BILL ANALYSIS
AB 600
Page 1
Date of Hearing: May 8, 2001
ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON JUDICIARY
Darrell Steinberg, Chair
AB 600 (Dutra) - As Introduced: February 22, 2001
SUBJECT : CONSTRUCTION DEFECTS: HOME WARRANTIES FOR
CONSTRUCTION OF RESIDENTIAL PROPERTIES
KEY ISSUES :
1)SHOULD THE LEGISLATURE CREATE A HOME CONSTRUCTION WARRANTY
PROGRAM WITH THE GOAL OF PROTECTING CONSUMERS FROM
CONSTRUCTION DEFECTS IN NEWLY CONSTRUCTED RESIDENTIAL HOMES
AND SPURRING CONSTRUCTION OF AFFORDABLE MULTIFAMILY HOUSING?
2)WILL THE CREATION OF HOME CONSTRUCTION WARRANTIES IN FACT LEAD
TO INCREASED AFFORDABLE HOUSING?
SYNOPSIS
This Bill Creates The California Homebuyer Protection And
Quality Construction Act Of 2002 To Provide For 10-Year Home
Construction Warranties For All New Residential Properties.
This Bill Is Virtually Identical To Legislation This Author
Carried In 1999 And 2000 (AB 1221 And AB 2112, Respectively).
The Author's AB 1221 Died In The Assembly Judiciary Committee,
And AB 2112 Was Stripped Down To Intent Language So That It
Could Proceed To A Conference Committee. Although The
Conference Committee Met Several Times, No Vote Was Taken On The
Measure, And It Died In Conference Without A Conference Report.
The Bill Seeks To Protect Homeowners And Builders From Prolonged
Litigation Over Allegations Of Construction Defects. The Bill
Creates A Process Under The Warranty For Resolution Of
Construction Defects, Which Includes The Following Steps:
Making A Complaint To The Builder, Making A Claim With The
Warranty Administrator, Participating In A "Dispute Resolution
Conference" (Mediation), Judicial Arbitration, And A Trial De
Novo. The Author Believes This Process Will Be Substantially
More Expeditious Than Litigation, And, Unlike Litigation, Will
Result In The Actual Repair Of Construction Defects In The Home.
The Option Of Providing A Home Warranty Is The Builder's. And
AB 600
Page 2
By Purchasing A Home With A Home Warranty, The Homeowner Is
Deemed To Have Waived Any Tort Remedies, Including Negligence,
Strict Liability, Implied Warranties, Or Any Other Common Law
Remedy Other Than For Breach Of Warranty Contract.
Additionally, If The Warranty Provides For It, The Homeowner Is
Also Deemed To Have Waived Any Noncontractual Claims Against Any
Design, Professional, Or Trade Contractors Covered By The
Warranty Who Performed Professional Services Or Works Of
Improvement On The Subject Property.
The Bill Also Eliminates The Prohibition Under Current Law Of
Requiring Homeowners With Construction Defect Claims To Resolve
Their Disputes Through Binding Arbitration.
SUMMARY : Creates the California Homebuyer Protection and
Quality Construction Act of 2002 to provide for 10-year home
construction warranties for residential properties.
Specifically, this bill :
1)Makes the following findings: a) California has a statewide
home building crisis; b) nationally, most of the least
affordable housing markets are in California; c) multifamily
housing, including condominiums and townhouses, has
traditionally been the entry level type of housing designed
for single people, young families, and senior citizens; and d)
Californians need affordable homes that incorporate high
quality construction, and they want to buy from homebuilders
who are able to stand behind their workmanship.
2)Authorizes participating homebuilders to offer home
construction warranties as a condition of the sale of new
residential homes, pursuant to which the homebuilder shall be
responsible for the correction of any construction defect
covered by the warranty. Such warranties shall last for a
minimum of 10 years, with protection under the warranty
beginning on the date of substantial completion of the
residential home to which it applies. The warranty may not be
canceled or changed at any time during the term of the
warranty.
3)Provides that, upon proper notice from the homeowner subject
to a home construction warranty, the homebuilder shall, for
the duration of the period covered by the warranty, be
responsible for the correction of any construction defect
covered by the warranty. Correction of any construction
AB 600
Page 3
defect includes repair, replacement, or payment of reasonable
costs to repair or replace (based on existing construction
codes and standards of construction practice in effect at the
time of original construction), or, at the builder's option,
rebuilding the structure in accordance with the original plans
and specifications or payment of the reasonable market value
of the property (without a reduction for existing construction
defects) plus relocation costs. The choice as between repair,
replacement, or payment is the builder's.
4)Provides that if a homeowner elects to purchase a home subject
to a home construction warranty, "the provisions of that
warranty shall be deemed to be the exclusive election of
recourse by that homeowner and the participating homebuilder
for the claims covered by the warranty. The parties to the
warranty contract are deemed to have waived any tort remedies,
including negligence, strict liability, implied warranties, or
any other common law remedy other than for breach of warranty
contract. . . .The homeowner who is party to the warranty
contract, should the warranty so provide, waives any
noncontractual claims against any design, professional, or
trade contractors covered by the warranty who performed
professional services or works of improvement on the subject
property. This section does not preclude or limit any right
of action for bodily injury, wrongful death, or fraud and
intentional misrepresentation."
5)Defines construction defect, for purposes of this act, as a
defect in design, materials or workmanship that: results from
an act or omission of the builder (or a contractor working for
the builder); occurs during the original construction of the
improvement, or in connection with the warranty repair work;
renders the improvement or some part of it not reasonably fit
for its intended purpose; and materially affects building site
work, substructure, building shell, or building services. The
builder shall be responsible for all physical damage
proximately caused by construction defects covered by the
warranty and for the actual reasonable cost of alternative
shelter expenses during the period of repairs.
6)Provides that for a licensed contractor to participate in this
homebuyer warranty protection program (and offer such
warranties), the contractor must be certified by the
Contractor's State License Board (CSLB). In order to be so
certified, a builder must: a) hold and maintain a valid
AB 600
Page 4
license as a general building contractor; b) provide proof of
an insurance policy providing coverage for the obligations of
the warranty; c) demonstrate proof of administrative capacity
to administer and process complaints and claims (either
in-house, or through contract with an insurance company or
warranty administrator); d) develop and implement a quality
assurance program meeting specified requirements; and e)
provide a summary of any alternative dispute resolution
process to be used under the warranty.
7)Provides that a contractor shall be deemed to be certified if
the CSLB fails to act on a contractor's application within 30
days. The contractor is required to file an annual renewal of
the certification, however, the board is required to renew the
contractor's certification unless the board finds that the
contractor fails to meet any of the above requirements.
8)Provides that any action taken by the CSLB to suspend or
revoke the certification of a contractor to issue such
warranties shall not affect the obligations of the contractor
under any previously issued warranties.
9)Sets forth the following process to seek resolution of
construction defect problems for home buyers under a home
construction warranty:
a) The homeowner registers a complaint. The homebuilder,
warranty administrator, or licensed insurance company is
obligated to acknowledge receipt of an initial nonemergency
complaint within 15 days of receipt.
b) The homebuilder and homeowner schedule a mutually
agreeable time for inspection of the condition.
c) Upon completion of the inspection, and no later than 30
days from receipt of the complaint (unless the parties
mutually agree to an extension of time), the homebuilder is
required to provide a written statement indicating his or
her belief as to whether the condition giving rise to the
complaint is covered by the warranty, and any corrective
action the builder intends to take to resolve the problem.
If the homebuilder determines that the condition is not
covered under the warranty, the written statement shall
describe the process for filing a claim under the warranty
to resolve the dispute.
AB 600
Page 5
d) If a California Home Construction Warranty provides for
alternative dispute resolution to resolve disputes under
the warranty, the method of dispute resolution shall be a
"dispute resolution conference" (which is simply mediation
by another name) with subsequent referral to judicial
arbitration. Appointment of a neutral and impartial
facilitator (for the dispute resolution conference) shall
be accomplished within 60 days from the warranty
administrator's receipt of a written request from a
homeowner to resolve the claim.
e) If the participants cannot reach an agreement during the
dispute resolution conference, the matter is referred to
judicial arbitration. Among the issues to be determined by
the arbitrator is the reasonableness of offers made or
rejected during the dispute resolution conference -
requiring the disclosure of what are otherwise required by
law to be confidential mediation proceedings.
f) Either party unsatisfied with the decision of the
arbitrator may request a trial de novo, on the facts or the
law, after completion of the judicial arbitration.
10)Requires a homebuilder who receives written notice of a
construction defect covered by the warranty which creates an
imminent threat to the health or safety of the residents to
take reasonable steps to correct the defect as soon as
practicable. If the builder fails to correct the defect in a
reasonable time, the homeowner may have the defect corrected
and may recover from the builder the reasonable costs of
repair, attorney's fees and costs, and any other damages
recoverable under any law not inconsistent with the provisions
of this Act.
11)Authorizes any participating homebuilder to offer a warranty,
as a condition of the sale of a new residential home, which
includes a provision to submit all complaints, claims,
disputes, and controversies relating to construction defects,
construction deficiencies, or any and all issues arising from
the construction of the new residential homes, regardless of
the nature of the claim, the injury or damage sustained or the
type of remedy sought, to a dispute resolution conference with
subsequent referral to judicial arbitration.
AB 600
Page 6
12)Permits a home construction warranty to also include a
provision to submit any and all disputes or controversies
regarding scope of coverage under the warranty or breach of
the warranty to a dispute resolution conference, with
subsequent referral to judicial arbitration, as well as any
and all disputes or controversies against a warranty
administrator or insurance company.
13)Limits the recovery of a homeowner or homeowner's association
that unreasonably rejects an offer made by the builder during
the dispute resolution conference or arbitration process to
the reasonable cost of repairs that are necessary to correct
the construction defect and are covered under the warranty,
and necessary attorney's fees and costs incurred before the
offer was rejected. The arbitrator shall determine the
reasonableness of the rejection of an offer of a settlement
made during the dispute resolution conference or arbitration.
14)Provides that if a participating builder fails to make a
reasonable offer during the mediation or arbitration process,
or fails to complete, in a good and workmanlike manner, the
repairs specified in an accepted offer, the limitations on
damages and remedies provided for under this bill shall not
apply. The arbitrator shall determine the reasonableness of an
offer of settlement made during the dispute resolution
conference or arbitration.
15)Provides that a home construction warranty transfers to a
subsequent purchaser with a transfer of title.
16)Prohibits a participating homebuilder, warranty
administrator, or a sales, marketing, or other representative
of the homebuilder, from knowingly misrepresenting the terms
and conditions of a home construction warranty.
17)Fails, despite the assertions relative to the need for
greater multifamily housing (specifically condominiums and
townhouses) and the effect of construction defect litigation
on this type of housing, to limit the home construction
warranties, and concomitant restrictions on seeking legal
redress in the courts, to attached multifamily housing units.
18)Eliminates the provision of existing law which affirmatively
allows parties to bring a court action for construction
AB 600
Page 7
defects, even if there is a binding arbitration provision in
the underlying contract.
EXISTING LAW :
1)Provides, as part of the Davis-Stirling Common Interest
Development Act, for the establishment and regulation of
common interest developments and the homeowner associations
which govern such developments. (Civil Code section 1350. All
further references are to the Civil Code unless otherwise
noted.)
2)Requires a homeowners' association, prior to commencing an
action for damages against a builder of a common interest
development based upon a construction or design defect, to
give written notice to the builder against whom the claim is
made, commencing a mandatory pre-litigation process (known as
the "Calderon process"). (Section 1375.)
3)Provides that the pre-litigation process shall not exceed 90
days, unless the parties stipulate to an extension of that
time period. During this process, the parties shall try to
settle the dispute or attempt to agree to submit it to
alternative dispute resolution. (Section 1375.)
4)Provides that a construction defect action may be brought
against any person who develops real property or performs or
furnishes the design, specifications, surveying, planning,
supervision, testing, or observation of construction or
construction of an improvement to real property. (Code of
Civil Procedure sections 337.1 and 337.15.)
5)Provides that an action based on latent defects (defects not
apparent from a reasonable inspection) in construction must be
brought within 4 years of discovery of the defect (if the
action is based on breach of contract or warranty), but in no
event may such an action be brought more than 10 years after
the date of substantial completion of the development or
improvement. (Code of Civil Procedure sections 337 and
337.15. See e.g. FNB Mortgage Corp. v. Pacific General Group
(1999) 76 Cal.App.4th 1116 and Liptak v. Diane Apartments,
Inc. (1980) 109 Cal.App.3d 762.)
6)Finds that judicial arbitration is an efficient and equitable
method for resolving small claims, and thus requires the court
AB 600
Page 8
in a county with 10 or more superior court judges, in all
civil actions in which the amount in controversy is less than
$50,000, to submit the matter to judicial arbitration. In
smaller courts, the court may provide by local rule, when it
determines that it is in the best interests of justice, that
all civil actions in which the amount in controversy is less
than $50,000 shall be submitted to judicial arbitration. For
civil actions in which the damages exceed $50,000, judicial
arbitration may only be provided upon stipulation of the
parties. However, any action otherwise subject to judicial
arbitration shall be exempt if found by the court not to be
amenable to arbitration on the ground that arbitration would
not reduce the probable time and expense necessary to resolve
the litigation. (Code of Civil Procedure sections 1141.10 and
1141.11, Rule of Court 1600.5.)
7)Specifies various costs that the party requesting the trial de
novo shall be responsible for assuming if the judgment at
trial is not more favorable than the arbitration award for the
party requesting the trial. (Code of Civil Procedure section
1141.21.)
8)Creates a process whereby courts may order parties in a civil
action to mediation, finding that in appropriate cases
mediation provides parties with a simplified and economical
procedure for obtaining prompt and equitable resolution of
their disputes. Such civil action mediation is intended as an
alternative to judicial arbitration, and neither shall be
ordered in cases in which the other is ordered. (Code of
Civil Procedure sections 1775 and 1775.4.)
9)Provides that determinations of a court to send a case to
mediation shall be made after consideration of the expressed
views of the parties on the amenability of the case to
mediation. Amenability of a particular action for mediation
shall be determined on a case-by-case basis, rather than
categorically. (Rule of Court 1631.)
10)Provides that no evidence of anything said or any admission
made for the purpose of, in the course of, or pursuant to, a
mediation is admissible or subject to discovery, and
disclosure of the evidence shall not be compelled in any
arbitration, administrative adjudication, civil action, or
other noncriminal proceeding. All communications,
negotiations, or settlement discussions by and between
AB 600
Page 9
participants in the course of a mediation shall be
confidential. (Evidence Code section 1119.)
11)Provides that home buyers have the right to bring a judicial
action for construction or design defect damages even when the
purchase agreement contains a binding arbitration clause.
(Code of Civil Procedure section 1298.7; Villa Milano
Homeowners Ass'n v. Il Davorge (2000) 84 Cal.App.4th 819.)
FISCAL EFFECT : The bill as currently in print is keyed fiscal.
COMMENTS : In support of the need for this measure, the author
submitted the following statement to the Committee:
The state's existing system for settling construction
disputes depends upon litigation, is time consuming and
costly for consumers and often does not result in actually
repairing the problem. California needs a system that will
allow desperately needed 'smart growth' housing to be built
again. . . .Not only is the current lawsuit-dependent system
inefficient and costly for homeowners, but abuses of this
system have also led to a collapse in the construction of
affordable, land-efficient townhomes and condominiums.
The existing system, dependent upon litigation to resolve
construction disputes, adds to homeowner costs and delays. .
. .All homeowners foot the bill - through higher costs - for
the lawsuit-first system. According to a study conducted by
the University of Southern California, construction defect
lawsuits against homebuilders can increase the cost of the
average home by as much as $68,000. . . .Abuses of the
existing construction dispute system have . . . made
attached condominium and townhouse projects magnets for
class-action lawsuits. Because builders can no longer
afford to insure these projects, the construction of
attached housing units has dropped 84% statewide in the past
five years. . . .
Assembly Bill 600 would give homeowners a choice. . .
.Passage of AB 600 would make it possible for homebuyers to
choose a state-sanctioned ten-year home warranty rather than
the current system that depends largely on costly and time
consuming litigation. Consumers retain their ability to
sue, but would also have alternatives other than litigation
for getting their problems fixed.
AB 600
Page 10
Background . The issue of construction defects, and the proper
remedy for such defects, goes at least as far back in history as
ancient Mesopotamia. In the code of laws governing ancient
Mesopotamia, known as Hammurabi's Code (famous for its "an eye
for an eye, a tooth for a tooth"), the issue was dealt with
rather severely: "If a builder build a house for some one, and
does not construct it properly, and the house which he built
fall in and kill its owner, then that builder shall be put to
death. If it ruin goods, he shall make compensation for all
that has been ruined, and inasmuch as he did not construct
properly this house which he built and it fell, he shall
re-erect the house from his own means." (Code of Laws, Numbers
229 and 232.)
More recently, however, the California Legislature enacted a
less dramatic response, known as the Calderon process (pursuant
to SB 1029 (Calderon), Chapter 864 of the Statutes of 1995), to
require parties to disputes concerning construction or design
defects to engage in a pre-filing process in an attempt to
resolve the dispute without the need for proceeding to court.
Recognizing that there are flaws with the Calderon process,
there have been subsequent efforts to fix the process (AB 594 of
1997 and AB 1950 of 1998, both by then-Assemblyman Torlakson),
but for a variety of political and policy-based reasons, these
efforts have not met with great success.
In 1999 and 2000, Assemblymember Dutra introduced legislation
virtually identical to the pending AB 600 to address
construction defect disputes through the use of home warranties.
AB 1221 of 1999, died in the Assembly Judiciary Committee, and
AB 2112 of 2000 was stripped down to intent language, and
subsequently died in conference without a conference report.
"Voluntary" Nature of the Bill's Warranty . The author notes
that this bill "give[s] homeowners a choice." However, the
choice of whether to offer a home for sale with a warranty or
not is the builder's, not the homeowner's. The homeowner's only
choice is to "vote with his feet," by not purchasing a home that
requires a home warranty. To the extent the use of such
warranties becomes widespread, the choice of homes not subject
to home warranties may be negligible. The bill in fact appears
to give the builder not just a choice of whether to require a
home warranty, but also a choice as to what types of defects
will be covered by the warranty.
AB 600
Page 11
Existing "Lawsuit-Dependent" System . The author comments that
the existing system for resolution of construction defect
disputes is dependent upon lawsuits and recourse to the courts.
The Calderon process described above, however, requires parties,
before any lawsuit is allowed to be filed (with regard to
construction or design defects in common interest developments
of 20 or more units), to engage in a pre-filing process during
which the parties are expected to try to settle the dispute
without the need for court intervention. This pre-litigation
process is unique to construction defect law, and seeks to
encourage expeditious resolution of construction defect claims
and to avoid the "lawsuit dependent system." This process was
enacted into law in 1995. It is well understood that there are
problems with the Calderon process, but the identified problems
appear to be solvable. It is this precise issue that the Chair
of this Committee is tackling with his AB 267, scheduled to be
heard in Committee on the same day as the pending measure. AB
267 (Steinberg) is the combined work product of the California
Building Industry Association, the Home Ownership Advancement
Foundation (a consortium of major builders in the State of
California) and the Consumer Attorneys of California.
Rather than attempt to fix deficiencies in the Calderon process,
however, this bill seeks to creates an intricate parallel
process for resolving construction defect disputes. What this
measure does is allow a builder to require a homeowner to
purchase a home warranty and be restricted to the complaint
resolution procedures under the warranty, or to allow the
Calderon process to control the resolution of construction
defect disputes. The Committee may believe that developing two
alternative approaches is unnecessary, and that a better course
of action would be to seek to improve the identified problems
with the Calderon process.
Broad Application to All Residential Housing . The primary
asserted rationale for the creation of home construction
warranties and the concomitant restriction on the ability of
homeowners to bring a construction defect action in court is
that, despite the great need for condominiums and townhouses,
the construction of this type of housing has declined, and the
cause of the decline is construction defect litigation. The
bill is premised on the need for quality affordable housing, and
asserts that this means multifamily housing, specifically
condominiums and townhouses. However, the bill has a much
AB 600
Page 12
greater reach, applying to all residential homes, multifamily
and single family, attached and detached units. Unfortunately,
the author's office has not provided the Committee with any
evidence suggesting that decreases in the single family housing
market that may exist are caused by construction defect
litigation and thus that such a dramatic reduction in the rights
of home owners to seek redress in court is warranted.
Effect of the Warranty Process on the Timeliness of the
Resolution of Construction Defect Disputes . One of the stated
primary goals of this legislation is to provide the homeowner
with an expedited method to resolve construction defect
disputes. However, it is uncertain whether the warranty
process created by this bill will in fact have the desired
effect. One of the primary criticisms of the current Calderon
process (intended to provide for a quicker resolution of
construction defect disputes) is that the process takes too
long.
Unfortunately, the home construction warranty program created
pursuant to this legislation may suffer from the same
deficiencies as the Calderon process. The bill allows the
parties to "mutually agree" to an extension of time for the
builder to respond whether a complaint of a defect alleged by a
homeowner is covered under the home warranty. There is no
maximum time period contained in the bill for the required
mediation of the dispute. The bill only provides that the
facilitator shall be appointed within 60 days from the warranty
administrator's receipt of a written request for dispute
resolution. Continuances are similarly allowed in cases
referred to judicial arbitration. And since both parties, the
builder and the homeowner, are entitled to request a trial de
novo after the arbitration award is handed down, the builder has
the ability to prolong the process in order to seek a resolution
more favorable to him or her.
Another concern with the Calderon process was its failure to
include all necessary stakeholders - including subcontractors,
materials suppliers, design professionals and insurers - early
in the process. This measure would seem to suffer from the same
deficiency. Without participation of these players, a
homeowner's attempts to fix a defect may arguably be stymied
because the party the builder deems responsible for the flaw is
not present during the process.
AB 600
Page 13
California Research Bureau Finds No Clear Link Between
Litigation, Increased Insurance Costs, and Supply of Affordable
Housing . At the request of the Assembly Housing & Community
Development and Judiciary Committees, and in preparation for the
December 1999 interim hearing on this author's AB 1221 of 1999,
the California Research Bureau did a preliminary study on the
issue of construction defect litigation and its effect on access
to affordable multifamily housing. (See California Research
Bureau, Construction Defect Litigation and the Condominium
Market , November 1999. Hereafter CRB Report.) The CRB Report
suggests a lack of evidence demonstrating the causal link
between construction defect litigation and a decrease in access
to affordable multifamily housing. The CRB Report notes that
although there is "little dispute that the [condominium] market
has declined . . . [t]he exact extent and causes of the decline
are hard to measure ." (Emphasis added.) The CRB Report notes
that "real estate professionals state that construction of
condominiums largely tracks the overall real estate market." A
study of the market over time shows "a pronounced boom during
the 1980s, fueled in part by favorable tax treatment that was
enacted in 1981. The boom ended in part because of a reversal
of the favorable tax laws and overbuilding in many markets. The
strong real estate market led to an increase in the price of
homes."
The CRB further notes that "[w]hile it is clear that the
condominium market has stagnated, it is not clear what is the
cause." The CRB offers the following among the possible causes:
construction defect litigation; the overall conditions in the
real estate market brought about by overbuilding in the 1980s
followed by a severe and prolonged recession in California;
opposition to new projects by existing neighborhood residents;
reluctance on the part of lenders, and their regulators, to
finance condominiums because of earlier loan losses; increased
affordability of singe-family homes in the 1990s due to falling
prices; and preference of home buyers for single-family detached
homes. In fact, the CRB Report notes that "as the market is
resurging and homes become less affordable, demand for condos is
starting to improve. . . . The beginnings of a resurgence in the
condo market would tend to bolster the arguments that
construction defect litigation has not seriously harmed the
market ." (Emphasis added.)
Binding Arbitration for Resolution of Construction Defect
Claims . Current law imposes specific notice requirements on
AB 600
Page 14
contracts to convey real property which contain provisions
requiring the settlement of disputes through binding
arbitration. (See Code of Civil Procedure section 1298.)
However, the code also provides that, notwithstanding any
binding arbitration provision in such a contract, an individual
has a right to go to a judicial forum for actions for bodily
injury or wrongful death, or for construction defect claims.
(Code of Civil Procedure section 1298.7.)
In November of 2000, the court confirmed the meaning of this
provision: "Code of Civil Procedure section 1298.7 provides
home buyers the right to bring a judicial action for
construction or design defect damages even when the purchase
agreement contains a binding arbitration clause. " ( Villa
Milano Homeowners Ass'n v. Il Davorge 84 Cal. App.4th 819, 822.)
The court went on to lament that homeowners were being forced
to resolve such disputes by binding arbitration: "It's a sad
commentary of the American justice system that we are farming
everything out of the courts through A.D.R., through arbitration
clauses and . . . if this is a matter of freedom of choice
rather than scarce resources then fine. But this certainly is a
contract of adhesion. When somebody buys a house, they
certainly don't expect that buried . . . is an innocuous little
provision: 'If you have a problem with the developer, by the
way, you don't get your right to a trial. You have to go to
arbitration.'" (84 Cal.App.4th at 824, n.3, quoting the trial
court decision.)
This bill however deletes from existing law the provision
prohibiting a homebuyer from being compelled to resolve
construction defect disputes through binding arbitration.
REGISTERED SUPPORT / OPPOSITION :
Support
Job-Center Housing Coalition (sponsor)
Advocacy Coalition for Long Beach
Alliance of American Insurers
American Association of Business Persons with Disabilities
American GI Forum of the Unites States
Ameristar Financial Services, Inc.
Apartment Association, California Southern Cities
Bay Area Urban League, Inc.
AB 600
Page 15
BRIDGE Housing Corporation
Bronce & Associates
Building Industry Association of Tulare/Kings Counties, Inc.
Building Industry Association, Greater Los Angeles/Ventura
Chapter
Building Industry Association, Orange County Chapter
California Business Properties Association
California Chamber of Commerce
California Landscape Contractors Association
California Manufacturers & Technology Association
Century Vintage Homes
Cervantes Trucking
Citizens Against Lawsuit Abuse of Los Angeles
Civil Justice Association of California
Community Home Builders and Associates
Consumer Coalition of California
Council for the Spanish Speaking
Countrywide Home Loans
Del Webb's Sun City Palm Desert
Diverse Strategies for Organizing
East Los Angeles Community Union
Filipino-American Service Group, Inc.
Greater Los Angeles African American Chamber of Commerce
Greenbriar Home Communities, Inc.
Hispanic Chamber of Commerce of Sonoma County
Home Builders Association of the Central Coast
Home Builders Association of Northern California
JWD & Associates
Latin Business LEADERS Association
Latino Chamber of Commerce of Santa Cruz County
Mexican American Opportunity Foundation
Midland Pacific Building Corporation
NAACP Stockton Branch Economic Development Committee
Orange County Citizens Against Lawsuit Abuse
Orange County Business Council
Pajaro Valley Association of Mexican American Educators
ProTec Building Services, Inc.
Professional Insurance Agents Group
Roofing Contractors Association of California
Saint Vincent De Paul
San Benito County Hispanic Chamber of Commerce
San Diego Regional Chamber of Commerce
San Francisco Chamber of Commerce
San Jose Silicon Valley Chamber of Commerce
Silicon Valley Citizens Against Lawsuit Abuse
AB 600
Page 16
Silicon Valley Manufacturing Group
Small Business Survival Committee
Standard Pacific Homes
The Corky McMillin Companies
Tonique's Total Works
Valley Industry and Commerce Association
Ventura Affordable Homes, Inc.
Zerimar Corporation
One Individual
Opposition
American Association of Retired Persons
Aqua Restoration
Avalon at Eagle's Crossing Homeowners Association
Barr & Clark Environmental
California League of Conservation Voters
California Nurses Association
Center for Community Action and Environmental Justice
Chicano Consortium
Chicano-Latino Caucus of the Democratic Party
City of Santa Monica
Coalition for Clean Air
Community Alliance for Stability and Health Economics
Community Associations Institute
Congress of California Seniors
Consumer Attorneys of California
Consumer Federation of California
El Concilio del Condado de Ventura
Evergreen Democratic Club at the Villages
Executive Council of Homeowners
Fair Housing Council of San Gabriel Valley
Foundation for Taxpayer and Consumer Rights
Gray Panthers L.A. West Network
Gray Panthers of El Cerrito
Gray Panthers of Sacramento
Gray Panthers of West Contra Cost County
Home Safe Campaign
Homeowners Against Deficient Dwellings, Inc.
Homeowners for Better Building
Imfeld and Imfeld Property Management
League of United Latin American Citizens
Los Angeles Coalition to End Hunger and Homelessness
Los Angeles County Department of Health Services, Toxics
Epidemiology Program
AB 600
Page 17
National Latino Real Estate Association
National Lawyers Guild, San Francisco Bay Area Chapter
Neighbor to Neighbor
Ohlone Student Health Center
Older Women's League of California
Pacoima Beautiful
People's Community Organization for Reform and Empowerment
Philippine Action Group for the Environment
Physicians for Social Responsibility
Prominence Homeowners of Hayward, CA
Sacramento Housing Alliance
Sober Living Network
South Central Los Angeles Ministry Project
Southern California Health and Housing Council
Strategic Actions for a Just Economy
The League of California Homeowners
Venice Community Housing Corporation
Westside Fair Housing Council
7 Individuals
Analysis Prepared by : Donna S. Hershkowitz / JUD. / (916)
319-2334