Category: Uncategorized

The Colorado Court of Appeals recently issued new guidance on the notice of claim process and statute of limitations under the Colorado Construction Defect Action Reform Act, C.R.S. §§ 13-20-801 et seq. (“CDARA”).

In Curry v. Zag Built, LLC, 2018COA66, the Court of Appeals addressed, among other issues, the effects of filing a case before completing the notice of claim process required under CDARA. The Court of Appeals held the notice of claim process is not a prerequisite to filing a case in court. The court further held that when applying CDARA’s stay provision, a case commences when the plaintiff files the complaint.

Zag Built, LLC built the Currys’ home in July 2013. By January 2014, the Currys noticed damage to the home including drywall cracks and racked or sagging doors. The Currys filed suit in June 2015, but did not initially serve their claims on Zag Built.

The Currys filed a status report with the trial court in September 2015 stating they filed their complaint to preserve the statute of limitations, they retained an expert to investigate the claims, and requested additional time to engage in the notice of claim process. Without response from the trial court, the Currys filed an updated status report in March 2016 stating their expert completed the investigation, they would continue pursuing the notice of claim process, and they would serve Zag Built within 90 days if the notice of claim process proved futile.

In mid-May 2016, the Currys again updated the trial court stating they had sent notices of claim, but Zag Built had not requested an inspection. The Currys filed an amended complaint in conjunction with the status report and then served Zag Built in late May 2016.

In July 2017, Zag Built filed a motion for summary judgment alleging the statute of limitations had run on the Curry’s claims because they had not complied with CDARA’s notice of claim process within two years of their claims having accrued. Zag Built also argued the Curry’s complaint filed in June 2015 did not commence the case for purposes of a stay under CDARA because Zag Built was not served the June 2015 complaint.

The trial court denied the motion holding the Curry’s claims were automatically stayed under CDARA until the notice of claim process was completed. Completion of the notice of claim process was determined by the trial court to have occurred in mid-April 2016 after the notice of claim was sent to Zag Built and Zag Built had not requested inspection. The trial court also held the Curry’s claims were not time-barred because they filed their complaint within the two-year statute of limitations. The Colorado Court of Appeals affirmed the trial court’s decision.

The basis of Zag Built’s argument was that the notice of claim process is both a prerequisite to filing a claim in court and the only way to toll the statute of limitations under CDARA. Zag Built argued the statute of limitations did not stop running because the notice of claim process had not been completed, even though a complaint was filed. Thus, because the Currys filed their complaint before completing the notice of claim process, Zag Built argued the statute of limitations continued to run on their claims. By the time the Currys completed the notice of claim process in January 2016, Zag Built argued more than two years had passed since the Currys first noticed damage in January 2014 and the statute of limitations barred their claims.

Notably, the Court of Appeals decided that § 13-20-803.5(9) creates an automatic stay that prevents litigation from progressing until the court lifts the stay. The stay is mandatory and applies to all aspects of a case, including the Currys’ obligation to serve Zag Built. The case resumes where it left off once the stay is lifted.

The opinion discusses two important distinctions regarding procedure in construction defect cases. First, the Court of Appeals stated the automatic stay began when the Currys filed a status report notifying the trial court the notice of claim process had not been completed. Practically speaking, the opinion suggests the parties can simply notify the trial court that the mandatory stay applies while the parties complete the notice of claim process. Therefore, counsel arguably does not need to request a stay by filing a motion but can merely notify the court the mandatory stay is engaged. If the trial court does not respond with a position on the stay, it is reasonable for counsel to inform the court after the notice of claim process is completed to effectively end the stay and resume the case.

Second, the Court of Appeals stated the notice of claim process can be shortened from the prescribed statutory timeframes. Zag Built had thirty days to inspect the subject property upon service of the notice of claim pursuant to § 13-20-803.5(2). Because Zag Built did not request an inspection, the Court of Appeals says the notice of claim process ended at the expiration of Zag Built’s statutory time to request the inspection. Therefore, CDARA’s established 75-day timeframe (90-days for commercial properties) to complete the notice of claim process can arguably be ended by the parties. Under this rationale, a contractor who receives a notice of claim can then immediately terminate the process.

The opinion supports plaintiff’s counsel who have time constraints by allowing them to file their complaint to preserve the statute of limitations and then investigate their claims. What remains unknown is how courts will treat CDARA’s automatic stay for claims filed to preserve the statute of limitations by, for example, setting forth time limits on the stay or requiring parties to file regular status updates. What also remains is how the notice of claim process will be affected by the actions of one party to prematurely end a statutorily prescribed timeframe.

 

Attorney Tessa R. DeVault represented Johnson Law by attending the 41^st Annual Colorado Women’s Bar Association’s (“CWBA”) “Wonder Women” Convention in Vail, Colorado. Tessa is a proud member of the CWBA’s Mountain Chapter for attorneys who live or work in Eagle, Summit, Lake, Clear Creek, Garfield, Pitkin, and Park Counties. Johnson Law proudly serves all of Colorado’s communities from the Western Slope to the Front Range with offices in Edwards, Denver, and Louisville.  Attending legal conventions connects our attorneys to the legal networks needed to provide excellent services to our clients across the state.

This year’s CWBA Convention focused on the big and small ways women lawyers are superheroes to their clients and their communities. Diversity and Inclusiveness were strong themes throughout the programming that spanned over three days of lectures, roundtable discussions, and workshops.

Keynote speaker Ms. Paulette Brown addressed the audience on the topic of Champions and Mindset Power. Paulette was the first woman of color to lead the American Bar Association in its 137-year history and is a nationally recognized leader and top lawyer.

Her keynote address identified the female attorney as the “24-hour woman” – one who balances the challenges of being a lawyer, the demands in maintaining a home life, and serves as a leader within her community. Paulette shared her successes in forming the American Bar Association’s Diversity and Inclusion 360 Commission, which effectuates policies aimed at dismantling barriers to inclusion and diversity while economically empowering diverse attorneys. Other highlights from her presentation were when she reminded the group that well-behaved women rarely make history, and she challenged women attorneys to identify where they want to be in history, what they want their contribution to be within the justice system, and then to write down their personal and professional plans in order to achieve them. The presentation ended with Paulette telling the group to “own your greatness.”

Following the inspiring work of Paulette was Denver’s own Dr. Nita Mosby Tyler. Dr. Mosby Tyler founded The Equity Project, LLC – an organization designed to support organizations and communities in building diversity, equity, and inclusion strategies. Her presentation was entitled: Using Your Power: Incorporating Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion into Everyday Life. The presentation started by identifying the phenomenon of “diversity fatigue” – feelings of exhaustiveness from discussing diversity.

Dr. Mosby Tyler presented on the differences between equity, diversity, and inclusiveness by describing equity as the umbrella of everything we are doing. Equity is the creation of systems where everyone can thrive and people have what they need. Diversity is the richness and beauty of the differences between all of us. Inclusion is an intentional action of what you do with diversity. Inclusion should be a win/win for all involved. Attorneys carry the responsibility and power to include those who are otherwise socially excluded. The strongest leaders are those who have expertise and mutual respect for others. Dr. Mosby Tyler ended her presentation by challenging the group to take responsibility to be the crafters of new doors that lead to equity.

The CWBA’s mission is to promote women in the legal profession and the interests of women generally. The Colorado Construction Attorneys at Johnson Law are involved in many organizations that provide a strong network of resources and connections for all types of legal issues. Johnson Law is proud to be part of a legal community serving the diverse interests of Coloradoans throughout the state.

For more information on the Colorado Women’s Bar Association or any of the speakers mentioned, please contact Tessa DeVault at [email protected].

Arbitration is a form of alternative dispute resolution that is agreed upon by the parties. Instead of bringing a case into the state or federal courts, parties may agree to select a third-party neutral to determine the outcome of their dispute. An agreement to arbitrate is often a contractual obligation. We often see this at our firm in the form of builder contracts that include an arbitration clause. The typical builder arbitration clause requires the parties to submit all disputes to arbitration regardless if it is a payment dispute, breach of contract, construction defect, fraud, CCPA, or other claims.  However, parties may agree to arbitrate a dispute independent of a contract.

Arbitration is different from the court system is several ways. Arbitration can be faster and cheaper, but the arbitration decision is final. Colorado courts encourage and favor agreements to arbitrate. Lane v. Urgitus, 145 P.3d 672 (Colo. 2006). Arbitration tends to be less formal than court and can be tailored to the needs of individual cases.

First, the parties select their arbiter, the person who will decide the case. Arbiters are often other lawyers or retired judges, but the parties are not restricted to selecting an arbiter within the legal profession. Several arbitration groups exist like the Judicial Arbiter Group (JAG) and the American Arbitration Association (AAA). This means there is no jury; only the arbiter (or sometimes a panel of arbiters) decides the dispute.

Another major difference between arbitration and court is that the parties must pay for the arbiter’s time. A state or federal court judge is not a private entity and serves the public and all cases that fall within the court’s jurisdiction.

Even though the parties must pay for the arbitration, the total cost of an arbitration can be less expensive than a court case. There are generally fewer trial days and appearances with the arbiter before trial, and therefore, less attorney fees. Arbitration also reduces costs because there are no juries and attorneys present the case to the arbiter who is already familiar with the subject matter of the dispute.

A case brought in arbitration can generally be resolved quicker than cases brought before a court judge. One reason is arbiters handle less cases than judges, and therefore, have more flexibility to schedule trial. Another reason is the parties and the arbiter can decide the rules they would like to follow. For court cases, there are specific and strict rules for case deadlines and obligations of the parties. In arbitration, the parties may elect the deadlines and obligations of the parties that are best suited for their individual case. For example, AAA has different types of arbitrations with different rules. https://www.adr.org/Rules

Last, but not least, one of the most important distinctions between arbitration and the court system is that the arbiter’s decision is final and non-appealable. For example, a court decision or jury verdict can be appealed to a higher court allowing one party to argue an error occurred that rendered the outcome incorrect. Overturning an arbitration award is difficult. An arbiter’s final decision can be vacated upon a court order, including, but not limited to, the award resulted from corruption or fraud; there was misconduct by the arbiter; a party’s rights were substantially prejudiced. C.R.S. § 13-22-223.

This blog post goes over the generalities of arbitration, but each arbitration provision is different, and sometimes the arbitration provision in your contract may be unenforceable or void. If you have specific questions about arbitration or any legal matter, Johnson Law’s attorneys are available to discuss your case with you and we look forward to hearing from you.

Those who find themselves facing defects in the construction of their home are often upset with their circumstances. Many of our clients have expressed anger, discomfort, and disruption of their daily lives due to damages caused by construction defects. In Colorado, homeowners are able to request compensation for these inconveniences – these are typically known as noneconomic damages.

Colorado law allows a person who owns property affected by construction defects to recover monetary damages for “inconvenience, emotional stress, and impairment of the quality of life.”[1] These damages extend to co-owners of property, even those who may not live at the property on a full-time basis.

This issue was addressed by the Colorado Court of Appeals in Hildebrand v. New Vista Homes, II, LLC.[2] The case required the court to consider whether or not an out-of-state co-owner of property could be awarded noneconomic damages. The court held that a father who co-owned a residence with his son could recover noneconomic damages even though his presence at the home was intermittent.[3]

The case involved damage to a brand-new home resulting from basement floor movement. The co-owner son testified that he was inconvenienced because his home was an investment and his sanctuary, and he became angry and sleepless after discovering the damage.[4] The co-owner father also testified he was inconvenienced by the damage when he would periodically visit his son and stay in the home because he had tripped over unlevel stairs leading to the basement, the damages prevented him from finishing the basement, and he could not use a pool table and ping-pong table that he had purchased to use in the basement.[5]

The Hildebrand court held that an award of noneconomic damages for both the son and father were appropriate under Colorado law because both owned the affected property.[6] Specifically, the court held that the out-of-state father’s right to occupy the property entitled him the right to recover inconvenience damages to the extent he occupied the house during his visits.[7]

If you have construction defects, you may be entitled to several different types of damages including personal injury damages and other noneconomic damages. Call Johnson Law today to discuss your circumstances and explore available solutions.

[1] C.R.S. § 13-21-102.5(2)(b).

[2] 252 P.3d 1159 (Colo. App. 2010).

[3] 252 P.3d at 1172-1173.

[4] Hildbrand, 252 P.3d at 1171.

[5] Id. at 1172.

[6] Id. at 1172-1173.

[7] Id. at 1173.

The language of law can seem foreign for those that find themselves involved in a legal dispute. Johnson Law specializes in litigation: bringing our clients’ claims into the legal system for resolution. But what does that really mean? Below you will find an overview of what can be expected during litigation.

Litigation is the legal process that occurs when people or companies make claims or complaints against other people or companies in court or other forums, such as arbitration. Litigation often occurs when the parties disagree as to the scope, severity, and appropriate outcome of their dispute, which requires a neutral third party (like judges, juries, or arbitrators) to resolve the dispute for them. There are four basic phases to a lawsuit: procedural, discovery, trial, and post-judgment.[1]

1^st Phase: Procedural

The first phase is procedural, meaning the attorneys and clients work together to put the case together and present their dispute to the court. This phase is where litigation is started by filing a complaint in the court. A complaint is a legal document that outlines the facts and legal claims of the dispute. The party bringing the claims is called the Plaintiff. Once the complaint is filed, the Plaintiff must serve their complaint on the other party. The other party is called the Defendant and service of the complaint is required to put the Defendant on notice the legal process has begun. The Defendant then answers the complaint or files motions to get the case dismissed.

Assuming the case is not dismissed and the Defendant files an answer, the parties work with the court to determine procedural aspects of the case including setting various case deadlines and picking a date for trial. During this phase, the Plaintiff and Defendant each collect and exchange information about the dispute. This process is called disclosure. Disclosures are the exchange of information between the parties, including all relevant documents, pictures, texts, emails, contracts, agreements, etc. as well as identifying people who may know something about the dispute. The parties have an ongoing obligation to disclose relevant information throughout the life of the case.

2^nd Phase: Discovery

The second phase is discovery. Once the parties have disclosed the information they have about the dispute, each side gets to investigate the other party’s claims and/or defenses through formal discovery.

Most commonly, the tools of discovery are depositions, written discovery, site inspections, and expert disclosures. Depositions are questions asked by the other party during a face-to-face meeting that is written down (transcribed). Written discovery means questions asked in written form. There are three main components of written discovery: interrogatories (written questions about the case); requests for production of documents or things (asking one party to hand over or disclose additional documents or things that have not yet been shared); and requests for admissions (asking one party to admit a specific fact).

For construction cases, site inspections are an important part of the process because it allows the parties to view and experience the construction that is in dispute. Site inspections are also important for the parties’ experts in forming their opinions as to what went wrong and how much it will cost to fix it. Expert disclosures are where each party’s expert shares his/her opinions with the other party on what caused and who is at fault in the dispute.

3^rd Phase: Trial

The third phase of litigation is the trial phase. This phase is by far the most time consuming and costly phase of the litigation. The trial phase is where the parties take all the facts of the dispute they have obtained through disclosures and discovery and present the case to the decision maker – the judge or jury. During this phase, the attorneys have pre-trial meetings with the court to determine specific legal issues of the case; exchange their evidence and witness lists; and prepare jury instructions and witness examinations. This phase is time consuming for the parties too because the Plaintiffs and Defendants must be present for each day of the trial. The attorneys turn all of their focus and attention to presenting the case and advocating on behalf of their respective clients. The end of this phase is a decision or judgment, by the judge or jury, as to the outcome of the dispute.

4^th Phase: Post-Judgment

The final phase is the aftermath of the court’s or jury’s decision of the dispute. If one party is displeased with the outcome of the case, they may appeal the judgment. An appeal is where one party asks a higher court to reconsider the judgment based on some alleged error. Appeals generally take a long time to resolve before the parties receive a full and final resolution of their dispute. Other post-judgment issues include a request by the prevailing party for the court to award them their litigation costs. Litigation costs include items like expert fees, filing fees, copying costs, witness fees, among others. If a party is entitled to recover their attorney fees, the court determines the amount of attorney fees during the post-judgment phase. If the Defendant or their insurer does not pay a judgment, often times the collection process begins until the amount is paid.

Conclusion

This basic overview outlines what can be expected during litigation. However, each dispute, each party, and each case are unique and not all cases go through the process in the same manner. The life of a case can last anywhere between a few months to a couple of years before resolution occurs. That is why Johnson Law strongly believes each client should be informed of what they can expect if they find themselves in litigation. At Johnson Law, we pride ourselves on our candor with clients and efficiency in navigating the litigation process to achieve our clients’ goals.

[1] Since most cases involve court instead of arbitration, this blog post will focus on court litigation instead of arbitration litigation, although they are very similar.

A mechanic’s lien is a legal tool for an individual to get paid for work or materials supplied to a project when the owner or general contractor does not pay for the work.

For example, it is the end of a four-month kitchen remodel construction project and the owner does not want to make a payment until he is satisfied the project is complete. The contractor requests final payment because all inspections have passed and the permit is closed, but the owner still refuses to pay. This situation creates problems for contractors who may have outstanding invoices for materials or laborers who need payment for the work they provided on a job.

Owners withhold payment for various reasons: dissatisfaction with the quality of work, inability or unwillingness to pay because changes in the work or unforeseen circumstances increased the construction budget, or disputes arise as to what work remains unfinished and whether or not that work is warranty work or punch-list items. While the reasons for nonpayment are plentiful, Colorado’s mechanic’s lien may provide a remedy for an individual to get paid.

In Colorado, every person who furnishes labor, machinery, tools, or equipment used in the construction or repair of any improvement to land may file a lien upon the property where they rendered their services. Those who build a structure, dig a ditch, install a fence, or provide the materials to do any of these projects may have the right to lien if they do not get paid. Mechanic’s liens are not only for contractors either. Surveyors, designers, planners, map creators, cost estimators, superintendents, engineers, and architects are among the class of people the law allows to file a mechanic’s lien.

What is a lien? A lien is a right to take possession of another person’s property for a debt that is owed by the property owner, until the debt is satisfied. This means that the kitchen-remodel contractor may claim an interest in the home where he performed his construction services. The purpose of a mechanic’s lien is to protect those who add value to and enhance another’s property by providing labor, materials, and/or services.

The four basic components of a mechanic’s lien are: (a) providing the work or materials specified under the law; (b) for the benefit of specific real property; (c) at the request of the property owner or property owner’s agent; and (d) abiding by the law’s requirements for perfecting and enforcing the lien. To perfect and enforce the mechanic’s lien, the person claiming the lien must provide the property owner a notice of intent to lien at least 10 days before filing the mechanic’s lien. A notice of intent to lien must be personally served or mailed, via certified mail, return receipt requested, to the last known address of the property owner. The person claiming the lien must include an affidavit of service certifying that notice was provided 10 days before recording the mechanic’s lien.

After serving the notice of intent to lien and waiting 10 days, the person claiming the lien must file the lien with the county clerk and recorder in the real property records where the real property is located. The mechanic’s lien statement must include: (a) the name of the property owner; (b) the name of the lien claimant (the person who furnished the labor or materials) and the name of the contractor when the lien claimant is a subcontractor; (c) a description of the property; and (d) the amount due or owing. A person claiming a lien should be careful in determining how much is due and owing because the individual forfeits all rights to the lien (and may be responsible for the other person’s costs and attorney fees) if the lien is filed in an amount greater than the lien claimant knows is due and owing. The lien statement must be signed and sworn to by the lien claimant or someone on their behalf. A lien claimant is entitled to receive interest on the lien at the interest rate established by a contract or at Colorado’s statutory interest rate of 12%.

There are tight timelines for when a lien may be filed that range between 2-4 months from the date labor or materials were last performed or provided. However, these timelines can vary depending on different circumstances, including, but not limited to, the type of work or materials provided, abandonment of the work, or the project remains unfinished. Once a person has perfected the lien, meaning the lien claimant provided a notice of intent to lien with proof of service and correctly filled out and recorded the lien statement, they must foreclose on the property in order to collect on the lien. A foreclosure action needs to begin within 6 months from the date the last labor or materials were provided or the project was completed. If a foreclosure action is not started, the person claiming the lien will not be able to enforce the lien after the time for foreclosure has passed.

In short, mechanic’s liens can be useful when a contractor or other professional who assisted in the construction or improvement to real property does not get paid. There are strict requirements as to the procedures to follow in order to make the lien enforceable. If an owner still refuses to pay, a foreclosure action must begin in order to preserve a lien claimant’s right in their interest to the real property they helped improve. With quick and varying deadlines based on the specifics of each individual case and the strict procedural requirements, Johnson Law is here to ensure your mechanic’s lien is valid so you can get paid. Call us and speak with one of our attorneys today to discuss the specifics of your case and how Johnson Law may assist you.

Part of the American dream is owning a home. It is often the largest purchase a person or family will make in their lives. However, such an important purchase can also come with a set of problems that no family should have to face. What happens when a home’s foundation moves or settles? What do cracks in concrete or drywall mean? What about uneven floors/windows/walls, water intrusions, sewage backups, etc.?

Johnson Law specializes in helping homeowners reach solutions when they encounter construction defects. But what exactly is a construction defect?

Colorado law does not define the term “defect”, but construction defects generally occur when a construction professional’s work falls below the standard of care. The standard of care is established through industry standards, manufacturer specifications, and building codes. These standards are in place to protect public health and safety by regulating and controlling buildings, structures, and equipment, including, but not limited to, foundations, stucco, heating and cooling systems, plumbing and drainage, signage, elevators and escalators, electrical systems, framing, siding, roofing, painting, and interior finishes.

The standard of care sets a minimum level of quality for construction professionals to use the products and materials as intended, fully incorporate the individual products and materials into the larger project, and achieve the desired outcome anticipated by the project documents. Defects can occur when inappropriate and/or defective products are used, products and materials are improperly installed, or design and engineering plans are not followed. Experts specialized in establishing the standard of care and determining whether the standard of care was met are important in construction defect cases.

What this means for a homeowner is that a defect can vary significantly and is unique to each case. For example, a homeowner may discover the physical manifestations of a defect if they see cracked drywall or concrete, have difficulty opening and closing doors, notice out-of-plumb walls, have broken pipes, observe discoloration of stucco, discover mold on walls, experience deteriorating building materials, encounter dysfunctional household systems and appliances etc.

Colorado law does not require a homeowner to know what the cause of the construction defect is at the time it is observed, but a homeowner’s claim arises when the homeowner discovers some physical manifestation of a construction defect. In other words, if you see a crack or some problem that could be a defect, the clock could begin ticking on when you can bring a timely claim against your builder or other construction professional.

If you have questions regarding potential defects at your home, please contact Johnson Law to speak with an attorney and hear more about potential solutions today.

-Tessa DeVault

The Colorado Trial Lawyers Association’s magazine, Trial Talk, published an article jointly authored by Johnson Law attorneys Chad Johnson and Tessa DeVault. The article talks about the basics of the Colorado Construction Defect Action Reform Act Notice of Claim Process. To view the article, click here. 

Johnson Law has been recently contacted from dozens of Colorado homeowners to investigate claims against Weyerhaeuser and other potentially liable parties for the installation of Weyerhaeuser’s fire protection coating product, Flak Jacket®, to floor joists.

The Flak Jacket® coating was applied to floor joists installed in many new homes in Colorado and is causing risk of formaldehyde poisoning to the occupants. Occupants with the affected product in their home have been advised to move out as soon as possible to avoid exposure and seek medical attention if their symptoms persist.

Unfortunately, despite several large national homebuilders knowing about the issue for weeks, not all homeowners were told immediately, and the builders have done very little to assist displaced homeowners. Many homeowners were advised by their builder to move out immediately, but have been given no assurances their home will receive proper repairs, or that the affected homeowners will receive fair compensation for their hotel stays, medical bills, loss of home value, and everything else they are entitled to under Colorado law.

Johnson Law is working with homeowners all over Colorado to assist them with getting temporary housing and reaching fair resolutions with Weyerhaeuser and other potentially liable parties. There is a possibility this becomes a class-action case.

If you would like to find out more information about retaining a construction defect attorney to assist with Weyerhaeuser floor joist claims, please send us an email at [email protected] (for fastest response) or give us a call at 303.586.4829. Johnson Law represents homeowners all across Colorado in construction defect cases with flexible fee agreements, including contingency fees.

On May 27, 2017, Governor Hickenlooper signed HB 1279 into law which changes the way Colorado homeowners’ associations may bring construction defect claims. The new Colorado law requires homeowners’ associations to send notice, hold a meeting, and conduct a voting period by the owners before bringing construction defect claims.

First, the notice must contain, among other things, a description of the alleged defects and a good-faith estimate of the benefits and risks involved. The new law establishes very specific and detailed notice requirements that include disclosure of attorney fees and costs, impacts on an individual owner’s property during the process, and the benefits and/or consequences of filing or not filing construction defect claims. Notably, the notice must also be sent to the construction professionals who performed the defective construction.

Second, Colorado homeowners’ associations must now hold an owner meeting between ten and fifteen days after the notice was mailed. The construction professionals must be invited to attend this owner meeting and have an opportunity to address the owners regarding the alleged construction defects. The construction professional may, but is not required, to provide an offer to remedy the alleged construction defects at the meeting.

Third, the owner voting period requires Colorado homeowners’ associations to maintain detailed owners’ lists and track owners’ votes. Homeowners’ associations may bring construction defect actions against construction professionals only after complying with the notice, meeting, and voting requirements established in the new law and upon authorization by a majority of favorable votes by the owners.

This new law goes into effect on September 1, 2017 and the full implications of these additional requirements for homeowners’ associations remain unknown. The law contains tight timelines and harsh consequences if the law’s requirements are not met. Questions remain regarding how this new law’s meeting requirement will interact with the notice of claim process required under Colorado’s construction defect laws. Finally, the new law establishes specific details on who and how owner votes are counted, how to amend claims, and exceptions to when homeowners’ associations can bring construction defect claims against a construction professional without an owner vote.

Contact Johnson Law today to discuss how this new law may impact your community and to ensure your homeowners’ association is complying with the law’s heightened requirements before filing claims for construction defects.

-Tessa R. DeVault