junior8158
New Member
I purchased a newly constructed home in March of 2003 from a builder. It was a spec home, I did not contract with the builder. The first time I ran the dishwasher it leaked and all of the water ran out onto our hardwood floors. It turned out that the dishwasher he installed was damaged. It appeared to have been dropped. I notified him immediately and informed him that I wanted the area of the floor affected to be replaced. I tried for about two years with no resolution. Over a period of time I have had several areas of the floor to buckle due to being wet from the leak. I have since hired an attorney who filed the case for me. In the filing he stated we were seeking all actual damages plus attorney fees, any other compensation due to stress and living in a home that was damaged due to this leak, etc. The typical legal jargon. After a lot of back and forth including this builder not even initially responding to the court filing, he finally has his own council and we are at the point to where my attorney is ready to send his attorney a letter stating what we expect along with quotes to replace the floor. The hiccup comes with my attorney now telling me that we can only ask for actual damages and no other punitive type allowances in the settlement. He tells me that a court will not typically award me anything extra. I reminded him that he included this in the initial filing and suggested that he go back and read exactly what his filing said.
My question is regarding the legal advice I am currently getting. I am located in Mississippi if that matters. I am not sure if he his right, especially since he had originally told me and include other damages in the filing papers. Without spelling out other specifics in the case, the builder has somewhat of a reputation for this type of thing, and had even been shut down by the local city building inspectors on as many as 12 houses at one time for not meeting building codes. He basically refused to perform this repair as he should have done based on the 12 month warranty, but instead threatened me and invited me to get an attorney. Plus he refused to get legal council and reply to the original filing for about 8 months. Can anyone advise me as to whether I am getting accurate legal advice. Should I only expect the builder to pay actual damages or should also expect something over and above this.
My question is regarding the legal advice I am currently getting. I am located in Mississippi if that matters. I am not sure if he his right, especially since he had originally told me and include other damages in the filing papers. Without spelling out other specifics in the case, the builder has somewhat of a reputation for this type of thing, and had even been shut down by the local city building inspectors on as many as 12 houses at one time for not meeting building codes. He basically refused to perform this repair as he should have done based on the 12 month warranty, but instead threatened me and invited me to get an attorney. Plus he refused to get legal council and reply to the original filing for about 8 months. Can anyone advise me as to whether I am getting accurate legal advice. Should I only expect the builder to pay actual damages or should also expect something over and above this.
