Why Builders Start Pointing Fingers When Defects Surface
Share:
When homeowners discover serious construction defects, the first reaction is usually frustration, followed quickly by one big question:
Who is responsible for fixing this—and who is going to pay for it?
In Florida construction defect cases, the answer is rarely simple. Unlike situations where a single party is clearly at fault, construction projects involve many players: builders, subcontractors, designers, suppliers, inspectors, and sometimes even the homeowner. Florida law recognizes this complexity through something called comparative fault.
Understanding how comparative fault works can help homeowners set realistic expectations, protect their claims, and avoid surprises as a case moves forward.
What Is Comparative Fault?
Comparative fault is Florida’s way of sharing responsibility when more than one party contributed to a problem. Instead of asking, “Who is 100% to blame?”, the law asks a different question:
What percentage of fault should be assigned to each party involved?
Those percentages matter because they directly affect how much compensation a homeowner can recover.
If multiple parties contributed to construction defects, each party may only be responsible for paying their share of the damages—based on their level of fault.
Florida’s Comparative Fault Rule (What Changed and What Didn’t)
Florida follows a comparative fault system governed primarily by section 768.81 of the Florida Statutes. Under current Florida law:
- Fault is apportioned among all responsible parties
- Damages are reduced based on the percentage of fault assigned to each party
- In many negligence cases, a party who is more than 50% at fault may be barred from recovery
Construction defect cases often involve negligence claims, contract claims, or both. Comparative fault most commonly applies to the negligence side of these cases, but it still plays a major role in how damages are calculated and defended.
The key takeaway for homeowners is this: fault is divided, not all-or-nothing.
Who Can Be Assigned Fault in a Construction Defect Case?
One of the most surprising aspects of comparative fault for homeowners is how many parties can be included. Fault may be allocated to:
- General contractors or builders
- Subcontractors (roofers, framers, plumbers, electricians, etc.)
- Architects or engineers
- Material suppliers
- Inspectors
- Developers
- Prior owners
- And sometimes, the homeowner
Even parties who are not named as defendants can still appear on the verdict form as so-called “Fabre defendants”, allowing fault to be assigned to them even if they are not paying damages.
How Homeowners Can Be Assigned Partial Fault
Many homeowners assume they cannot possibly share blame for construction defects. In reality, defense teams often argue otherwise. Homeowner fault allegations may include claims that the owner:
- Failed to maintain the property properly
- Ignored warning signs of water intrusion or damage
- Made modifications that worsened the problem
- Delayed repairs, allowing damage to spread
- Used the home in a way inconsistent with design specifications
Even if these arguments are exaggerated or disputed, they are commonly raised to reduce the builder’s financial exposure.
Importantly, being assigned partial fault does not automatically eliminate a homeowner’s claim. It may simply reduce the amount recoverable.
How Comparative Fault Affects Damages
Comparative fault directly impacts how much compensation a homeowner can recover. Here’s a simplified example: If a jury finds:
- Total damages: $500,000
- Contractor: 60% at fault
- Subcontractors combined: 30% at fault
- Homeowner: 10% at fault
The homeowner’s recovery may be reduced by their 10% share of fault, and each responsible party may only be liable for their allocated percentage.
This is why defendants aggressively pursue comparative fault arguments—it can significantly reduce what they owe.
Why Builders and Contractors Focus on Shifting Blame
In construction defect litigation, it’s common for defendants to point fingers at one another. A general contractor may blame subcontractors. Subcontractors may blame design professionals. Everyone may argue the homeowner contributed to the damage.
This is not personal—it’s strategic.
Under Florida’s comparative fault framework, every percentage point matters. Shifting even a small amount of blame can mean hundreds of thousands of dollars in reduced liability.
What This Means for Homeowners Bringing a Claim
For homeowners, comparative fault changes how a case should be approached from the beginning. It means:
- Thorough investigation matters
- Expert opinions are critical
- Maintenance records can become evidence
- Timing of repairs and notice is important
- Early legal guidance can shape outcomes
A well-prepared case anticipates comparative fault arguments and addresses them proactively, rather than reacting after they are raised.
Comparative Fault Does Not Mean “No One Is Responsible”
One common misconception is that comparative fault lets builders avoid responsibility altogether. That is not how the law works. Even when fault is shared:
- Responsible parties are still accountable
- Homeowners can still recover damages
- Liability is simply divided more precisely
Comparative fault is about allocation, not elimination, of responsibility.
Why Timing and Documentation Matter More Than You Think
In construction defect cases, delays can hurt more than just the structure.
Waiting too long to investigate or repair defects can lead to arguments that the homeowner made the damage worse. Poor documentation can make it harder to rebut those claims.
Photos, expert reports, maintenance records, and repair histories all play a role in determining how fault is divided.
How Legal Strategy Can Minimize Homeowner Fault
An experienced construction defect attorney understands that comparative fault is almost always raised—and prepares accordingly. Effective strategies often include:
- Early expert evaluations
- Clear timelines showing when defects appeared
- Evidence of proper maintenance
- Proof that defects were latent or hidden
- Demonstrating that repair delays were reasonable
The goal is not to deny reality, but to keep fault where it belongs.
Final Thoughts: Comparative Fault Is Part of the Landscape—Not a Dead End
If you’re a homeowner facing serious construction defects, comparative fault can sound intimidating. But understanding how it works puts you in a stronger position.
Florida law recognizes that construction projects are complex and that responsibility is often shared. What matters is making sure the right parties are held accountable—and that your own actions are accurately represented.
At DuFault Law, we help homeowners throughout Florida navigate construction defect claims with a clear understanding of comparative fault and how it affects recovery.
Comments are closed