Cyrus Dugger

Arbitration: Even Winners Are Losers

Even when you can find a a way to win in arbitration, you're not really a winner.... at least in Texas.

Couple's Dream Home A 10-Year Legal Nightmare

Builder fights claim of faulty house in court to which he's donated

By WAYNE SLATER / The Dallas Morning News

AUSTIN – In the beginning, Bob and Jane Cull thought if they just wrote homebuilder Bob Perry a letter about all the defects in their new Mansfield house, everything could be resolved.

[Click image for a larger version] ERICH SCHLEGEL/DMN
ERICH SCHLEGEL/DMN
A key issue in the case is whether Bob and Jane Cull of Mansfield waived their right to arbitration when they sued Perry Homes in 2000, claiming the home has fundamental flaws.

That was 10 years ago.

A tortuous legal battle has carried the retirement-age couple through the courts, to arbitration and now through the courts again – all the way to the Texas Supreme Court. The Culls have won every round, but their home has not been fixed, legal costs have soared and the couple has postponed retirement plans.

"You think you can wake up from a nightmare and it'll be over," said Ms. Cull, a physicians' liaison. Instead, the couple watches as the home's defective foundation continues to move, some windows won't open and more cracks form in walls, according to engineering reports.

A spokesman for Mr. Perry said the case is built around an important principle: whether arbitration or the courts will settle disputes. But the Culls say their case against Perry Homes illustrates how construction disputes can last for years without resolution and how the system is stacked against average homeowners who challenge homebuilders with wealth and political influence.

Particularly this builder: Mr. Perry is the nation's most generous individual political donor. He has been a leading advocate of laws to limit court awards against businesses and a financial benefactor to politicians and judges. And he has funded Republican candidates up and down the ballot in Texas, including more than $340,000 to the nine justices that will hear the Culls' case.

Perry Homes spokesman Anthony Holm said the donations are irrelevant.

"All we're trying to do is get our day in court," Mr. Holm said.

The Culls filed suit in 2000 to force repair of their house. But they grew concerned a legal battle could take years and went to arbitration instead, thinking it would resolve the issues quicker and with less expense.

Mr. Holm said the switch was unfair to Perry Homes, which had spent time and money preparing for a trial. He says the couple waived its right to arbitration.

It is that legal question – "at what point in time does a consumer waive their right to arbitration?" – the high court has been asked to decide, he said. Arguments will be heard in March.

Consumer advocates say Mr. Perry has spent millions of dollars creating a political and legal system tilted in his favor.

"It's not surprising that he showered tens of thousands of campaign dollars on the Texas Supreme Court," said Andrew Wheat of Texans for Public Justice, a nonprofit group that tracks campaign contributions.

"What is shocking is that the judges who took all this money have agreed to hear Perry's appeal of a lemon-home case – one that he already lost in front of an arbitrator and two Texas courts," he said. "It's three strikes and you're out in the Texas justice system – unless you own the league." link)

Cyrus Dugger: Author Bio | Other Posts
Posted at 4:08 PM, Jan 22, 2007 in
Permalink | Email to Friend | Comment on this post