There are many, many factors that play into this, as pointed out by your article. I recently had an inspector walk into a 3,000-square-foot home, sign the inspection report and walk out. He did not check or even walk through the house. He was there for maybe five minutes.

It also seems to me the state wants everyone to get a license. This brings in a tremendous amount of money. In 2004, it cost me nearly $3,000 to get licensed, bonded and insured. Until this state cracks down on shoddy workmanship and other factors, it will only get worse.
Name withheld by request

Cost-effective litigation: We and many of our neighbors have recently settled a class-action lawsuit against a major Arizona homebuilder, so we read your article "Cracked Houses" with great interest.

We found the article to be very informative, and it accurately portrays the significant hurdles faced by homebuyers, like us, who have to battle with their builders for months and months to recover money to adequately repair their defective homes.

However, we think the article may unnecessarily discourage homeowners from seeking compensation from builders, as a result of the substantial dollar amounts that you noted were spent by the homeowners on attorneys' fees and litigation costs.

We want Arizona homeowners to know that many attorneys, including ours, Dicks, Coglianese, Lipson & Shuquem (you quoted Mike Dicks in your article), work on a "contingency" basis, and advance all costs. These attorneys recovered money to repair our homes, without having to spend our own money.
Nick Wilson, Gilbert

Bird Brains

Q: Is he not a journalist? A: He is The Bird: The Bird is a fucking idiot -- a leftist fucking idiot -- on levels too numerous to mention. I'm just sick of his leftist blather, his endless rhetorical diatribes delivered with pious arrogance, as if all his notions are made of simple common sense that his detractors surely must be missing.

Duh! Just like all panties-in-a-wad liberals, he gets himself all worked up, then reverts to name-calling against his targets. Is he not a journalist? Is it not his charge to write and be published part and parcel of his profession? If you ask me, he's a dweeb.
Jason West, via the Internet

Manly Andy: I've read repeated ball-busting screeds against Andrew Thomas by The Bird (the latest "Judging Andy," Robrt L. Pela, March 23), and I have wondered how the foul fowl gets away with it with such a powerful individual. It seems that the County Attorney would just have one of his pals in the Maricopa County Sheriff's Office plant some confiscated crack cocaine in The Bird's hubcaps (I've just always figured that New Times columnist John Dougherty must drive a vehicle with no hubcaps or Joe Arpaio's goons would've already done this to him).

Then I ran into Andy Thomas on the street, and I realized what a sawed-off doughboy fucker he is. He's about as frightening as a well-fed pussy cat. You guys called him "Candy" Thomas once. Indeed.

I was surprised that Thomas wasn't some big ol' redneck, with the anti-Mexican shit he's always spouting. I couldn't get over how pasty white and soft he looks. You know, he looks like one of those little guys who's never done physical labor or gotten any exercise. This is not to say that he isn't a powerful, um, man.

But I guess it's always the little insignificant-looking wimps who're overcompensating and trying to seem all bad-ass.
Mary Frances O'Rourke, via the Internet

Bible belted: If The Bird did any research into the theological aspects of what Nick Moran is portraying ("Bite o' Christ," March 23), he might just find out that Bishop Thomas Olmsted is right.

In fact, if you story-hungry saps at New Times would look into the facts, you might just find out that Matthew Moran can eat corn chips and French fries, and that his dad is a distorting liar who wants it his way or the litigious way. Nick Moran's just picking a fight because he thinks he can.
Rob Frier, Phoenix

Barry Glib

A critic spouts shifts of wit . . . : I can't believe the mean-spirited, vicious, self-serving and cowardly piece Robrt L. Pela wrote under the guise of a review ("Over the Hill," Stage, March 23). Clearly he has some kind of ax to grind with the Copperstate Dinner Theatre's Peter Hill, or he has absolutely no concern for the feelings of others in his comments about Somewhere in the Night: The Barry Manilow Songbook.

The show is average? Most shows in the Valley are average. A few are total dogs, and a precious few are gems.

Pela was apparently told by Mr. Hill not to review the show because of a very bad review already. Hill's wishes should have been granted. Instead, it's clear that Pela preferred to act like a 7-year-old who has been told "no" and reviewed the show anyway.

Only he was too cowardly to admit his real feelings and instead attributed them to his sister. There's a difference between a critic and an ass.
Diane Senffner, Mesa

« Previous Page
My Voice Nation Help
Phoenix Concert Tickets