Limits on suing builders OK'd
By a vote of 27-1, an amended version of SB220 passed the Senate on Tuesday, a day after passage in the House on Monday by a 64-9 vote.
Home builders and Realtors had pushed for the bill, saying it would reduce the number of unwarranted lawsuits. But critics maintained the measure would limit homeowners' ability sue a contractor for defective construction.
Salt Lake attorney Lincoln Hobbs, who represents homeowners associations, accused the Utah Home Builders Association of attempting to protect contractors from negligence claims while other professionals such as lawyers, doctors, Realtors and accountants are held accountable when they fail to meet their legally required duties.
The bill prevents a person from filing suit unless a builder did not follow their contract, or the defective construction caused personal or property damage. In addition, a person could sue if there were a "willful breach of legal duty."
The bill was sponsored by Sen. Curt Bramble, R-Provo, and Rep. Steve Urquhart, R-St. George. Urquhart said during debate Monday that the measure will only "codify the status quo," and that people who have complained that the bill will take away their rights were misinformed.
Utah Association of Realtors president David Mansell said that by keeping third-party "frivolous" lawsuits at bay, the state housing market can maintain its affordability.
California, Nevada and Oregon are the only states that allow third-party lawsuits on behalf of nonconsenting homeowners who are part of a homeowners association, said Mansell. He said such lawsuits have helped drive up home prices in those states by forcing home builders to include extra costs to account for potential lawsuits and higher than required building standards needed to reduce potential liability.
According to his association, the bill approved Tuesday stems from a 1996 Utah Supreme Court case involving the American Towers condominium development in Salt Lake City. A small group of condo owners had sued, claiming the builder was responsible for construction and design problems. In that case, the state high court ruled that negligence claims were no longer allowable, Mansell said.
Hobbs disagreed and noted that in 2003, the Utah Supreme Court said in another case, Grynberg v. Questar, that its original decision in the American Towers case was no longer appropriate. "That was the case where the Supreme Court said, 'We don't consider it to be good law anymore,'" he said.
Recent comments
Has anyone actually read the bill? If so, I would like to know where...
What's really going on | July 22, 2008 at 3:59 p.m.
Democracy is dead in America when government officals can be purchased...
Sick of bought government | March 5, 2008 at 11:04 p.m.
Lawsuits didn't hike home prices in California- greedy builders...
California Defective HomeOwner | March 5, 2008 at 10:31 p.m.
