Where does a consumers best interest lie? Shouldn't there be a requirement for a contract?
Does a kangaroo court such as DPOR, or Appeals board such as VDH truly serve the public?

As much trouble as we have had in bringing examples before this board of malfeasance or tort offense in the description of site conditions or the specification of designs why has this board refused to take the public's interest into consideration?

Will this board capture consumer protection elements into it's review of regulations? I believe that was the legislated purpose (health welfare and safety).

To wit:
Generally, an owner who furnishes a construction contractor with plans and specifications furnished by the owner that prove ineffective or insufficient cannot recover from the contractor for loss or damage resultingsolely from the defective or insufficient plans and specifications, unless the contractor is negligent or has made an express guarantee or warranty that the plans or specifications are sufficient or free from defects.

See Richmond, Inc. v. Ewing’s Sons,

200 Va. 593, 595, 106 S.E.2d 595, 597

(1959)http://www.uslaw.org/files/public/Virginia_construction_10.pdf