Statute of repose clarification

A bill that its sponsor termed a technical fix to clarify a 2004 law, could have major implications for some homeowners.

Rep. Julie Bunn (DFL-Lake Elmo), who sponsors HF412, said the bill’s goal is to make two components even clearer: a homeowner’s warranty claim must be made within two years of the breach, and the claim has to occur within 12 years of the warranty effective date.

The problem, she said, is that court levels have interpreted the law differently, catching homeowners in the middle.

Bunn said that a 2007 court decision went against the original intent by stating all claims must be within 10 years, the stated warranty on many home repairs, even though 12 years was always the intent.

“The Legislature, I think it is clear, intended to give people time, even after the warranty period expires, to discover a problem, go to the builder, and hopefully the builder will take care of it. But if they won’t, you still have time to bring your claim,” said Scott Andresen, an attorney who has represented hundreds of homeowners in warranty disputes.

He said the problem is courts interpreting current law to mean a homeowner has to discover the breach within the warranty period; tell the builder and have the builder “tell you to go pound sand” before a lawsuit can be brought. “They’ve effectively shortened the 10-year warranty period with that interpretation. This bill will clarify to say you still have a two-year statute of limitations, but you have to bring the lawsuit within 12 years of the warranty date.”

Lisa Frenette, government affairs director with the Builders Association of Minnesota, spoke against the bill.

“We believe right now that the law is clear on the time certain of when you can bring forward a claim. It allows a person to come forward, bring a claim and go into an extra two years if they bring the claim within the ninth and the 10th year,” she said.

Approved Feb. 23 by the House Civil Justice Committee on a split voice vote, it was sent to the House Commerce and Labor Committee. A companion, SF470, sponsored by Sen. Sandy Rummel (DFL-White Bear Lake), awaits action by the Senate Judiciary Committee.