The terms of any warranty does not affect the statutory obligations of House-Builders under s. 1(1) of the Defective Premises Act 1972.

The leading (insurance backed) Warranty Provider is the NHBC but there are others. Detailed coverage of them is beyond this website. Recourse must be had to all the relevant documents of sale etc including the warranty concerned.

Liability under that warranty is part of the pattern of obligations in favour of House purchasers that I have referred to.

A copy of the current (210419) suite of NHBCs warranties is available here:  http://www.nhbc.co.uk/Homeowners/Findyourpolicydocument/. Earlier warranties are also available.

Provided the House Builder is solvent it may be necessary to make claims against it under section 2 of the NHBC (Buildmark) policy within the relevant 2 year period. 

There are other helpful sections of cover including those relating to e.g. contamination of the land upon which the dwelling is situated – please see in the case of the NHBC the insurance policies on its web site above.

A threshold issue in relation to liability under section 2 of the NHBC Buildmark cover is whether a notice was given within the relevant two year period so as to bring into operation the liabilities of the House-builder under that section.

This means that the House-builder must have been notified by the aggrieved house purchaser/consumer (and preferably in writing).

Good housekeeping about the giving (and management) of notices given, is essential by the aggrieved purchaser of the defective dwelling concerned.

As with all insurance policies, there are definitions, excesses, limitations, exclusions and other stipulations that need to be complied with. To give a flavour of such matters, this is how one High Court Judge referred to the house purchasers’  claim under section 2 of NHBC’s Buildmark:

 The Claimants make claims under section 2 of the Buildmark cover. This provides, under the heading "the Builder's obligations" that: "this part of the cover tells you what the Builder must do if you give him written notice of Defects or Damage in your Home. This notice must be given as soon as possible within the period of cover."

Section 2 then contains a column which states that the Builder must take certain actions as follows:

"Within a reasonable time and at his own expense, to put right any Defect or Damage to your Home or its Common Parts which is notified to him in writing within the period of the cover.

Any reasonable costs you incur, by prior agreement with the Builder, for removal storage and appropriate alternative accommodation if it is necessary for you or anyone normally living in the Home to move out so that work can be done."

It also states that the builder is not liable for "any cost or expense greater than that necessary to carry out a workmanlike repair of the Defect or Damage."

The definition of Damage is "physical damage to the home caused by a Defect." Defect is defined as "a breach of any mandatory NHBC requirement by the Builder or anyone employed by him or acting for him…." Home is defined as "the house.. referred to in the Buildmark Offer, together with any of the following which are included in the original Contract: …. (d) any garage, permanent out building, retaining wall, boundary wall, external hand rail or balustrade, path, drive, garden area or paved area newly built by the Builder at the date of the Insurance Certificate."

The NHBC Requirements which are relied upon by the Claimants as giving rise to liability under the Buildmark Cover are Design Requirement R2 that "Design and specification shall provide satisfactory performance."; Workmanship Requirement R4 that "All works shall be carried out in a proper neat and workmanlike manner" and Structural Design Requirement R5 that "Structural design shall be carried out by suitably qualified persons in accordance with British Standards and Codes of Practice." The Claimants say that these requirements were broken and there are both Defects within the meaning of section 2 of the Buildmark cover and there is also Damage. They contend that SHL is therefore required to rectify the Defect or Damage…..”

By contract, S 1(1) of the DPA 1972 seems less cluttered and less complicated but for the incorrect decision of the CA that must be challenged. However it may still be possible to succeed under section 1 of the DPA 1972 under incorrect interpretation of it.

In answer to the question posed by the title of this page of this web site: the e.g. NHBC warranty can assist the owner of a defective dwelling provided the claim is brought under the correct section of the policy and the correct notice is given to the correct party on time.

Next Section: House-Builders Minimising their Obligations to Purchasers’ through the Contract of Sale