Dear Senator Davis and Representative Herbkersman,
This letter concerns consumer protection laws in South Carolina.
Here at Sun City Hilton Head there have been several widespread instances of shoddy construction. These include:
* roof truss connections
* failed retaining wall
* stormwater lagoons
* leaking roofs
These instances are described in detail at http://peretired.blogspot.com/.
The builder here, Pulte Homes, has a binding arbitration clause in their sales contracts, which in itself is unfriendly to consumers. Taking the shoddy stucco as a case in point, several hundred homeowners here have retained The Chakeris Law Firm in Charleston to represent them in their defective stucco claims. The first claim, the Oros case, has been decided fully in the favor of the plaintiffs (http://www.islandpacket.com/news/local/story/676781.html).
Chakeris’ website, that is devoted to the stucco claims (http://www.suncityblufftonhomedefectclaims.com/index.asp), states that, according to South Carolina law, those wishing to take action against the builder must do so within three years, or their right to take legal action expires. This is consumer unfriendly. As you know, latent construction defects can take years to surface.
The Nevada Supreme Court recently ruled that even owners of re-sales have the right to sue builders for shoddy construction defects (http://www.lvbusinesspress.com/articles/2008/10/13/news/iq_24385054.txt). This is consumer friendly.
Is South Carolina a consumer-friendly state, or is South Carolina a consumer-unfriendly state? Do South Carolina laws favor builders, or do they provide “an equal playing field” where consumers have a “fair footing” with builders in getting their grievances resolved? Will the South Carolina legislature pass laws to bring South Carolina “in line” with other more consumer-friendly states?
I will appreciate your attention to this matter, and your response to this letter. I am available to meet with you at your convenience to speak with you further about this matter.