<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments for Jaffe Real Estate Law</title>
	<atom:link href="http://jafferealestatelaw.com/comments/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://jafferealestatelaw.com</link>
	<description>Real Estate Law : Howard Jaffe, Esquire</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Thu, 30 Jul 2009 14:06:14 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.1</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>Comment on Residential Fire Sprinklers in New Construction Homes by Residential Lawyer</title>
		<link>http://jafferealestatelaw.com/2009/07/residential-fire-sprinklers-in-new-construction/comment-page-1/#comment-8</link>
		<dc:creator>Residential Lawyer</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 30 Jul 2009 14:06:14 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://residentiallawyer.wordpress.com/?p=89#comment-8</guid>
		<description>Mike, I would not go so far as to say a builder would be liable for damages for building without sprinklers, especially if a current code doesnt specifically call for it.  This is in an issue that one day will likely be tested in the courts ( it could be litigated now though I have not seen it) much like any safety related upgrade offered to the public.

My comments were more about stating that while the installation of residential sprinklers may seem like an expensive upgrade for home buyers, over the life of ownership the added cost can be minimal and the benefits in terms of safety and limiting loss if a fire should occur are very tangible and home buyers of new construction should encourage their installation.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Mike, I would not go so far as to say a builder would be liable for damages for building without sprinklers, especially if a current code doesnt specifically call for it.  This is in an issue that one day will likely be tested in the courts ( it could be litigated now though I have not seen it) much like any safety related upgrade offered to the public.</p>
<p>My comments were more about stating that while the installation of residential sprinklers may seem like an expensive upgrade for home buyers, over the life of ownership the added cost can be minimal and the benefits in terms of safety and limiting loss if a fire should occur are very tangible and home buyers of new construction should encourage their installation.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Residential Fire Sprinklers in New Construction Homes by Mike</title>
		<link>http://jafferealestatelaw.com/2009/07/residential-fire-sprinklers-in-new-construction/comment-page-1/#comment-7</link>
		<dc:creator>Mike</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 30 Jul 2009 03:03:07 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://residentiallawyer.wordpress.com/?p=89#comment-7</guid>
		<description>Howard, I guess what is your take on this?  Are you stating that the builder who may have publicly testified against sprinklers because the homes they build are safe, or builds a home with out residential sprinklers can be liable for damages or injury if a fire occurs?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Howard, I guess what is your take on this?  Are you stating that the builder who may have publicly testified against sprinklers because the homes they build are safe, or builds a home with out residential sprinklers can be liable for damages or injury if a fire occurs?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
