Opinion ID: 1669608
Heading Depth: 3
Heading Rank: 1

Heading: The Limited New-Home Warranty

Text: The warranty provided the Turners with coverage for one year from the date they closed on the purchase of the home. However, in order for Westhampton to be liable under the warranty, the Turners were obligated to fulfill two separate requirements. As the Turners acknowledge, paragraph 4 of the warranty requires them to bring any legal action alleging a breach of the warranty within 90 days of the expiration of the one-year warranty. However, as the Turners note, and as we stated above, the Legislature has provided a six-year statute of limitations on breach-of-warranty actions. Ala.Code 1975, § 6-2-34(9). Moreover, Ala.Code 1975, § 6-2-15, provides that any agreement or stipulation, verbal or written, whereby the time for the commencement of any action is limited to a time less than that prescribed by the law for the commencement of such action is void. Clearly the 90-day provision in the warranty does not override the 6-year statute of limitations. However, the Turners have failed to address the other requirement set out by the warranty. Paragraph 3 provides that [Westhampton] shall not be liable under this Agreement unless written notice of the latent defect shall have been given by [the Turners] to [Westhampton] within the one (1) year warranty period. Such a provision is not akin to a statute of limitations. Rather, such a provision operates as a waiver of the Turners' right to sue under the warranty if they fail to give notice of the defect within the one-year warranty period. In Ex parte Miller, 693 So.2d 1372, 1376 (Ala.1997), a case decided under Alabama's version of the Uniform Commercial Code, we held that a company can limit its warranty coverage. In Southern Energy Homes v. Washington, 774 So.2d 505, 511 (Ala.2000), we held that a warranty can require a certain method by which the warranty holder notifies the party giving the warranty of a defect covered by the warranty. See also Copenhagen Reinsurance Co. v. Champion Home Builders Co., 872 So.2d 848 (Ala.Civ.App.2003). If a purchaser were to attempt to hold the seller liable when the purchaser had not notified seller pursuant to the method set out in the warranty, the seller would not be liable. While these cases are based upon Alabama's Commercial Code, we see no reason to limit the rule to cases concerning goods. Rather, we are led by the principle of freedom of contract. Therefore, we hold that companies selling houses are similarly capable of limiting warranty coverage. The warranty in this case requires that the purchaser give notice of the defect within one year of the commencement of the warranty. The Turners have failed to provide any evidence indicating that they provided the required notice within that period. Therefore, the trial court did not err in entering a summary judgment for Westhampton. [3]