Tenant says it had to fix the building itself - and now wants the landlord to foot the bill
Indeed has sued its Stamford landlord for at least $1.2 million, saying hidden fireproofing defects forced the tenant to fix a Class A office tower itself.
The job-search company filed the suit on May 19, 2026 in the US District Court for the District of Connecticut. The defendant is 200 Elm Partners BH LLC, the owner of the Link at Stamford, described in the filing as a 560,000-square-foot multi-tenant commercial building at 695 East Main Street/200 Elm Street.
Indeed signed the lease on or about June 28, 2024 and took possession on August 1, 2024, according to court papers. Under the deal, the suit says, 200 Elm Partners expressly represented and warranted that the space complied with all applicable laws and agreed to handle fireproofing, firestopping, and related code work as part of the "Landlord's Work."
When Indeed took the keys, the fireproofing sat above the ceilings - not reasonably observable on an ordinary walkthrough, the filing states. On or about June 30, 2025, a subcontractor of Indeed's project manager, Pavarini North East Construction Co., LLC, flagged significant latent defects, according to the suit. Indeed then brought in AK Engineering, PC to test and analyze the space. The findings, the filing says, included adhesion and cohesion failures, disbondment from the substrate and structural members, water damage, and areas where fireproofing was entirely missing.
Code consultant Milton Gregory Grew, AIA concluded the work did not meet Part IV of the 2022 Connecticut State Fire Safety Code, the complaint says. Project architect Gensler Architecture, Design & Planning, PC determined the defects were present before Indeed took possession, and would not certify the premises for occupancy, the filing states.
Indeed served a written default notice on August 15, 2025. On August 21, 2025, the landlord said it would not remediate, the suit says. Indeed then invoked the lease's self-help provision, ran its own remediation plan, and brought the space into compliance so a certificate of occupancy could issue, according to the filing. 200 Elm Partners has not reimbursed Indeed for the remediation costs, the complaint says.
The filing widens the picture beyond Indeed's own floors. A visual inspection of other parts of the building, including the parking garage, showed a complete failure of the sprayed fire-resistant material, the suit alleges. Indeed also says 200 Elm Partners has refused to produce records of the annual inspections that the state fire safety code requires building owners to keep.
The case brings four claims: breach of lease, breach of the implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing, reckless misrepresentation, and violations of the Connecticut Unfair Trade Practices Act, or CUTPA - a state law that lets parties recover damages for unfair or deceptive business conduct. Indeed is seeking compensatory damages of not less than $1.2 million on each count, plus punitive damages and attorneys' fees on the misrepresentation and CUTPA claims, according to the demand for relief.
Indeed is represented by Adam M. Swanson, Bhanuka Y. Mahabamunuge, and Shawn S. Smith of McCarter & English, LLP.
The allegations have not been tested in court. 200 Elm Partners has not yet filed a response, and no court has ruled on the claims.
