USEFUL INFORMATION
|
J. Randolph Given
|
LEGAL PITFALLS FOR HOME REPAIR AND REMODELING |
|
The Home Repair and Remodeling Acts requires all home improvement and repair contractors
to provide a copy of a specific brochure that is contained verbatim in that statute: Any person engaging in the business of home repair and remodeling shall provide to ts customers a copy of the "Home Repair: Know Your Consumer Rights" pamphlet prior to the execution of any home repair and remodeling contract. . . . 815 ILCS 513/20 For any contract of more than $1,000, the contractor must provide the brochure and obtain from the homeowner a signed receipt for the brochure. The statute provides language for the receipt. Even handymen are affected. I am finding many tradesmen are not familiar with this requirement. Under the most consumer oriented interpretation of the Act, giving the brochure and obtaining the receipt are a condition precedent of the contractor's right to recover for his work on an owner-occupied residence. Such an interpretation would turn the shield of this Act into a sword for the homeowner. The unscrupulous homeowner could contract for work, accept all of the benefits of a job done in a good and workmanlike manner, and then refuse payment. His would argue that the contractor had not satisfied a condition of his right to compensation by failing to provide the brochure or to obtain a receipt in proper statutory form. RETURN TO: Useful News Index RETURN TO: Web Site COPYRIGHT 2007 |
Although I doubt that such a harsh and unjust interpretation ultimately will
prevail in our courts, no contractor wants to buy a lawsuit, especially if
the judgment is likely to have to be taken up to the Appellate Court. The Act's second problem arises from language required to be contained the contract for home repair or remodeling. A contract for over $1,000 must state the total cost, including parts and materials listed with reasonable particularity and any charge for an estimate, 815 ILCS 513/15. The contractor must be concerned about whether his contract spells out the cost of materials and labor with reasonable particularity. In the construction business, contractors do not customarily spell out these component costs in any detail, even if the contractor uses sophisticated cost estimation software in preparing his bids. To do so falsely implies that there is a direct relationship between the costs of materials and labor for each part of the job and the overall cost of the job. On a project of decent size that relationship does not exist. If the contractor is able to build a portion of the project for less than his projected costs for the element, a homeowner might expect the savings to accrue to him rather than to the builder. The same homeowner however does not expect to pay more for a cost overrun on another element. I have encountered this problem recently. Hopefully, the Courts will focus upon the term "reasonably" as they interpret the requirements for contracts under the Act. As usual, the courts need to clean up what the mess created by the legislature, which did not take much care in the drafting of its legislation. NOTHING CONTAINED IN THIS ARTICLE IS LEGAL ADVICE: IMPORTANT DISCLAIMER |