Relating to home inspectors; to add Section 34-14B-11 to the Code of Alabama 1975, to provide a limitation period on actions against licensed home inspectors; and to amend Section 34-14B-3, Code of Alabama 1975, to provide legislative intent.
The legislation fundamentally alters the landscape for civil claims against home inspectors, emphasizing the need for timely reporting and resolution of claims. It addresses concerns about the growing number of lawsuits against inspectors, which some argue have made home inspection a high-risk profession. Proponents of the bill believe that by setting clear boundaries on liability, the law will help stabilize the market for home inspection services and encourage more individuals to enter the profession, ultimately benefiting homeowners who need reliable inspection services.
House Bill 118 proposes significant legal reforms concerning home inspectors in Alabama. The bill establishes a two-year limitation on civil actions related to home inspections, stipulating that complaints regarding defects or deficiencies in inspections must be made within two years of discovery. This time limit aims to provide clarity and predictability for home inspectors, potentially reducing the risk of prolonged legal disputes. Additionally, the bill introduces a maximum of seven years for any claims against home inspectors from the delivery of an inspection report, barring claims made beyond this period unless the inspector had prior knowledge of any defects.
Despite its intentions, HB 118 has sparked debate among stakeholders. Critics argue that the seven-year cap on liability could disadvantage consumers who discover significant defects long after the inspection. They express concerns that this might shield inspectors from accountability for serious oversights and diminish the quality of inspections. Additionally, the clarification about not disfavoring limitation clauses in contracts could lead to increased use of such clauses, potentially undermining consumer protections that are historically available in such transactions. Advocates for consumer rights fear these changes could tilt the balance of power too far in favor of inspectors.