We had a frank conversation with the builder about costs, as well as what was and wasn't worth fighting over. Some items were able to be repaired without impacting the budget by subcontractors that were already coming in to do other things. Other things we didn't care enough about to make a fuss over (like the roof line not matching up right on the back side of the house, where no one will ever notice). Some things we asked her to fix at her expense.
We were very aware that big projects, be they software or home construction, don't ever go perfectly, so we made a conscious effort to stay calm and solution-oriented through the entire multi-year process. We came in very slightly under budget, and things that need to get addressed are getting addressed, whereas a lawsuit would have turned things adversarial very quickly.
>We were very aware that big projects, be they software or home construction, don't ever go perfectly
Most large projects have some central features/processes that are by their very nature both very expensive and very complicated.
The entire prefab industry is built around minimising those things - but then something ELSE becomes the most expensive/complicated thing. You then have a situation where if you're seen as a bottleneck, holding up the expensive/complicated thing, then the total cost of the project will balloon.
Many prefab companies know this and are happy to sell modules with little QA work done, because it's unlikely that there will be serious repercussions. Once you accept the work then it'll be too hard for your legal team to fight for (or at least, not financially worth it).
I'm not saying that prefab companies are ethically bankrupt, but it IS an environment that promotes this method of doing business. I've been in construction for mining/oil&gas companies, on both sides of this situation, quite a few times. The amount of shoddy work you're willing to accept is quite terrifying once the cost for re-work gets into nine and ten digits.
I imagine it's because he would be largely up against a company and litigators skilled at meeting the letter of the contract if not the spirit. "Winning" would likely see him get a minimum level of corrections done to the house, which could be accomplished for less than the cost of a lawsuit.
According to my neighbor, who is a lawyer and likes to drink, this is pretty common. He is on a lot of cases where the lawsuit makes him (the lawyer) more money than either party would have saved or lost had they just settled up front.
The one I remember had to do w/ $1900 worth of lost wedding photos cuz a server died or got deleted. Cost more to twist the knife in court than to just settle.
Probably depends on your local jurisdiction... I am not a lawyer but my own experiences tell me that any kind of civil case below about $50K, the courts would really you rather not bother them with this, and you are going to spend at least 20% of that and several years before you may or may not see a dime.
Oh and the 15k are only for legal costs. Don't forget rent for 3 years on top of that. And all the money that you'll still have to pay for the construction. And stress (medical bills are not cheap).
We were very aware that big projects, be they software or home construction, don't ever go perfectly, so we made a conscious effort to stay calm and solution-oriented through the entire multi-year process. We came in very slightly under budget, and things that need to get addressed are getting addressed, whereas a lawsuit would have turned things adversarial very quickly.