Skip to content

Menu

LexBlog, Inc. logo
NetworkSub-MenuBrowse by SubjectBrowse by PublisherJoin the NetworkGet StartedSubscribeSupportContact
Search
Close

UCIOA – A Wolf in Sheeps’s Clothing – Part 16

By John Randy Sawyer on June 18, 2007
Email this postTweet this postLike this postShare this post on LinkedIn

This is part 16 of Randy Sawyer’s 16 Part series on UCIOA. You can read previous posts here.

Section 88, subsection (g)
88(g) – In the event that no settlement agreement and releases are executed with respect to any phase of completed common elements or improvements during the period of declarant control of the executive board of the association, any statutes of limitation or repose applicable to such phase shall be extended for a period of one year after the assumption of control of the executive board by unit owners other than the declarant. In addition, the declarant controlled board shall not be obligated to commence suit for any such claims during its period of control.

This provision of Section 88 seeks to limit the statute of limitations on construction defect claims to one year following the transition of control of the Association from the developer to the independent unit owners. Under current law, the independent unit owners get six years from the date of transition for statutes of limitations and ten years from the date of transition under the state statute of repose (at a minimum as to claims against the developer). This provision, therefore, severely limits current legal rights. There is no benefit here to anyone other than the developer. This provision would allow a developer to conceal the existence of defects during the entire time it controls the Association, which could be several years, then turn over control to the independent unit owners. Then, if the independent unit owners do not discover the defects or act upon them within one year of getting control, they could possibly lose the claim entirely.
This provision also completely eliminates the well settled fiduciary duty that board members appointed by the developer to the developer-controlled Association have to ferret out defects and deal with them, be it by lawsuit or otherwise. In other words, they have no liability whatsoever for burying their heads in the sand.

Photo of John Randy Sawyer John Randy Sawyer

John Randy Sawyer is a Shareholder and member of the firm’s Construction Litigation Group. Mr. Sawyer has been practicing for fifteen years and has developed during that time extensive experience litigating in state and federal courts in New York and New Jersey. Mr.

John Randy Sawyer is a Shareholder and member of the firm’s Construction Litigation Group. Mr. Sawyer has been practicing for fifteen years and has developed during that time extensive experience litigating in state and federal courts in New York and New Jersey. Mr. Sawyer concentrates his practice in construction litigation, including defective workmanship claims, design errors and omissions, product liability, breach of contract, insurance coverage litigation and appellate practice. Mr. Sawyer has represented developers, general contractors, subcontractors, condominium associations and homeowners in cases involving a wide variety of structures, ranging from single family homes to twenty-plus story high rises. Mr. Sawyer is the co-founder of www.ConstructionLitigationLawBlog.com.

Read more about John Randy SawyerEmail
Show more Show less
  • Posted in:
    Real Estate & Construction
  • Blog:
    Construction & Transition Litigation Law Blog
  • Organization:
    Stark & Stark

Call us at 1-800-913-0988 or email sales@lexblog.com.

Facebook LinkedIn Twitter RSS
The Library at LexBlog
  • About LexBlog
  • The Field We Built
  • Library at LexBlog
  • Our Beliefs
  • Our Team
  • Contact LexBlog
  • Disclaimer
  • Editorial Policy
  • Terms of Service
  • Get Started
  • Publishing Solutions
  • Compass
  • Submit a Request
  • Support Center
  • System Status
Copyright © 2026, LexBlog, Inc. All Rights Reserved.
Law blog design & platform by LexBlog LexBlog Logo