly. I am sure there are exceptions, but I stand by the probabilities.I think that seeing the house put up for sale could have ignited long dormant anger from one of the parties who were sued. In particular, the asking price could show that the property that was allegedly defective was actually a valuable asset.
Although the design team probably carried E&O insurance, the suits could have had an effect on their ability to practice, by raising their insurance costs to exceptionally high rates. Reputations would have been damaged. The contractors could face something similar. Also, Sherman sued everyone involved in the project, and IIRC, at least 2 parties fought back vigorously and were not found liable.
Although the house did - undeniably - have construction defects, the suits may have affected parties who were not responsible for the defects. JMO
If he did it out of jealousy then he may of done the deed himself in which case he wouldn't need to pay anybody and thus not need the financial resources. Whoever did this is going to keep a financial trail to a minimum.Good points, Bobbi. However, did the ex-boyfriend (Andrew Liss) have the financial resources to fund such an extensive and costly operation? Especially with no expectation of a future financial return.
Jealousy and revenge are great motives, but you still need the money (I am guessing many hundreds of thousands of dollars) to fund an operation like this. Secondly revenge and jealousy tend to be personal motives and the revenge taker is often present during the crime. I certainly hope the TPS checked his alibi.
Yes could be but I think if that is the perp, they were that upset about the home selling for that price, why let it be demolished without any resistance? IMO that is a bigger kick in the butt.I think that seeing the house put up for sale could have ignited long dormant anger from one of the parties who were sued. In particular, the asking price could show that the property that was allegedly defective was actually a valuable asset.
Although the design team probably carried E&O insurance, the suits could have had an effect on their ability to practice, by raising their insurance costs to exceptionally high rates. Reputations would have been damaged. The contractors could face something similar. Also, Sherman sued everyone involved in the project, and IIRC, at least 2 parties fought back vigorously and were not found liable.
Although the house did - undeniably - have construction defects, the suits may have affected parties who were not responsible for the defects. JMO
I don't think the perp would react to the demolition - it would draw attention to them.Yes could be but I think if that is the perp, they were that upset about the home selling for that price, why let it be demolished without any resistance? IMO that is a bigger kick in the butt.
It is theorized, but not known, that they were attacked elsewhere in the house and moved to the pool.Welp, I tried, really tried not to become interested in yet another unsolved cold case, but here I am, lol.
This case is very interesting, yet the secrecy and lack of information released reminds me of the Delphi case.
Do we know if they were killed by the pool where they were found?
Thank you, I'm trying to catch up but there isn't much info out there, is there?It is theorized, but not known, that they were attacked elsewhere in the house and moved to the pool.
Thank you, I'm trying to catch up but there isn't much info out there, is there?
That was a very creepy, unusual crime scene.
That seems personal.
Welcome to Canada, where police investigations and evidence are just normally kept under wraps until trial. I wouldn't call it 'secrecy'. It's just different values and attitudes about solving crimes, the right to a fair trial, public speculation and what MSM will and won't print/broadcast.This case is very interesting, yet the secrecy and lack of information released reminds me of the Delphi case.
Do we know if they were killed by the pool where they were found?
It is different. I think many US sleuthers get frustrated because there isn't more info released. It is just a different country, different rules. Good and bad to each approach.Welcome to Canada, where police investigations and evidence are just normally kept under wraps until trial. I wouldn't call it 'secrecy'. It's just different values and attitudes about solving crimes, the right to a fair trial, public speculation and what MSM will and won't print/broadcast.
JMO
Most of the differences between US and Canadian cases in regards to publicity come about after an arrest and before trial, where none of that information is available. This case is pre-arrest. In regards to the Georgia case of the Dermonds, that Sheriff has released info to help the case along and is asking for public help. Is he withholding info? Probably. I don't see what it has to do with the Shermans however.Just to add, it's interesting to me to compare this case with the murder of the Dermonds in Georgia. An older, wealthy couple, targeted for an unknown motive, very unusual actions by the killer(s).
The Sheriff in that case has spoken innumerable times to the media, providing lots of details (too many details to accurately remember) about the results of the investigations.
However, beyond providing lots of content for the true crime industry...it remains unsolved over 10 years later.
So, IMO, whether police provide the public with details or don't, doesn't affect whether they solve the crime. It only affects the number of true crime channels that will make an episode out of the case, or the number of times that 'new details' gives the media a reason to rehash the basics of the case.
IMO police in Canada prefer that their suspects don't know anything about what police know. When you're playing poker, you don't show your hand.
JMO