LV homeowners give Carson City an earful on bill

Friday, March 26, 1999 | 11:02 a.m.

CARSON CITY -- A bill that would provide recourse for homeowners with construction defects will die unless opposing sides compromise soon, the chairman of the Assembly Judiciary Committee warned Thursday during a 90-minute hearing before packed rooms in Carson City and Las Vegas.

Chairman Bernie Anderson, D-Sparks, issued the warning during tense testimony. At one time, he warned the Las Vegas audience to refrain from outbursts or they would be removed from the hearing room in the Sawyer State Office Building.

Many of those attending in Las Vegas were homeowners wearing T-shirts with the inscriptions "Go AB442" on one side and "Stop SB286" on the other side.

Senate Bill 286 is the bill sought by insurance companies and contractors to limit suits and damages in these cases. It is before the Senate Commerce and Labor Committee.

Attorneys for both sides have held talks to negotiate a compromise -- so far without success.

Assemblyman Jerry Claborn, D-Las Vegas, told Jim Wadhams, a lawyer for the Southern Nevada Homebuilders, that the present law "does not do the job."

"Are we ever going to get something to protect the homeowner? We want our homes fixed," Claborn said.

Assembly Tom Collins, D-North Las Vegas, said the problem is with the Clark County Building Department. He said the building inspectors survey only 1 to 2 percent of the homes being built.

Collins, a subcontractor, said inspectors ignore structural defects, looking only at electrical, mechanical and plumbing fixtures. In addition, he said, the county inspectors fail to make sure there are qualified workers on the job.

"The building inspectors are not able to do the job," he said.

During the hearing, the Nevada Trial Lawyers Association showed videotaped statements by four homeowners in Las Vegas and Washoe County detailing the multitude of problems encountered.

Bill Robinson, homeowners association president of the Rancho Santa Fe development in Las Vegas, said it took three years and a lawsuit to get money from contractors to correct leaky roofs, fire code violations, water seepages, faulty foundations and other problems.

Las Vegas attorneys Scott Canepa and David Pursiano, who represent homeowners, said a major section in AB442 requires contractors to participate "in good faith" in any required mediation before a suit can be filed.

"Builders drag the process on, feinting participation. In the end, when the homeowner has thousands of dollars in damages, the developer or builder is offering a dollar," Pursiano said.

Canepa said another major section involves a homeowner who has a health and safety defect. If the contractor doesn't respond in 35-45 days, the homeowner can file suit without going through mediation.

"If the builder doesn't want to play by the rules, the homeowner can get to court quicker," Canepa said.

A third major part of the bill deals with homeowner associations. It would change the law so the statute of limitations on filing suits for construction defects doesn't start to run until the homebuilder turns over control of the development to the homeowners.

The two attorneys said the builder may control the association for three or four years until they sell all units before bowing out of the picture. And this would allow the statute of limitations for suits to begin when the contractor is gone.

Wadhams said the bill by the trial lawyers association would result in complicated suits. It adds a section where homeowners, in certain circumstances, can collect for "emotional distress," something that isn't in the current law.

He cited one case that was filed in 1989 and continues to this day as an example of the drawn-out litigation that exists. This bill, AB442 "accelerates the opportunity for litigation," he said.

Scott Rasmussen, a Las Vegas attorney representing the Nevada Contractors Network, said this bill would spark a proliferation of suits over minor deficiencies and that construction jobs would be lost in Southern Nevada.

"If your goal is to create more lawyer jobs, this is the bill," Rasmussen told the committee.