Highlights and [bracketed comments] added
Be sure to read HOT's perspective at the end.

An exciting new warranty concept is about to be introduced to homeowners. Homeowners, you are going to love this. I've used exact wording from an amendment to HB2295, by one of our Texas State Representatives, that significantly impacts your ability to have many of the items in your 'new' home quickly and reasonably covered by your builder's warranty.

Readers, please carefully read the wording in this amendment to a law that will affect your rights as a homeowner.
In this case, 'exciting' is not a good thing.

Now, let's go through this together.

"A builder shall assign to the homeowner, without recourse, the manufacturer's warranty for all manufactured products that are covered by a manufacturer's warranty."

Well, if I'm not mistaken, some of those warranties for those manufactured products are for the purchaser of the product. If so, there would be nothing for the builder to assign. In addition, if the warranty does extend to the homeowner, the builder doesn't need this legislation to allow the manufacturer to extend warranty coverage to the homeowner.

I particularly like this next section.

"Any rights that inure to the homeowner provided under a manufacturer's warranty are the obligation of the manufacturer. The builder does not assume any of the obligations of the manufacturer resulting from a manufacturer's warranty, but shall coordinate with the manufacturer, suppliers, or agents to achieve compliance with the performance standard."

in⋅ure
Show Spelled Pronunciation [in-yoo r, i-noo r] Show IPA verb, -ured, -ur⋅ing.
-verb (used with object)
1. to accustom to hardship, difficulty, pain, etc.; toughen or harden; habituate (usually fol. by to): inured to cold.
I particularly like definition #1 as it relates to this amendment.

-verb (used without object)
2. to come into use; take or have effect.
3. to become beneficial or advantageous.

Does this mean that any manufactured product in your new home is now no longer the initial responsibility of the builder? Of course it does.

This law is specifically meant to wear the homeowner down, and reward the builder for purchasing and utilizing any junk product he or she wishes to put in your new home, as long as it has a warranty. And... when it does break, leak, ignite, or otherwise destroy your new home, the shoddy builder smiles knowin' you, the homeowner, get to deal directly with manufacturer.

What does "coordinate with the manufacturer, suppliers, or agents" mean" for the homeowner? Let's start out with 'coordinate'. Does this mean give the homeowner literature, make a phone call, answer written requests by the manufacturer, or what?

In addition, does the builder get to choose what path he takes? "Hmmm, shall I give the homeowner my supplier's name or the name of the manufacturer?" "Am I required to give 'em a phone number?" How much coordinatin' does the builder have to do

When a manufactured product breaks or otherwise fails to perform properly, this new state law, if passed, will make it the responsibility of the homeowner to deal with the manufacturer, supplier, agent, or whoever else the 'buck' gets passed to. Then, finally, if the manufacturer doesn't honor the warranty, the builder has to deal with the issue.
To give readers and idea how commonplace this will become and what a nightmare it can become for the homeowner, let's look at the number of manufactured products used in a house.

Here is a partial list:

Bricks, doors, doorknobs, door hinges, door latches, windows, shingles, flashing, fireplaces, tubs, sinks, commodes, faucets, plumbing lines, electrical wires, Air conditioning systems, heating systems, ductwork, carpet, wood flooring, tiles, handrails, guardrails, garage doors, garage door openers, water heaters, exhaust vents, dryer vents, dishwashers, disposals, ovens, cooktops, microwaves, drywall, etc. You get the picture. [add roof & floor stusses]

For comparison' sake, let's look at your automobile warranty and utilize the state representative approach.

• When your tires fail, track down the tire manufacturer.
• When your door handle breaks, call the door handle manufacturer.
• When the engine develops a coolant leak, track down the engine supplier that your car company purchased from.
• Did the motor for your power-seat fail? Contact the motor manufacturer.
• When your window won't roll up, call the window mechanism manufacturer.
• When the transmission fails, find out who manufactured the transmission, and contact them directly to see when they might repair your transmission.

Are you starting to understand the absurdity of this amendment?

Almost all products, (a house is a product) contain parts from other manufacturers. These parts or components have warranties that protect the company that built the bigger product, the end product, (I.e. houses, automobiles, air conditioning systems, microwaves, etc.) that the consumer purchases.

"If the manufacturer does not comply with the manufacturer's warranty within a reasonable amount of time, the builder shall make the affected condition comply with the performance standard and shall be subrogated to the homeowner's claims against the manufacturer."

In addition, what is a "reasonable period of time"? Can we get just a little bit vaguer?

As far as I can tell, there are no 'rights' given to the homeowner by this amendment. All this amendment does is give the shoddy builder, who buys and utilizes underperforming and defective manufactured products, another dilatory tactic. All it does is make the homeowner have to labor to have their home repaired in a timely fashion.

This HB2295 is headed to the Senate via a companion bill [SB 1015 by Hegar]. Call your Senator and let them know what you are thinking. [Find State/US Senators & Representatives by Address.]

If you don't... Don't whine and complain when you buy your new house and your builder has you calling and writing, and e-mailing and photographing your brains out, just to get defects in your home corrected.

Do you want to spend time with your family and other loved ones, OR, do you want to spend the first couple of years in your new home tracking down and dealing with manufacturers of defective products your builder installed in your new home?

Quality builders know that if an amendment like this makes it into law, that this is one more tool that allows shoddy builders to underbid and price their new home at a price less than what a quality builder can price their new home. Quality builders are already at a distinct disadvantage as a result of the laws that created the TRCC and the warranty and performance standards created by the TRCC. Quality builders and consumers need HB2295 to make it into law without the nonsense amendments that only benefit shoddy builders.

HOT's perspective: No! HB 2295 is a BAD bill for consumers and a bad bill for Texas. It's written to look good, but here's why it's not:

• Judicial Roadblock - The TRCC remains an expensive, time consuming and complex obstacle to other dispute resolution options, including arbitration or civil suits. That's because HB 2295 fails to make SIRP (state inspection and review process) optional.
• Mediation - This is presented in the bill as an alternative to SIRP, but it's ONLY an option if your builder requests SIRP, and that will likely never happen.
• Presumptive Determinations - SIRP decisions are "final and non-appealable" even though they are made by unlicensed inspectors and people with no legal training. That's another obstacle homeowers must overcome in a trial, assuming they have a chance to get there.
• Licensing - The bill substitutes Licensing for Registration but fails to implement a regulatory program that weeds out or keeps out bad builders. Pretend licensing would give homeowners a false sense of security. The bill grandfathers all currently registered builders and only requires 8-hours of continuing education per year with no exam. And it lacks an insurance bonding requirement to protect you when your builder runs off, goes bankrupt, or refuses to stand up to their responsibility. HOT proposed a bill that moved regulatory oversignt from the TRCC to the Texas Department of Licensing and Regulation. TDLR has over 100 years of regulatory and licensing experience. TRCC has none. TRCC has been a failure at regulating the industry or even registering builders (only about half are registered).
• Building Codes - The bill "dumbs down" building codes in the name of standardization, preventing some municipalities from requiring stricter codes.
• Extends Housing Problem - By catering to shoddy builders, the bill makes it difficult for quality builders to compete. And by protecting builders rather than homeowners, it makes older homes more attractive than new homes to buyers - not because older homes are built better (they often are), but because there are more protections when buying older homes. This can have a stiffling impact on the building industry and economic development.
• 6 More Years - The bill extends the life of the ineffective TRCC.

By Mark Eberwine, 05/16/2009
Source: http://voices.mysanantonio.com/markeberwine/2009/05/warrantieswho-is-responsible-f.html

 ↑ Back to Top