On April 7, 2023, New Mexico’s governor, Michelle Lujan Grisham, signed into law New Mexico’s Right to Repair Act (Act), 2023 N.M. SB 50. The Act’s effective date is July 1, 2023. The Act applies to construction defects in dwellings, i.e., newly constructed single family housing units designed for residential use. The Act applies to not only newly constructed housing units but also to systems and other components and improvements that are part of the housing unit at the time of construction.
Pursuant to the Act, except for construction defect claims that involve an immediate threat to the life or safety of persons occupying the dwelling, that render the dwelling uninhabitable or in which the seller, after notice, refused to make a repair pursuant to any applicable express warranty, a purchaser must comply with the provisions of the Act before filing a complaint or pursing an alternative dispute mechanism related to a construction defect in the dwelling. A seller who receives a notice complying with the provisions of the Act must give notice to all construction professionals who may be responsible for the defect.
The Act gives the seller an opportunity to inspect the dwelling and take reasonable measures to determine the nature and cause of each alleged construction defect, and the nature and extent of any repairs needed. Further, the Act requires sellers to respond within 60 days. The response may include: a) an offer to repair or replace each alleged construction defect, b) an offer to provide monetary compensation to the purchaser, or c) invoke any remedies provided in the construction contract. If the seller’s response includes a notice of intent to repair or replace the construction defect(s) – and such offer has not been rejected by the purchaser – the purchaser shall allow the seller and the seller’s construction professional a reasonable opportunity to do so.
A purchaser who reasonably rejects the seller’s offer has complied with the requirements and may initiate suit. Similarly, if a seller does not comply with the Act and the seller’s failure is not due to any fault by the purchaser, the purchaser shall follow any remedy provided for in the construction contract, file a complaint in court or pursue any alternative dispute resolution mechanism set forth in the construction contract.
To the extent that the repair and replacement process takes place pursuant to the Act, the statute of repose set forth in NMSA § 37-1-27 and any applicable statutes of limitations is tolled.
Although the Act does not specifically mention that it applies to subrogation claims, because a subrogating insurer steps into the shoes of its insured, subrogation professionals should be aware of this change in the law and, as appropriate, provide the notice set forth in the Act.
Recent Posts
Categories
- Products Liability
- Evidence
- Experts – Daubert
- New Jersey
- CPSC Recalls
- Causation
- Subrogation
- Construction Defects
- Statute of Limitations-Repose
- New York
- Certificate of Merit
- California
- Podcast
- Experts - Reliability
- Jurisdiction
- Condemnation
- Maryland
- Uncategorized
- Negligence
- CPSC Warning
- Minnesota
- Contracts
- Anti-Subrogation Rule
- Landlord-Tenant
- Sutton Doctrine
- Waiver of Subrogation
- Rhode Island
- Pennsylvania
- Texas
- Florida
- Workers' Compensation
- Economic Loss Rule
- Cargo - Transportation
- Malpractice
- Spoliation
- Tennessee
- Water Loss
- Indiana
- Michigan
- Comparative-Contributory Negligence
- Contribution-Apportionment
- AIA Contracts
- Assignment
- Missouri
- Parties
- Public Policy
- Civil Procedure
- Product Liability
- Res Judicata
- Arbitration
- Damages
- Damages – Personal Property
- Litigation
- West Virginia
- Wyoming
- Oklahoma
- Builder's Risk
- Contractual Subrogation
- Equitable Subrogation
- Georgia
- Illinois
- Insurable Interest
- Limitation of Liability
- Mississippi
- Made Whole
- Delaware
- Settlement
- Subrogation – Equitable
- Construction
- Premises Liability
- Joint or Several Liability
- Montana
- Duty
- Privity
- New Mexico
- Right to Repair Act
- Massachusetts
- Landlord
- Tenant
- Building Code
- Arizona
Tags
- Products Liability
- Evidence
- Circumstantial Evidence
- Experts - Reliability
- Experts – Daubert
- New Jersey
- Malfunction Theory
- Subrogation
- Causation
- Construction Defects
- Podcast
- Product Liability
- Subro Sessions
- Texas
- New York
- Certificate of Merit
- Contracts
- California
- CPSC Recalls; Products Liability
- Waiver of Subrogation
- Experts
- Maryland
- Landlord-Tenant
- Jurisdiction
- Jurisdiction - Personal
- Statute of Repose
- Condemnation
- Construction Contracts
- Inverse Condemnation
- Negligence
- Louisiana
- Minnesota
- Statute of Limitations - Accrual
- Amazon-eBay
- Civil Procedure
- Georgia
- Contracts - Enforcement
- Illinois
- Pennsylvania
- Experts – Qualifications
- Made Whole
- Statute of Limitations
- Sutton Doctrine
- Water Damage
- Rhode Island
- workers' compensation subrogation
- Arizona
- Florida
- Public Policy
- Economic Loss Doctrine
- Design Defect
- Expert Qualifications
- West Virginia
- Amazon
- Negligent Undertaking
- Limitation of Liability
- Statute of Limitations - Contractual
- Anti-Subrogation Rule
- Indiana
- Tennessee
- Evidence - Hearsay
- Loss of Use
- Vehicles
- Connecticut
- Delaware
- Improvement
- Negligence – Duty
- Warranty - Implied
- Apportionment
- Privity
- Malpractice
- Statute of Limitations - Tolling
- Spoliation
- Statute of Limitations – Discovery Rule
- Malfunction Theory; Design Defect
- Independent Duty
- Ohio
- Settlement
- Michigan
- Comparative Fault
- Contracts - Formation
- Condominiums
- Non-Party at Fault
- Massachusetts
- Unconscionable
- Missouri
- Parties
- Failure to Warn
- Manufacturing Defect
- Pleading
- Removal
- Entire Controversy Doctrine
- Motion to Intervene
- Res Judicata
- Arbitration
- Subrogation; High-Net-Worth; Damages; Art; Cargo-Transportation; Anti-Subrogation Rule
- Wisconsin
- Products Liability – Risk-Utility
- Architects-Engineers
- Lithium-ion battery
- Internet Sales
- Anti-Subrogation Rule; Wyoming; Landlord-Tenant; Sutton Doctrine
- Oklahoma
- Sanctions
- Spoliation – Fire Scene
- Builder’s Risk
- Contractual Subrogation
- Equitable Subrogation
- Exculpatory Clause
- Gross Negligence
- Insurable Interest
- Mississippi
- Daubert
- Standing
- Third Party
- Accepted Work
- Montana
- Independent Contractor
- Res Ipsa
- Workers’ Compensation
- New Mexico
- Right to Repair Act
- AIA Contract
- Betterment
- Damages
- Damages-Code Upgrades
- Statute of Limitations - Repose
- Washington
- Implied Warranty of Habitability
- Warranty - Construction
- Idaho
- First Party Claims
- Joint-Tortfeasors
- Forum-Venue
- Warranty – Express
- AIA Contracts
- Anti-Indemnity Statutes
- Indemnification
- Products Liability - Foreseeability
- Cargo-Transportation
- Contribution
- MCS-90
- Substantial Completion
Authors
Archives
- May 2025
- April 2025
- March 2025
- February 2025
- January 2025
- December 2024
- November 2024
- October 2024
- September 2024
- August 2024
- July 2024
- June 2024
- May 2024
- April 2024
- March 2024
- February 2024
- January 2024
- December 2023
- November 2023
- October 2023
- September 2023
- August 2023
- July 2023
- June 2023
- May 2023
- April 2023
- March 2023
- February 2023
- January 2023
- December 2022
- November 2022
- October 2022
- September 2022
- August 2022
- July 2022
- June 2022
- May 2022
- April 2022
- March 2022
- February 2022
- January 2022