House OKs Stronger Protections For Home Buyers

by Steven K. Paulson, AP Writer

DENVER - After lawmakers accused some homebuilders of forcing buyers to waive their warranty rights, the House gave initial approval Wednesday to a bill that requires the warranties to be upheld.

Actually we accused the homebuilders, and the homebuilders admitted, that their contracts force buyers to give up a lot of rights -- including the right to expect a new home to be "habitable."

The Homeowner Protection Act of 2007 would allow courts to void any part of a contract that waives basic legal rights.

Rep. Debbie Stafford, a Republican from Aurora, said some homebuilders were taking advantage of a 2003 law that eased restrictions on them, wiggling out of warranties even when negligence was involved.

Actually the homebuilders offer warranties to most new home buyers. The problem is that they get homeowners to waive their legal rights in return for the warranties. Then the warranties don't cover a lot of the serious defects that can cause a new house to start falling apart just a few years after its built.

At that point a lot of homeowners are in a real jam. If they can't afford to pay for repairs they just have to live with the problems, which can include cracking walls, rain and snow in the attic, and basements floors that ripple like a stormy sea

She said lawmakers thought they were doing the right thing when they passed the law, but some homebuyers have been left with costly repairs.

"The American dream for many of the people who voted to send us down here are caught in the American nightmare," Stafford said.

Other Republicans said the measure (House Bill 1338) will drive up the cost of new homes and hurt the industry at a time when it is in a slump.

"This is kicking an industry while it's down," said Rep. David Balmer, R-Centennial.

Good grief, the homeowners I've heard from have lost nearly everything and they're stuck living in a crumbling home. Larry Mizel, the head of Richmond American Homes made $42 million last year. So did his partner. I think they can afford to build homes property, or fix their mistakes.

The bill faces a third reading in the House before it goes to the Senate.

Rep. Al White, R-Winter Park, said the bill would create a windfall for home buyers who could prove a builder was negligent.

This argument drives me craze. For five years now I've been listening to some Republican claim that anything we do to protect consumers is just a way of making a few lucky consumers rich. They say that Coloradans don't want to work for a living, they just hope to get maimed in a car wreck, suffer an injury during surgery or buy a defective home so they can sue someone and get right.

Have you ever hoped your new home would fall apart so you could sue? Have you ever wanted a doctor to give you the wrong treatment so you could claim malpractice? Most people I know have never sued anyone. And hope they never have to.

Colorado has very few lawsuits and very small damage awards. When people sue it's usually because they've tried everything else and don't see any other way to resolve a horrible situation.

Bill sponsor Rep. Jack Pommer, D-Boulder, said the measure puts limits on damages. He said some homebuilders have acknowledged that some of their contracts are "unconscionable" and he said they need to be reined in.

The bill doesn't put any limits on damages, it just keeps in tact the limits that the homebuilders got when they passed the Construction Defects Act back in 2003.