Bob and Jane Cull bought the home of their dreams in Texas. It was built by one of the most powerful and politically connected homebuilders in the country - and it was defective. Thus began a 13-year odyssey that would teach them some unhappy lessons about money, power and influence.

Back in the early 1990s, the Culls decided they wanted to build the home where they'd retire and live out the remainder of their days. Although they didn't play, they wanted a lot on a golf course in a new development in the suburbs of Dallas.

"We actually spent about five years looking all around," Jane says. "We found a perfect lot. It was just a perfect place to call home."

So Bob and Jane Cull bought from one of the state's largest homebuilders. And before they knew it, they were playing with their grandchildren in their new living room with a tall ceiling that looked out over hole No. 2. And they lived happily ever after. For about six weeks.

"There were windows that you could not raise," Bob says, and "a roof support in the attic that fell away."

The Culls' new home was undergoing "foundation heave." The clay soil underneath was expanding and contracting like a sponge as it got wet and dried out. The edges of the foundation began lifting, and the wooden frame began to bow under the stress. [HOT: To learn more, read our paper, "Soil Issues and Residential Construction."

You Win, And You Win And You Still Haven't Won 

"It's overwhelming," Jane says. "The process and the system and the years that fly by. The fact that you win, and you win, and you win, and you win and you still haven't won is totally unbelievable."

After two years of getting nowhere with their builder and warranty company, the Culls hired a structural engineer. To their chagrin, he said their house would either have to be torn down or put up on jacks, and piers driven into the bedrock. Either way, it was going to cost hundreds of thousands of dollars. The Culls hired a lawyer, and when their case went to arbitration, they were confident about the evidence.

"The only person in 12 years who has heard every bit of testimony, read all the depositions, the engineering reports and sat face-to-face with all parties for three days is the arbitrator," Bob Cull says.

The arbitrator sided with the Culls. Perry Homes was ordered to pay $800,000 in damages and retake ownership of the house. The Culls felt triumphant and vindicated. But they were about to discover that if your builder has the resources, binding arbitration isn't necessarily all that binding.

Political Ties In High Places

Seventy-six-year-old Bob Perry is one of Texas' most successful homebuilders. For the last two decades, he has used his $600 million fortune to fund the Republican revolution, both in Texas and nationally. He helped put George W. Bush into the White House. He was the Swift Boat Veterans For Truth's largest contributor. In Texas, if you hold a position of legislative, judicial or executive power, a Bob Perry donation is almost certainly in your campaign account.

After he lost in arbitration to the Culls, the builder began appealing the award through the state courts. Perry's appeals were rejected at each stop until he got to the Texas Supreme Court. And there, he got satisfaction.

"They overturn two lower courts and vacate an arbitration system - all for their biggest donor," argues Andrew Wheat.

Wheat is the research director of Texans for Public Justice, which tracks campaign contributions in Texas. Wheat says that since 2006, Bob Perry has contributed more than $21 million to political candidates and judges - including the nine Republican justices who make up the Texas Supreme Court.

"They all took money," Wheat says. "Not a single member of that court should have sat and heard a case involving Bob Perry Homes."

Six years after winning in arbitration, the Culls' $800,000 award was thrown out. In a 5-4 decision, the Court disallowed arbitration and sent the case back to the courts.

Anthony Holm, spokesperson for Bob Perry, defends the Texas Supreme Court's ruling and the justices' decision to sit and hear the case. He says that if the judges recused themselves every time a case involving a big donor was before them, they'd almost never hold court.

"Every single major law firm in Texas are huge donors to the Texas Supreme Court - and every other judicial candidate at every level in this state," Holm says.

The decision to throw out the arbitration award provoked an outcry from public interest groups and Texas newspapers. The ruling and Perry's money had tarnished the state's highest court with the appearance of impropriety, critics said. It's an allegation Perry's spokesperson dismisses.

"I mean, it's simply absurd," Holm says. "The situation is tragic and no one wants to be here, but all we have sought from day one is our day in court."

The Culls are trapped. They can't sell the house - it wouldn't pass inspection. They say they're not that kind of people anyway. It's now been 13 years, and to Jane and Bob Cull's amazement, inspectors hired by their builder are once again inside their house, drilling holes through their foundation. One arbitration and a half-dozen court rulings later, they are starting the process all over again.

A Legal Odyssey

Jane and Bob Cull's legal battle over their home has lasted 13 years. Here, a timeline of events, based on the Culls' records:

• April 1996. The Culls purchase a lot and sign a contract with Perry Homes to build a house in Mansfield, Texas.
• October 1996. The Culls move into their new home on Walnut Creek Oaks golf course.
• January 1997. The Culls write the first of 11 letters in 1997 alone to Perry Homes about home foundation movement and structural heaving.
• July 1999. Warranty company Home of Texas takes over structural issues; agrees to cover foundation and roof framing system. In September, Perry Homes is named contractor for the warranty coverage.
• June 2000. Perry Homes announces plan of repair complete.
• July 2000. Realtor refuses to list Cull home for sale.
• September 2000. Culls retain legal counsel.
• November 2001. Culls seek arbitration.
• December 2002. Arbitrator rules in favor of the Culls, awards $800,000 in compensatory and punitive damages, orders Perry Homes to retake ownership of house. Perry Homes appeals.
• January 2004. District court confirms the arbitrator's award; Perry Homes appeals.
• August 2005. Court of Appeals affirms trial court ruling in favor of Culls.
• October 2005. Perry Homes appeals to the Texas Supreme Court.
• May 2008. Texas Supreme Court sides with Perry Homes, returning the case to district court.
• February 2009. Process begins anew.

  Wade Goodwin, NPR (National Public Radio), 03/28/2009
Source: http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=102453061

READER COMMENTS (oldest to newest)

[HOT: Texans should be ashamed that its elected officials let builders in our state get away with the sort of shenanigans reported in this National Public Radio broadcast. It caused caused lots of turmoil and reader comments. What follows is just a subset for the first few hours after airing.]

FR Thompson (RandyT) wrote:

Dear USA, this is the work of the Texas Republican Party. Perry owns them all. Including all the Republican judges.

The Thinker (tekguy) wrote:

The old saying death and taxes pales in comparison to corrupt politicans in Texas and Chicago. No matter the party.

William Buchman (BillyFish) wrote:

While this seems like a miscarriage of justice, the engineer in me cries out that I have not heard the whole story. Someone buys a lot and tells someone else to build upon it. They do so. Who's duty is it to check the soil mechanics to see if the lot is suitable for construction? How was that specified in the contract?

True, the builder is more knowledgeable, but the Culls really wanted that home built. Although it may not be a good analogy, if you buy tainted food and hire an expert chef to cook it, is it the chef's responsibility to determine whether the food is indeed wholesome? While many people hire inspectors before they buy an existing home, should they not be willing to hire someone to determine the suitability of the lot before going to the expense of construction?

From the description presented by NPR, the best possible construction would not have prevented the home from failing.

John Jacobs (Zeff) wrote:

Just another fine example of why I will not live in Texas again. Seems the Republic never fully joined the Union, and I've met many Texans who are proud of that fact.

Richard Mason (RCM) wrote:

Zeff is right. Texas is no place for Americans. We should trade them for Puerto Rica and treat them as a hostile foreign nation. After giving us two George Bushes they are definitely hostile!

Saturday, March 28, 2009 7:56:25 AM

Francis Catania (Penang1970) wrote:

We have been considering moving to Texas for retirement but this story gives us serious reservations about building a retirement home there.

beverly scarbrough (cobweb) wrote:

One more shameful example how Money and power are abused. How that builder lives with himself is beyond me.

Shawn Allen (gonzo3d) wrote:

The builder isn't responsible for his structure?

If a chef cooks a meal and the food kills the client, I believe the law will find the chef IS responsible. Food is a apple/orange analogy anyway.

You pay me to build you a structure, and that structure starts to collapes within 6 months, and I am not responsible.. Hm. I may be in the wrong business!

What a country! Viva los Americanos!

margarita maldonado (marita) wrote:

My parents are the second owners of a custom built home that they've lived in now for 40 plus years. It's solid as a rock. Of course, it's built on caliche and isn't cookie cutter construction like the homes they build out here (Texas) nowadays. Builders buy lots out here, and they try and squeeze as many homes into them as possible, as fast as possible. They don't care. AND they bury all the construction waste in the yards. Builders got cheap, easy loans like all of the rest of the country. Why would anyone think they would be scrupulous about what they did with the money?

Kathryn Cole (kathrynyo) wrote:

As the recession tightens, the wealthy and powerful are circling their wagons to protect their wealth and power. This is to be expected. But it is a scandal that our elected representatives, whether local, state, or national, are helping them, to the detriment of the public who elected them. This is the one barrier to my being hopeful about our democracy, that Big Business literally buys legislation.

James Erdman (landscapelover) wrote:

"Power tends to corrupt and absolute power corrupts absolutely." Those words from 19th century English historian Lord Acton came immediately to mind when I heard this revelation of builder-magnate and his lawyer. I then found this quote of Acton's even more to the point: "Every thing secret degenerates, even the administration of justice." I thank NPR for having the courage to expose the sociopaths who, to the very top, rule Texas. Texas, the Lone Star State shows how far that star has lost its luster.

Eileen Sullivan (Rufus31) wrote:

BillyFish blames the homebuyers for not having checked the suitability of their land for building. I would think that, even in Texas, there are building codes whereby the soil is tested before a permit for construction is issued. The onus of responsibility in obtaining that permit is on the builder. That's how we do things in Massachusetts. When the judiciary is beholden to interests that keep them on the bench it is suspect for tyranny. And, besides, winning a judgment in the courts seldom results in actually getting restitution..in the end, it's just a piece of paper.

William Dennison (dennisonwj) wrote:

I had a similar problem as this, to not the same extent however with Ryan Homes in Maryland. Mostly, the local legislature supported the Developer (Moxley Development), and the Builder (Ryan Homes) to a level of utter corruption. This home was in Columbia, Maryland, a pre-planned mini-metropolis type area for the middle class. Essentially, the county granted every possible variance (arbitrarily with no support) to the developer/builder. Their decisions ALWAYS stood in court regardless of countless ordnances broken. We also hired professional engineers to testify that the proposed development would be structurally unsafe. The builders/developers did not even bother to bring professional engineers forward to refute ours, they did not have to; they had already won. It was sickening to me to see our system of laws and ordnances utterly tossed aside. It made me angry when I realized that the majority of our legislators in Maryland are on the payroll of developers and builders. How are we to change this, unless you have money, that breeds corruption, your chances of making a difference in politics is slim to none. We seem to be heading in the wrong direction, revolution may be the only answer.

Martha Crotty (Doodle) wrote:

Wouldn't it be interesting if our ex-president's new house has the same kind of problems?

robin boren (bosco1) wrote:

Although this is a tragic story, it is not the rule in Texas. Unfortunately if you own a home in Dallas you will have issues with foundations. Their ground is very unstable due to the clay which will expand when wet and contract when dry causing an unstable environment for a slab foundation. We do as much as we can to correct the issues. Drill piers, post tension cables etc. However most homeowners in Dallas area understand that there is maintenance required daily in order to keep their foundation from failing. That is, they must water there foundation in order for the clay to stay wet. You must keep it expanded so minimal damage will occur. Myself, being a builder, I do stress this fact.

BTW the majority of home buyers’ complaints with the TRCC are not structurally related. They are more on the lines of paint colors or stone/brick selections that most have chosen themselves. And then they change their minds and expect the builder to foot the bill for replacing those things. As a pure custom home builder I want the homeowner on sight as much as possible. So they can monitor and make changes throughout the building stages. Seems to work out just fine.

Sean Lawler (Seanus) wrote:

I am not surprised that Bush took campaign money from such an aweful corporation. By the way, when is the International Criminal Court going to try the bush administration for crimes against humanity?

And with regard to structural damage being commonplace among Dallas homes; I wouldn't defend Bob Perry. If this was something present in so many homes then A) you don't live in Texas b/c it's a horrible place anyway or B) Bob Perry drills down to bedrock to support the foundation as any honest home-builder would. But I'm sure the house that Bush bought is perfectly secure. Because while in office Bush espoused political initiatives that were favorable to the cronyism of large corporations.

Marsha Abelman (MarshaMarsha) wrote:

I can't help but remember comments from Texas relatives about the "corrupt politics in Chicago..." Throwing stones is such a dangerous hobby!

Sue McCoy (Swenger) wrote:   

Wow! And I thought Indiana (being Repub. controlled) had it bad. If the segment was correct and thoroughly researched, then the homebuyers in Texas truly have my sympathy.

Anne Salamon (aks) wrote:  

This is an example of the corporate greed that blossomed on a national level under the Bush administration doctrine of Free Market/no government interference (i.e. less regulation). It was this attitude & lack of oversight as well as tolerance of special financial bullies that contributed to a corrupt Republican White House. Republicans in Texas seem to feel that it's alright to take advantage of the little guy and to spout lies ("Swiftboat Veterans for Truth") as long as they take the moral high road and wrap themselves in the American flag. That the Texas Supreme Court, recipients of Perry money, would overturn many lower courts' decisions to rule in Perry's favor makes me ill. How many other people, without this couple's resources, have been denied justice at the hands of corrupt wealthy power brokers?

Sue McCoy (Swenger) wrote:  

@Anne: my husband and I own a very small company, and under the articles which were used to create it, we are considered a 'corporation'. And a great deal of the 'less regulation' began under the Clinton Admin. I am not a supporter of Bush & Co. Admin., however, I am tired of gross and far-sweeping generalizations which I often see in the NPR comments. It is what I would expect from CNN viewers, listeners.

robin boren (bosco1) wrote:  

There is no way that the builder is responsible for this tragic story. The land was never his, the land was in a developed area. the soil tests were all ready completed by the developer. the details of those perk test were submitted to slab engineer to draw up the plans for the foundation on that particular lot.those plans are the specs of what any builder would go by. once the builder builds that slab to the specs, the engineer comes out and approves the job before concrete is poured. there would be no reason at all for a builder to even think about doing any independant tests.

Douglas Laurora (Beekersavant) wrote:  

Join the Facebook Group- "Don't Buy a Perry Home" and link it to everyone you know. Let's help the people of Texas make informed home buying decisions.

The Thinker (tekguy) wrote:  

I lived in Texas once for 5 weeks. That was enough for a lifetime. Had 2 rifles stolen from my apartment by the manager who had a pass key. No forced entry. The police would do nothing.

Had a man chase me down a freeway pointing a gun at me.

Heard on the news one day a man was stabbed in the back standing on the street waiting for someone. As he feel his attacker said "sorry I thought you were someone else."

Texas is rednecks, oil mentality and money. They used to be more progressive before Republicans ran everything. Now you have people such as Tom Delay, and John Cornyn from Texas. If these people represent their values I don't want any part of them.

Texas also executes the most prisoners of any state. Some menatality retarded and others that had inept counsel.

The republican governor was attempting to fast track 8 dirty coal fired power plants a few years ago.

Aus Tex (Gockomo) wrote:  

It is so ironic to me that so much is made of Tort reform...specifically by the GOP. It seems to me the only way to get justice for any issue is to have friends in high places. If you don't have at least a million dollars and tons of time on your hands, you're basically screwed...whether it's a problem with your home, your health, whatever. All we can do is take a good look at ourselves and insure we are behaving with integrity. It's clear that many people when given the opportunity to take advantage of any system will look out for #1. It is time for us all to raise our consciousness and behave well towards our fellow wo/man. Maybe it will catch on....

The Thinker (tekguy) wrote:  

With all due respects robin boren you don't know what the hell you are talking about. If arbitration and all of the courts below the corrupt state supreme court agreed that the figure was valid then it should have been paid.

A builder is responsible for making sure the people who are sub contractors know their jobs, including what kind of soil and drainage a building lot has before putting down a foundation. Then if there is a problem the owners should be told what is required and any additional expense is needed.

I've been the building chairperson for a $500,000 addition to our church and we've also built a home a few years ago. We had a survey which told us the drainage and elevation the house should sit on the lot, The back of our lot is considered wetlands.

This builder didn't do their job properly, the abrition found the builder at fault, so did the courts.

CW Private (Pvt_Douglas) wrote:  

If a defense fund is set up for for the Culls, I am willing to make a contribution even though I make only a little above minimum wage. I am one of those people who loves making authority accountable.

Steven Fair (cowboydem) wrote:  

What really bothers me is that the Perry Homes (Rick Perry) could have made good with the Cull's for a lot less than they spent on lawyers. What were Perry Homes trying to prove, that they could build substandard homes any time they wanted?

Blake Southwood (MartianAstronaut) wrote:  

Texas is no longer part of America.

John Fabie (hup1) wrote:  

Why not just give Texas back to Mexico?

Lois Murphy (bubbabelle) wrote:  

With as much money Perry Homes and Bob Perry make in a year from home sales, it seems he could absorb the cost of rebuilding or paying out the binding arbitration fee. Shameful behavior from that old man.

MaryLou Gale (MLGale) wrote:  

Anyone Texan who buys a home from Perry Homes should have their head examined.

C Vigneron (laager) wrote:  

This is a story that makes me miss Molly Ivans.

Glenn Phillips (cody999) wrote:  

I would like to know if i can contribute to the Cull's legal fund. They have been truly screwed by the court in Texas. I would like to find out if they have a web site I can contribute too.

Sarah Cluster (brianeclus) wrote:  

What a relevant story. I appreciate BillyFish's comments about the soil and his analogy about tainted food I find valid. He is NOT coming off 1 sided and just adds some validity to any intelligence there might have been in this corrupt story. BUT that is what this story reeks of. Corruption. To Swenger, Aks comments are not "gross and far-sweeping generalizations which you often see in the NPR comments. It is what you would expect from CNN viewers, listeners." You as a "corporation" only heard that in her comment and failed to read what she was especially commenting on. The fact that the Texas Supreme Court which so obviously from the statements, a recipient of Perry money, would overturn many lower courts' decisions to rule in Perry's favor. I mean the story referred to Perry being worth millions ... a $800,000.00 judgement for him to pay to the homeowners should not have been defeated. He is a corporate fat cat by all accounts and even more so if he has been able to change legislation per future homeowner's and their dilemmas with builders in that area. This story reeks of the law changing that the Bush Administration is horribly responsible for. They changed things on the books that will take years and years to undo.

Sarah Cluster (brianeclus) wrote:  

There were stories abounding of the legal twistings that Bush and company did that "earmarked" legislation concerning scientific research, environmental issues, privacy issues ... EVERYTHING - and did so in ways that looked like they were wrapping themselves in the constitution. And then they had the Supreme Court so conveniently made up of these "Constitutional" judges. My statements are not backed up with enough facts because of my own brain's lacking in being able to recount the names and facts but I read many many well researched stories of this having gone on and it having made marks on our society for years to come. And this story sounds sorely like another one of them. Texas legislation and legislators should be gone over with a fine tooth comb. Short of what I heard recently about Virginia and its execution laws, I think perhaps Texas is 2nd in its executions and I for one find that even more abhorrent resting on the back of such an obviously tainted legislature. Thanks to Beekersavant for the facegroup coup. Bottom line Gockomo has it right when it comes to each of us and our own personal integrity and the raising of our consciousness as a society that might survive.

Jack Maxwell (Jackmax) wrote:  

One of the 8 institutional guarantees of democracy is the right of political leaders to compete for support and votes. Another is the responsiveness of state institutions. Political support that leads to a response like this from the bought-off Texas Supreme Court, contributes to the further deterioration of our republic’s foundation-one that is beginning to resemble that of the Dahl’s Perry-built home. Perhaps the exposure of this shameful episode will help initiate the reform needed to keep it from happening again. The home-building industry has contributed to the current financial crisis because of the greed, usury, avarice (and "clout") of builders like Perry. Corruption like this used to be relegated to third-world countries. What happened, America?

john mcclurg (opa) wrote:  

Folks--the comment page is about the article not about arguing your individual prejudices with each other. It is not all about YOU. I think these people got a truly raw deal. The builder has spent more in legal fees than it would have cost him to give these people a new house built on good foundations. Bravo to these plaintiffs who apparently are not going to go quietly. Razzberries to the builder whose sense of entitlement dwarfs his humanity.

T Winston (Churchhill) wrote:  

Just goes to show the lack of integrity the conservative movement has. The builder is part of Bush's (..No dollar left behind)...There are some really honest people from Texas. They’re just not in the Oil, cattle and etc.. What a disgusting display of ruthless power.

Mary Eldridge (FlyingCloud) wrote:  

Another example that greed rules, the same greed that has pushed our economy into the ditch. In this case, greed coupled with corruption of the highest judges in the state. What a sorry commentary on Texas "justice."

Richard Dugan (Verdadero) wrote:  

The only thing that is certain is that the politicians who accepted the money of this failed contractor and most likely the contractor as well should go directly to jail and not pass go. That goes double for the corrupt court in Texas. One wonders when Texans will have had enough of the criminal politics in their state and boot out all of the crooked Republicans who are ripping all of them off.

Texans are so proud of their heritage and their fight for independence but they have allowed the Bush syndicate and the corrupt Republicans to push everyone into poverty with their greed.

Vic Edwards (elpredicto) wrote:  

As Reader's Digest says, that's life in these United States. So much for George Bush's mantra of "compassionate conservatism." Oh, well.

It's another tragic story of "Follow the Money" ... regardless of where it flows ... and in this case, just like sewage, it all flows downhill from the Texas Supreme Court.

Mr. Perry may be financially wealthy, but he's morally and spiritually bankrupt. Since most conservatives (especially in Texas) are Christians, I wonder how they envision the not-too-far-off meeting between Mr. Perry and St. Peter. Should be an interesting exchange as St. Pete says: "Let's roll that video!" of the rich old man's life.

There are a few expressions that come to mind for Perry Homes and its actions against the Culls:

1. "What goes around ..."

2. "Do unto others ..."

and, in the case of a business:

3. "The customer is always right."

The customer is right, unless the home builder has the state's judges in his back pocket. Haven't heard an adage that applies to that situation.

The Thinker (tekguy) wrote:  

A texan riding in his limo sees a man about to jump off a bridge when he tells his driver to stop the car.

He jumps out and yells "don't jump!"

The man stops and turns and asks why?

"Think of your wife and family."

"I have no wife or family."

"Think of your job and co-workers."

"I have no job."

In desperation he says "remember the Alamo."

"What's the Alamo?"

Texan "Jump you damn Yankee jump!"

kelly cantara neal (kcn) wrote:  

I am disheartened at the Culls' experience and the number of "wins" in their corner have convenienced me that the wins are justified. However, the article above fails to mention the very important fact of exactly what the Texas Supreme Court has ruled. Even in the audio it is not mentioned until after the fact when the NPR host had to ask the author specifically what it was. To rant about corrupt politicians and underhanded dealings without presented the facts is not respectable journalism. I understand there will be another segment tomorrow outlining the legislative ramifications, etc. but segmenting the story in this fashion appears to only serve the purpose of whipping up an angry mob. It smacks of sensationalism.

Fuzzy Chickens (fuzzychickens) wrote:

Purchasing judges and politicians is a right of every rich American. It is totally unpatriotic to suggest otherwise.

Dean Libey (uradragon) wrote:

Just south of Spokane, on a hill overlooking Hangman Creek, somebody built houses on a mountain of sand. The cliff is slowly eroding away and I imagine there are a few houses that you couldn't give away. I would also imagine that somebody was given a permit to be build there, so they did and then people bought the houses. If I am putting out $800,000 for a house I'd like to know what it sits on. but who would ever think you'd have to keep the the foundation base wet for your house not to fall apart. Corruption i.e. The Good Old Boys are alive and well and certainly plays a part in this drama.

Lisa Barillas (Gemraticus) wrote:

"Anthony Holm, spokesperson for Bob Perry, defends the Texas Supreme Court's ruling and the justices' decision to sit and hear the case. He says that if the judges recused themselves every time a case involving a big donor was before them, they'd almost never hold court."

PRECISELY why judges - who are supposed to be held to a higher (neutral) standard than mere politicians - should not even be allowed to take money from contributors!!! Anthony Holm's argument drives home this point. Why is it even legal for judges to accept donations? And why aren't people mad as hell about this?

Wayne Caswell (HoTexas) wrote:

Homeowners of Texas is a non-profit working to regulate homebuilding and make builders accountable to homeowners… Check out our website (www.homeownersoftexas.org) and February newsletter. To learn about building on expansive soil, see www.homeownersoftexas.org/Soil_Issues.pdf.

 ↑ Back to Top