Enforceability Status
South Carolina courts have found similar builder contract provisions unconscionable. In Smith v. D.R. Horton, the South Carolina Supreme Court found multiple D.R. Horton contract provisions unconscionable, establishing strong precedent against one-sided liability limitations.
Legal Analysis
South Carolina provides significant protections for new home buyers. The South Carolina Supreme Court's decision in Smith v. D.R. Horton (2017) found multiple provisions in D.R. Horton's purchase agreement unconscionable, including arbitration terms and warranty limitations. While the case addressed specific contract provisions, its analysis of unconscionability in builder adhesion contracts has broad implications for liability limitation clauses.
South Carolina recognizes the implied warranty of habitability in new construction under the builder-vendor doctrine. The Right to Cure Act (S.C. Code Ann. sections 40-59-810 to 40-59-860) establishes mandatory pre-suit notice and cure procedures for construction defect claims. These statutory and common law protections provide remedies that a contractual liability limitation may not be able to eliminate.
South Carolina's Unfair Trade Practices Act (S.C. Code Ann. section 39-5-20) prohibits unfair or deceptive acts in trade or commerce and provides treble damages. Courts may view a blanket liability waiver in a take-it-or-leave-it contract as an unfair practice. The combination of Smith v. D.R. Horton, the implied warranty doctrine, and statutory consumer protections creates a legal environment where liability limitation clauses face substantial enforceability challenges.
Relevant South Carolina Law
Establishes mandatory pre-suit notice and right-to-cure procedures for residential construction defect claims.
Prohibits unfair or deceptive trade practices and provides treble damages and attorney fees for violations.
Related Cases
The South Carolina Supreme Court found multiple provisions of D.R. Horton's purchase agreement unconscionable, including arbitration and warranty limitation terms, establishing strong precedent for challenging one-sided builder contract provisions.
Builders in South Carolina Using This Clause
What South Carolina Buyers Should Know
- Understand the impact of Smith v. D.R. Horton The South Carolina Supreme Court has found multiple one-sided builder contract provisions unconscionable. This precedent may apply to liability limitation clauses in your purchase agreement.
- Know your implied warranty rights South Carolina recognizes an implied warranty of habitability for new construction. A builder cannot necessarily eliminate this protection through contract language alone.
- Follow the Right to Cure Act procedures Before filing a construction defect claim, comply with South Carolina's mandatory pre-suit notice and cure requirements. Proper compliance preserves your legal rights.
- Consider Unfair Trade Practices Act claims South Carolina's consumer protection statute provides treble damages for unfair practices. An attorney can assess whether the liability limitation in your contract may constitute an unfair trade practice.