The Washington State Senate passed SB 5895, the 2009 version of the Homeowner's Bill of Rights. The vote was 25 to 24, mostly split along party lines. Our own senator, Tim Sheldon, voted against the bill.
The primary component of SB 5895 is a warranty that requires builders to stand behind their work for several years, giving buyers of new single family homes the assurance that if a defect is discovered, the builder will be coming back to fix it.
Courts have ruled that Washington law doesn't permit homeowners to recover damages if something goes wrong with their home, which allows unscrupulous builders to completely escape accountability.
Andrew Villeneuve, founder of the Northwest Progressive Institute, writing for RedmondReporter.com, described the situation like this:
State law currently affords a family greater protection against a defective car or toaster it does for a new home. It sounds outrageous. And to those families whose savings have been wiped out, to those parents who have lost the ability to pay for their kids to go to college, and to those children whose safety has been at risk because they were living in unsafe homes, it is outrageous.
Other components of SB 5895 include:
- Creation of implied statutory warranties and requires third-party inspections for new residential construction and substantial remodels.
- Requires applicants for contractor registration to provide additionalinformation and directs the Department of Labor & Industry to establish worker certification requirements in the areas of foundations, framing,siding, roofing, windows, and doors.
- Increases bonding requirements for registered contractors.
Governor Gregoire has said that she'd work to pass the Homeowner's Bill of Rights. Although a version was considered in last year's legislative session, the bill failed to pass, largely through the efforts of the Building Industry Association of Washington.The Washington State Senate passed SB 5895, the 2009 version of the Homeowner's Bill of Rights. The vote was 25 to 24, mostly split along party lines. Our own senator, Tim Sheldon, voted against the bill.
The primary component of SB 5895 is a warranty that requires builders to stand behind their work for several years, giving buyers of new single family homes the assurance that if a defect is discovered, the builder will be coming back to fix it.
Courts have ruled that Washington law doesn't permit homeowners to recover damages if something goes wrong with their home, which allows unscrupulous builders to completely escape accountability.
Andrew Villeneuve, founder of the Northwest Progressive Institute, writing for RedmondReporter.com, described the situation like this:
State law currently affords a family greater protection against a defective car or toaster it does for a new home. It sounds outrageous. And to those families whose savings have been wiped out, to those parents who have lost the ability to pay for their kids to go to college, and to those children whose safety has been at risk because they were living in unsafe homes, it is outrageous.
Other components of SB 5895 include:
- Creation of implied statutory warranties and requires third-party inspections for new residential construction and substantial remodels.
- Requires applicants for contractor registration to provide additionalinformation and directs the Department of Labor & Industry to establish worker certification requirements in the areas of foundations, framing,siding, roofing, windows, and doors.
- Increases bonding requirements for registered contractors.
Governor Gregoire has said that she'd work to pass the Homeowner's Bill of Rights. Although a version was considered in last year's legislative session, the bill failed to pass, largely through the efforts of the Building Industry Association of Washington.
Here's a summary of the pros and cons of this bill, based on public testimony, as compiled by legislative staffers:
PRO: Condo buyers have four-year statutory warranties, unlike single-family residences. As a matter of public policy, they should be treated the same. There are limited legal remedies in Washington for homeowners, which is why these protections are needed. Current warranties are not helpful, almost never enforced, and often you have to bring an action within one year of possession. Oregon has law to recover from any negligent contract, but our state doesn’t allow that. Insurance costs will not kill the industry, as demonstrated by the healthy condo market. In the end, both homeowners and contractors will benefit by the bill as the quality of the product increases. Although some homeowners do due diligence by checking into a contractor's record with L&I, this wasn't helpful in the end because the contractor did business under a different name or litigation against the contractor wasn't revealed. Consumers need more information.
CON: This is a bad bill because of insurance requirements. Builders will not be able to get insurance, even those who never had a claim against them. This would be bad for the economy. Most builders build less than ten homes a year and the requirements under this bill will put them out of business. Oregon has a construction board to resolve disputes, we should look at that model. The bond rate is too high. There are stamping requirements (building envelope) which creates an issue for single-family homes. Litigation needs finality so fraud should be limited to six years. HB 1393 is more practical and insurable.
March 31 Update: From the Northwest Progressive Institute, we read that "Last week, the House Judiciary Committee decided to kill Senate Bill 5895". This morning, the Labor, Commerce & Consumer Protection Committee, chaired by Senator Jeanne Kohl Welles (D-36th District), inserted some language that may virtually bring this back, from the brink of death.
"Gone are the express warranties. Instead, there's a solid statutory warranty (which was at the heart of Senator Tom's SB 5895) that can't be waived, modified, or disclaimed. It's a guarantee of safe home construction that homeowners and builders alike will be able to bank on for years to come."
Some local residents came together, earlier this week, to discuss ways in which public transportation options into our area might be improved. Among the steps discussed were the creation of a part-and-ride and service by Intercity Transit, between the peninsula and points in West and Downtown Olympia. Until such time as there are better transit services, however, there are existing options about which residents here might not be aware.
