Rather than attempt to push work away—and with it reputation and possible referrals—builders should learn what the items in question are and, if appropriate, suggest that the homeowner can wait until the next scheduled visit. If the items involved will get worse (loose doorknob that will eventually damage the door), or are dangerous (carpet seam separating near the top of the stairs), or are simply annoying (noisy bedroom door wakes new baby), the builder should issue the necessary work orders right away.
This type of legal-versus-service debate first surfaced in California regarding quality control checklists. One builder observed that he had been advised to avoid using written checklists to prevent homeowners from getting copies. The fear was that if a customer could prove a problem had existed, that knowledge could stimulate legal action.
This kind of twisted thinking denies a company one of the most effective, proven tools for producing the good quality consumers expect. Of course, you must actually use the checklist: Fill it out accurately, take action on identified items, and document that the correction was provided.
This dichotomy has always existed but the increase in absurd legal cases in recent years has many companies operating from a basis of fear, afraid to take any action not blessed by their attorney.
While I am among the first to suggest that a builder consult with the legal profession for guidance when a customer relationship becomes difficult, builders have a right to expect the resulting advice to be balanced.
What’s legal is not always what’s right. Building homes is a risky business. Each company must make judgment calls daily that could lead to legal trouble. On the other hand, builders want to be able to hold their heads up, even if they do so in a courtroom.
Carol Smith offers customer service assessment, consulting, and training programs for home builders. She can be reached at csmithhomeaddress@att.net.
