Winser

Winser v. Pardee Homes CA2/6

Good Law
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaAugust 7, 2014B243615California2,384 words

Opinion

Opinion

FACTS

Anthony and Michelle Winser purchased a home directly from the developer, Pardee Homes (Pardee) in March 2002. Other than installing a security system and tinting windows, the Winsers have made no modifications to the home. In March 2004 the Winsers contacted Pardee complaining of water leaks at their doors and windows. Pardee sent its service representative, Robert Spielman, to the home. Spielman looked for cracking and water stains, pulled back the carpet and checked for clogs in the window track weep holes. He found no signs of water intrusion. The Winsers complained of water intrusion again in 2005. Spielman conducted another inspection but found no signs of water intrusion. In 2006 the Winsers complained that the exterior paint was bubbling and peeling. Spielman determined that the paint was not bonding properly to the stucco. Pardee repainted the house with "Elastometric" paint. The Winsers did not complain again until March 2011. They complained about water leaks around windows and doors and paint defects. Spielman inspected but found no evidence of water intrusion. He found, however, bubbling in the paint on the rear elevation of the house. Pardee agreed to paint…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.