Vid nybyggnation av bostadshus och vid vissa bygglovspliktiga ändringsarbeten föreligger ett lagstadgat krav att byggfelsförsäkring skall tecknas. Försäkringen omfattar kostnader för att avhjälpa fel som uppkommit under byggtiden och syftar till att snabbt avhjälpa fel och brister utan långvariga tvister om vem som skall ta på sig kostnaden för att undanröja bristerna - en god tanke som dessvärre verkar fungera sämre i verkligheten. Lagen innehåller nämligen flertalet bestämmelser om tillåtna ansvarsbegränsningar vilket lett till att det vid flera situationer inte föreligger någon rätt till ersättning trots att det är rimligt att anta att skadorna skall täckas av försäkringen. Denna uppsats syftar därmed till att beskriva, belysa och analysera byggfelsförsäkringens tillämpning för att på så sätt komma fram till om syftet med lagen verkligen upprätthålls så som lagen är utformad idag eller om lagen borde ändras och i så fall på vilket sätt den borde förändras. Efter att ha studerat gällande rätt och föreliggande försäkringsvillkor har jag funnit att byggfelsförsäkringens tillämpningsområde är väldigt snävt och därmed borde utvidgas för att lagen skall vara helt ändamålsenlig. Jag anser således att utvecklingsfel borde omfattas av försäkringens tillämpningsområde för att byggherren skall erhålla ett fullgott skydd för byggfel. Jag är även av den uppfattningen att konsumenter som väljer att själva uppföra sitt hus utan olägenheter kan uteslutas från försäkringsobligatoriet då försäkringen medför minimal nytta för dessa. / At the moment there is an existing statutory requirement regarding taking out an insurance policy each time a residential property is being constructed and also in connection to certain acts of modifications which require building permit. This insurance policy covers costs relating to compensations of defects in relation to the property, which have arisen during the construction time, with the purpose of restoring defects and errors and thereby avoiding lengthy legal proceedings concerning the identity of whom is responsible for the cost of restoring the errors. The idea is originally a good one, however, it does not seem to function very well in real life. The statute contains several rules regarding limitations of legal liability, which has led to the consequence that a right to compensation often is lacking, although it is reasonable to assume that the defects in question should indeed be covered by the insurance policy. This dissertation aims to describe, illuminate and analyse the Building Defects Insurance Act and its area of scope, and thereby examine whether the purpose of the Act is fulfilled as it is construed at this point in time or whether the Act should be altered and, in that case, in what way that could be done. My conclusion, after examining the present legal situation and existing insurance policies, is that the Building Defects Insurance Act has quite a narrow scope and therefore should be extended in order for the Act to fulfil its purpose. In my opinion, defects in property developments should be considered being within the scope of the insurance policy, in order to offer the property developer full protection regarding defects in the property. It is also my opinion that consumers choosing to construct their own properties can, without difficulty, be excluded from the requirement of insurance since the insurance is of very limited value for consumers.

The purpose of this paper is to investigate whether development faults can be considered part of the term faulty in the Swedish Consumer Services Act and where the liability for developmental faults lies in connection with construction in general, and especially with single house construction. Developmental faults are a kind of latent defects. In legal terms developmental faults are defined as defects that have arisen despite that the work has been made in what is considered to be a professional way at the time of completion. A construction is defective if it deviates from the professional standard, or from what has been agreed. The assessment shall be made according to the circumstances at the time of the inspection of the construction. This is particularly interesting in the case of developmental faults, since the construction methods are often poorly tested, and the defects usually show up at a later time. Developmental faults in real estate seem to be a part of the buyer’s liability. The Swedish Supreme Court concluded this in their rulings Fritidshuset i Transtrand and Malmöfasaden. The Swedish Supreme Court however, reserved themselves by saying that deviations can be made from this conclusion. An example of such a deviation come from a ruling called Villorna i Lund, where the Supreme Court stated that single house buyers must, especially when the houses are new, be able to expect that the houses are generally functional and not having any special defects that make them less suited for accommodation. The question of liability regarding developmental faults in construction tend to be determined in each individual case. Special consideration is made to whether the fault is substantial and if the fault is caused by the contractor’s carelessness, which the Supreme Court concluded in their ruling Myresjöhus II. An exception is made for single house constructions, where an argument can be made that the contractor always is liable for developmental faults. Both precedent, especially Myresjöhus II, and doctrine show that contractors have a responsibility for their method of choice. Whether the method has been widely used in the industry previously has no implications on the responsibility of the contractors if the method is defective. This paper concludes that developmental faults cannot be considered part of the general term of faulty in the Swedish Consumer Services Act. However it can be considered part of the term faulty regarding single house construction. Regarding the question of liability, it can be divided in three sections. Developmental faults in real estate lies as a general rule under the buyer’s liability. The liability of developmental faults in construction is determined in each individual case with regard to whether the fault is substantial and if the fault is caused by the contractor’s carelessness. Lastly, developmental faults in connection with single house construction is part of the contractor’s liability. These liabilities are, of course, only viable provided that a complaint has been made within the specified liability period.

No description available.