Great Western Buildings Lawsuit: Unraveling the Decades-Long Controversy in Prefab Steel Construction

In the world of prefabricated steel buildings, few stories have captured as much attention as the Great Western Buildings lawsuit. This legal saga, spanning from the 1990s to recent years, highlights critical issues in construction quality, consumer protection, and corporate accountability. Great Western Buildings, once a prominent player in the industry, faced allegations of using substandard materials that led to premature failures in their products. Customers reported everything from rusting frames to structural collapses, sparking class actions and individual suits that have reshaped how the sector operates.

For anyone considering a metal building purchase or simply curious about corporate missteps, understanding this lawsuit is essential. It not only exposes vulnerabilities in prefab construction but also serves as a cautionary tale for buyers. In this article, we’ll explore the background, key allegations, legal battles, and lasting impacts of the Great Western Buildings lawsuit, drawing on court records, customer complaints, and industry insights. Whether you’re researching Great Western Buildings complaints or evaluating similar companies, this deep dive provides the facts you need.

Background on Great Western Buildings

Great Western Buildings, originally based in Colorado, emerged as a leader in the prefabricated steel building market during the late 1980s and early 1990s. The company specialized in pre-engineered structures designed for easy assembly, catering to a wide range of uses including homes, barns, workshops, and commercial spaces. Their appeal lay in affordability and convenience—customers could order kits that promised durability and low maintenance, ideal for rural and industrial applications.

At its peak, Great Western sold thousands of these buildings across the United States, marketing them as long-lasting solutions built to withstand harsh weather. However, as the company grew, so did concerns about their manufacturing processes. Reports from the era indicate that cost-cutting measures, such as sourcing cheaper steel and simplifying welding techniques, may have compromised quality. This set the stage for widespread dissatisfaction.

Today, the entity operates as Great Western Building Systems, LLC, still headquartered in Colorado, and continues to provide steel building systems. Despite rebranding efforts, the shadow of past legal troubles lingers, with the Better Business Bureau noting mixed reviews and ongoing complaints about service and product quality. Yelp users and BBB filings frequently cite issues like delayed deliveries and poor customer support, echoing themes from the original lawsuit.

The company’s history is intertwined with the broader prefab industry boom, where rapid expansion often outpaced quality controls. By the mid-1990s, as more buildings aged, owners began noticing defects that went beyond normal wear and tear. This backdrop is crucial for understanding why the Great Western Buildings lawsuit gained such traction—it wasn’t just isolated incidents but a pattern affecting thousands.

The Origins of the Great Western Buildings Lawsuit

The roots of the Great Western Buildings lawsuit trace back to the early 1990s, when initial customer complaints surfaced. Owners of these steel structures reported rapid deterioration, including rust stains, holes in panels, and buckling beams—issues appearing within just 5 to 10 years of installation. These weren’t minor cosmetic problems; they threatened the entire structural integrity, leading to costly repairs or even demolitions.

A pivotal moment came in 1996 when Colorado resident Ray Dolin filed a class action lawsuit after his barn developed severe rust issues only six years after purchase. Dolin, representing a growing number of disgruntled customers, argued that the buildings failed to meet reasonable expectations for longevity. His case quickly expanded to include thousands of plaintiffs nationwide, turning it into one of the largest class actions in Colorado’s history.

What fueled this legal fire? Industry experts point to the economic pressures of the time. Prefab buildings were in high demand, but competition drove companies like Great Western to cut corners. Sourcing steel from suppliers with inconsistent quality and using welding methods prone to corrosion were common practices, according to court documents. Customers, many of whom were farmers or small business owners, felt betrayed, as marketing materials promised decades of reliable service.

This origin story isn’t unique to Great Western; similar issues plagued other manufacturers. However, the scale of complaints—estimated at over 20,000 affected buildings—elevated this case. It also coincided with a rising awareness of consumer rights in the construction sector, paving the way for a high-stakes courtroom drama.

Key Allegations Against Great Western Buildings

At the heart of the Great Western Buildings lawsuit were allegations of negligence, breach of warranty, and deceptive practices. Plaintiffs claimed the company used inadequate steel that was susceptible to premature corrosion, compounded by faulty welding and assembly instructions. One quote from the proceedings described the defects vividly: “Within 5-10 years, unsightly rust stains and holes were visible. Even worse, the corrosion was causing beams and panels to buckle or break loose, threatening the integrity of the entire structure.”

Beyond materials, accusations extended to misleading marketing. Great Western allegedly implied their buildings would last for decades without major issues, creating an “implied warranty” that was breached when structures failed early. In more recent cases, like the 2022 class action, allegations included using drywall with high sulphur dioxide levels, moldy insulation containing asbestos, and poorly sealed windows leading to leaks. These defects reportedly caused health problems, such as respiratory issues and even cancer risks, alongside financial burdens from repairs and devalued properties.

Customer testimonials amplified these claims. A YouTube video from 2022 featured Coloradans who paid thousands in deposits only to face endless delays, price hikes, and incomplete deliveries. BBB complaints echo this, with users reporting non-responsive service and subpar construction quality. Collectively, these allegations painted a picture of a company prioritizing profits over safety and reliability, fueling public outrage and legal scrutiny.

Legal Proceedings and Developments

The original Great Western Buildings lawsuit unfolded in Colorado courts, starting with the 1996 filing and culminating in a trial by 2000. Great Western defended itself vigorously, attributing problems to external factors like weather or improper installation by customers. However, plaintiffs countered with evidence of systemic welding faults and comparisons to competitors’ more durable products.

In November 2000, the jury ruled in favor of the plaintiffs, finding the company negligent in steel selection, quality control, and assembly methods. The verdict was upheld by the Colorado Supreme Court in 2001, solidifying the case’s legacy.

Recent developments show the issues persist. In 2022, Steamboat Distilled LLC sued Great Western Building Systems for breach of contract, leading to a venue change and procedural closures, though the core claims remain unresolved. That same year, another class action alleged hazardous materials in buildings. In 2024, Crystal M. Tabor filed an employment discrimination suit under the Americans with Disabilities Act, with ongoing motions and docket activity as of mid-2025. These cases involve motions to dismiss, waivers of service, and denials of counsel appointments, indicating protracted battles.

Court records from platforms like PACER and Trellis reveal a pattern of disputes, from product liability to internal employment issues. While some suits settle quietly, others drag on, keeping the company’s legal team busy.

Outcomes and Settlements

The 2000 jury decision led to a landmark settlement: Great Western agreed to pay up to $50 million for repairs or replacements affecting around 20,000 owners. However, not all claims were fully compensated, leaving some plaintiffs dissatisfied. This outcome established a precedent for implied warranties in prefab construction, influencing consumer laws nationwide.

For recent cases, outcomes vary. The Steamboat suit was administratively closed after a venue shift, but substantive resolutions aren’t detailed. The 2022 class action remains pending, with potential for significant payouts if plaintiffs prevail. Tabor’s 2024 case is active, with partial motions to dismiss filed and responded to.

Overall, these settlements have cost the company dearly in finances and reputation. They’ve also prompted internal changes, though customer reviews suggest improvements are uneven.

Impact on Customers and the Construction Industry

The Great Western Buildings lawsuit has had profound effects on affected customers, many of whom faced thousands in repair costs and lost trust in prefab options. Stories of barns collapsing or homes becoming uninhabitable underscore the human toll, with some reporting health issues from mold or asbestos.

Industry-wide, it spurred tighter regulations. Building codes now emphasize corrosion resistance, and manufacturers invest more in quality assurance. Competitors learned to highlight warranties and third-party testing in marketing. For buyers, it’s a reminder to research thoroughly—checking BBB ratings, reading contracts, and inspecting materials before purchase.

The controversy also influenced related lawsuits, like those against other steel builders for similar faults. It fostered a culture of accountability, where ethical practices outweigh short-term gains.

Recent Developments and Ongoing Concerns

Even in 2025, Great Western faces scrutiny. The Tabor employment case highlights internal issues, while customer forums buzz with complaints about delays and quality. A 2023 ex parte communication to the FTC signaled tensions with industry groups, terminating memberships amid non-compete concerns.

Injunctions in other cases, like one against a former executive, show the company’s aggressive defense of trade secrets. These developments suggest that while the original lawsuit is history, new chapters continue to unfold.

What This Means for Future Buyers of Steel Buildings

For prospective buyers searching for “Great Western Buildings lawsuit” or similar terms, the lesson is clear: Due diligence is key. Look for companies with strong warranties, positive reviews, and transparent sourcing. Consider alternatives like local builders or certified materials to avoid pitfalls.

The case also empowers consumers—know your rights under implied warranties and don’t hesitate to seek legal recourse if defects arise. Resources like the BBB and state attorneys general can help navigate complaints.

Conclusion: Lessons from the Great Western Buildings Lawsuit

The Great Western Buildings lawsuit stands as a testament to the importance of quality in construction. From its 1990s origins to today’s disputes, it reveals how corporate shortcuts can lead to widespread harm. While the company has paid dearly, the real winners are consumers who now benefit from stronger protections.

As the industry evolves, staying informed about such cases ensures better decisions. If you’re dealing with similar issues, consult a professional—knowledge is your best defense against future controversies.