Written By Jean Meyer
Like many other states, Montana’s Legislature has enacted a pre-suit notice of claim process as codified at M.C.A. § 70-19-427. Montana’s Notice of Claim Statute requires a residential homeowner to serve a written notice of claim on the construction professional prior to the commencement of a lawsuit. The notice of claim must state that the homeowner is asserting a construction defect claim against the construction professional and must describe the claim in reasonable detail. Thereafter, the construction professional has 21 days to respond to the homeowner by proposing an inspection of the property, offering to compromise or settle through a financial settlement or repair, or denying liability. As with Colorado’s statute, the homeowner is under no obligation to accept a construction professional’s offer.
Additionally, M.C.A. § 70-19-427(3)(b) allows the homeowner to reject the inspection proposal. Nevertheless, if the homeowner elects to allow the construction professional to inspect the property, within 14 days following the completion of the inspection, the construction professional is obliged to provide the homeowner with an offer to compromise via a monetary payment, a written offer to remedy the claim through a combination of repair and monetary payment, or a written statement setting forth the reasons why the construction professional will not proceed to remedy the alleged defect. The homeowner must then, within 30 days, accept or reject the construction professional’s proposed resolution. If the homeowner rejects the offer of repair or settlement presented by the construction professional, the homeowner must serve written notice of the homeowner’s rejection to the construction professional. After delivery of the homeowner’s rejection of the proposed settlement, the homeowner is free to commence a lawsuit against the construction professional.
Montana’s Notice of Claim Statute has an extremely limited scope of judicial interpretation with only one case known to have meaningfully addressed the significance of the Statute as of the date of this publication. That, case, however, highlights unique aspects of Montana’s Notice of Claim Statute as compared to other states, such as Colorado. For example, in Milligan v. Howard Constr. Co., 2004 ML 1621, 18, 2004 Mont. Dist. LEXIS 1776, *7 the District Court highlighted the unique definition of “Claimants” bound by the Statute, as only “a homeowner or association asserting a claim against a construction professional concerning a defect in the construction or remodeling of a residence.” Montana’s definition of “Claimants” is thus more restrictive than other states which often require a pre-suit notice of claim letter on behalf of a claimant filing suit against a construction professional, irrespective as to whether the claimant is a homeowner or association. Thus, in the context of a contractor suing another contractor for construction defects, it does not appear as though it is necessary to circulate a pre-suit notice of claim letter.
For additional information concerning Notice of Claim letters in Montana or about construction defect litigation in Montana, generally, you may reach Jean Meyer by telephone at (406) 219-8422 or by e-mail at meyer@meyerconstructionlaw.com