Don’t give developers and builders a free pass on shoddy work
As the unlucky buyer of a poorly built condo, the recent Denver Post editorial advocating for proposals that would weaken the rights for homeowners is infuriating. Buyers should expect developers to build their new home right — and if it’s not, be able to hold developers legally accountable to fix it.
I’m a living example of someone who is largely priced out of the housing market. Purchasing my condo in an affordable housing development in Five Points was a dream come true. Not only could I afford to buy my place, but the central location also meant I had access to light rail.
Colorado’s predictable late summer rains revealed our builder didn’t grade the structural decking properly and used subpar materials. As water streamed into our front doors and ran down our indoor walls in sheets, the damage was clear.
We repeatedly tried to get our developer and builder to repair the damage, but they dragged their feet and offered only pathetic “caulk and walk” efforts that didn’t begin to fix the problems. Finally, when the time period to take legal action was almost up — six years after the complex was finished — we reluctantly filed a lawsuit to hold them accountable for making it right.
Finally, after 10 long years and tens of thousands of volunteer hours, we won, and the builder settled. The most serious problems were finally repaired. We were not made whole, and we never will be.
Nobody wants to see affordable housing built more than I do. But when laws are passed to decrease developers’ responsibility for shoddy construction, it’s homeowners like me who are left holding the bag to deal with the overwhelming financial and personal costs. Purchasers of affordable units should never be put in this position.
Colorado has some of the weakest consumer protections for construction defects anywhere in the country, with one of the shortest timeframes for taking legal action, a block on charging interest on the full cost of repairs, even though these repair costs inevitably rise over the years. This incentivizes developers to drag their feet to run out the clock on the legal window) and the ability for developers to write purchase contracts preventing homeowners from accessing the court system for construction defects.
Builders alread have a legal “right to remedy” their own construction defects in the notice of claim process. Under current law, homeowners provide written notification of discovered defects, builders then have a total of 2 months to inspect the property and the opportunity to propose a repair to remedy the problem. If an offer is made, homeowners then have 15 days to accept or reject it depending on whether they see that it will fix the problem or that is no more than a “bandaid” fix.
The editorial by default supports requiring homeowners to accept insufficient repairs that might not solve the problem, a change in law that’s unacceptable to us. No homeowner wants to go to court, but when there is a serious problem in the construction of the biggest investments of most people’s lifetime, they just want it fixed for good.
Nevertheless, we agree that construction insurance is an issue, too. Homeowners who have struggled to hold builders accountable for construction defects have discovered that Colorado not only has no requirement for how much insurance a builder must carry, but even more disturbing they don’t have to carry any insurance at all. In these cases, it’s impossible to cover repairs.
Builders complain of high insurance costs but because there’s no transparency in Colorado, we don’t know what factors are used to determine rates, how many claims there have been, how many carriers are in the market or what the rates and costs of these products will be. Lawmakers who want to do something positive should sponsor legislation to gather this information and provide analysis to determine an adequate level of coverage and gain insight into costs.
As the editorial notes, there are many factors linked to a lack of condo construction — like bigger profits with apartment construction, slow permitting, and out- of- date zoning laws — but there’s no evidence that construction defects is the problem. In fact, construction defects would never be a problem if homes were built right the first time.
Protecting wealthy builders and developers from legal liability might lead to more secondrate housing but will do nothing to increase construction and the supply of affordable housing.
Jonathan Harris is the chair of Build Our Homes Right, a coalition of homeowners and legal advocates dedicated to protecting homeowner rights and opposing attempts to weaken legal protections for consumers who buy a defective home.