Court Opinion

ID: 7771409
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2022-07-30 20:54:07.86604+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T13:28:40.803805
License: Public Domain

I disagree with the analysis used in the main opinion to conclude that the Teels are not entitled to any payment by the Board from the Homeowner's Recovery Fund. I agree with the trial court that "[t]he Act does not preclude an injured homeowner from recovering damages proximately caused by a licensed homebuilder through the . . . [F]und . . . simply because the homeowner resides in a county that has not elected to be covered by the licensing provisions of the Act."
I concur in the result, however, because the Teels failed to follow the correct procedure for applying to the Fund; specifically, they failed to provide the Board with certain information required by Rule 465-X-7-.02(1)(f)2(i)-(iii) and Rule 465-X-7-.02(2)(g)4-6, Ala. Admin. Code.