Contractor defends code violations in Chatham County home he built
For nearly six hours, the Muehlbach family got what they wanted. They were heard.
It won’t fix their house or put lost money back in their pocket, but it was a chance for the Muehlbachs to tell their story to the NC Licensing Board for General Contractors and listen to the response from the builder they say botched their dream home.
5 On Your Side first told you about this story back in May 2023. Jake and Anita Muehlbach hired Jeremy Lindley of Lindley Builders, Inc. to help design and construct their home in Chatham County.
After they moved in, the family was told there were significant structural issues. Jake Muehlbach told our team that structural engineers told him it would be cheaper to tear down the home and rebuild it, than it would be to make repairs.
Despite dozens of code violations, the home passed every county inspection and was issued a certificate of occupancy.
The Muehlbachs successfully sued Lindley, but they have not recovered any of the $225,000 civil judgment because Lindley Builders, Inc. does not have any assets to pay out.
Chatham County was named in the same lawsuit for failing to catch any of the building code errors, but the judge granted them governmental immunity and released them from the lawsuit.
The Muehlbachs filed a complaint with the North Carolina Licensing Board for General Contractors. The board’s attorney reached a settlement agreement with Lindley, but that was abruptly pulled off the table in September. Instead, the board opted to hold a hearing and review all the evidence against Lindley.
During Wednesday's hearing, Jake Muehlbach repeatedly shook his head in disbelief and disagreement as Lindley defended his work in front of the board.
When his own attorney asked Lindley to give his perspective on the specific code violations at the home, Lindley often had explanations as to why he believed his work was actually code compliant.
However, when board investigator Curtis Huff was asked if Lindley Builders followed the building code, Huff replied simply "no."
Huff went through pages of violations he says Lindley made or oversaw while building the Muehlbachs home.
"It’s always been my opinion that the general contractor should be held accountable," Huff said during his testimony.
Another expert, Cody Johnston, Director of Engineering at Stonewall Structural Engineering, explained there were egregiously over-spanned framing members. He explained the way the roof was constructed, it was at risk of flattening. Johnston said the roof was not an immediate safety concern, but wasn’t sure if it would last the lifespan of the home.
Lindley told the board he’s built approximately 15 homes using some of the same methods and has not had problems in the past. He did not answer our questions after the hearing about whether those other homeowners should be concerned about the workmanship of their homes.
Lindley’s attorney tried to poke holes in the Muehlbachs timeline of events and questioned whether Lindley was given proper opportunities to correct his mistakes. But the board cast doubt on what they heard from Lindley during his testimony.
There were questions during the hearing about the building plans for the home. Lindley says he lost his copy of them and Chatham County does not have them on file. The board found it odd that Lindley had other building records related to the project, but not the building plans that could potentially answer several questions.
A load bearing wall on the first floor was not properly supported. Inspectors never flagged it during construction and eventually it created a hump in the floor. The board wondered out loud how Lindley could have walked by that every day during the build and not seen it.
Near the end of the hearing, Lindley was asked if he was still building. He said Lindley Builders, Inc. was effectively shut down, but he was operating under a different business name of JL Lindley, Inc.
During closing remarks, the Board’s staff attorney noted he had never seen this many code violations in a case.
Lindley’s attorney argued his client was not grossly negligent in his actions and asked the board for no disciplinary action.
Lindley refused to answer our questions after the hearing.
The board now has three weeks to review the evidence and testimony and issue a ruling. It could range from no discipline to revoking Lindley’s contractors license.
