Homeowners' association dwelling actions
HB 2713, titled the “Home Ownership Act,” makes two main changes to Arizona law governing construction-defect and real-property litigation. First, it shortens the statute of limitations in A.R.S. § 12-552 for contract-based actions against developers and construction professionals from eight years to four years after substantial completion for most claimants, while preserving a longer period for municipalities and counties in certain circumstances. It also keeps the existing framework for latent defects, implied warranty claims, and exceptions for personal injury, death, and express written warranties.
Second, the bill adds detailed procedural requirements for homeowners’ associations before they may file a dwelling action for construction defects under A.R.S. § 33-2002. These requirements include written disclosure to members and the targeted seller/construction professionals, a noticed meeting where defects are presented and the seller may respond, a two-thirds member vote to authorize suit, a professional engineer inspection before the vote, and notice of the seller’s right to repair or replace alleged defects. The bill also requires HOAs to disclose how any recovery will be allocated, preserve records for five years, and allows sellers to challenge HOA compliance with these procedures.
The bill would amend Arizona’s statutes of limitation for real-property construction claims and would impose additional pre-suit procedural hurdles on homeowners’ associations seeking to bring construction-defect dwelling actions. It would affect developers, builders, design professionals, sellers, HOAs, homeowners, municipalities, and counties by changing when claims can be filed and by creating new notice, inspection, voting, recordkeeping, and disclosure obligations. The bill applies the amended limitations period to actions filed after its effective date.
Based on the bill text and the absence of recorded committee testimony or votes, the overall sentiment appears to be policy-driven and reform-oriented rather than clearly partisan or contested in the available record. The measure seems designed to balance access to construction-defect litigation with stronger procedural protections for sellers and construction professionals, while also giving HOA members more transparency and control over whether a suit is filed. Because no committee discussion or vote history is provided, there is no documented public sentiment in the record beyond the bill’s structure and stated purpose.
The main points of contention likely center on the bill’s reduction of the limitations period for construction-related claims and the added procedural barriers for HOA lawsuits. Builders, developers, and construction professionals would likely favor the shorter filing window and the expanded pre-suit process, which may reduce litigation exposure and encourage repair opportunities. HOA advocates and homeowners concerned about latent defects may object that the bill makes it harder to bring claims, especially by requiring a two-thirds vote, an engineer inspection, and detailed disclosures before suit. The bill also gives sellers standing to challenge HOA compliance, which could further be viewed as shifting leverage toward defendants in construction-defect disputes.