In article , RicodJour wrote:
On Oct 16, 4:01=A0pm, (Doug Miller) wrote:
In article =
..com, RicodJour wrote:

On Oct 16, 1:53=3DA0pm, (Doug Miller) wrote:
In article =
ups=3D
..com, Too_Many_Tools wrote:

I would agree...the problem seems to be the lack of retrieving damages
from the manufacturers and importers of the bad sheetrock.

Nonsense. The homeowners need to go after the *builders* who used low-quality
materials.

So, if your brand new car burst into flame you'd sue the dealer?

Of course not. I'd sue the manufacturer of the car. Just like the owners of
the homes with Chinese drywall need to do: sue the manufacturer of the home.

Replying to nonsense with nonsense doesn't make sense.

Your analogy is, to put it charitably, severely flawed.

Hint #1: Who is the manufacturer of a house?
Hint #2: It's not the company that made the drywall, or the forester that
grew the trees that the framing was milled from.

Your understanding of how the legal system works is severely flawed,
which is why you didn't understand my analogy.

I understood your analogy perfectly well. It's just a very bad analogy.

Rule one is to go after the guys with the deepest pockets. The
builder isn't it.

Obviously your own understanding of the legal system could use a little,
umm, enhancement. You can sue anyone you want. *Recovering* from someone who
hasn't any liability might be a bit of a problem, though. If a home is built
with substandard materials, the liability _to the homeowner_ rests with the
builder, not with the manufacturer of the substandard material.