A Dobbs Ferry homeowner is suing a Hartsdale architect for $250,000 for professional malpractice for allegedly botching renovations of his home.
The work was so poorly done, Brian Hochhauser claims in an Oct. 12 complaint filed in Westchester Supreme Court, that architect Carlo Frugiuele and his Urban Office Architecture firm, Manhattan, exposed his family to “risk of injury or death from fire.”
The complaint also names Frugiuele’s wife, Wamaris Rosario, whose similarly named Urban Office Builds Corp., Hartsdale, was the general contractor for the project.
Neither Frugiuele nor his firm responded to an email asking for their side of the story.
Frugiuele is known professionally as Carlo Enzo. He trained at Columbia University and in Milan, Barcelona, Paris and Graz, Austria, according to his profile on the firm’s website. He has lectured on architecture at Columbia University, University of Pennsylvania, City College of New York, Pratt Institute and Parsons School of Design.
Rosario is the firm’s director of interior design. She studied at Pratt Institute and Hobart and William Smith College.
Hochhauser and Tanika Goudeau bought the 4-bedroom, 4-bathroom, 2,580-square-foot house on Constance Avenue for $1.1 million last November. They had already signed a contract with Frugiuele’s firm to renovate the house for $245,100. They later adjusted the price to $228,366 and nearly $193,000 has been paid.
The work was supposed to be done by May 15, according to the complaint, but the house still was not “basically habitable” by June 20 when Hochhauser’s family moved in because their lease had expired in Long Island City.
Hochhauser claims that walls were closed up before an inspection “in a deliberate attempt to conceal” that materials had not been installed.
The July 27 inspection “revealed grave and dangerous deficiencies,” the complaint states. A load-bearing beam had been cut to install a sprinkler line; improperly sized pipes had been installed; electrical wiring was put in hazardous locations; and fire blocking and insulation, a water shutoff valve and a discharge line were not installed.
Frugiuele allegedly told Hochhauser that he had obtained a sprinkler system permit and he identified the man who did the plumbing. But no sprinkler permit had been issued, according to the complaint, and the plumber purportedly denied doing any of the work.
Hochhauser says he received a $100,200 estimate for fixing the problems.
In September, an electrician he hired discovered that outdoor lighting didn’t work because of improper wiring.
Later that month, water leaked from the ceiling into the living room. An independent plumber found a punctured hot water pipe, according to the complaint, and several walls had to be opened, a new pipe was put in, and the walls were replaced.
Hochhauser claims that Frugiuele and Rosario never disclosed that Rosario’s home renovation company would serve as the general contractor and that he first became aware of the company when he got copies of building permits.
In addition to a charge of professional malpractice against Frugiuele, the defendants are accused of fraud, unjust enrichment, negligence, breach of fiduciary duty, and infliction of emotional distress.
Hochhauser is represented by Manhattan attorney Thomas V. Purpi.
