Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Housing Consumer Protection topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Resident raises warranty, safety and billing complaints about new home; city says property was not CRA-funded
Summary
A Lake Wales homeowner reported construction defects and billing issues at 119 D Street and said the builder (referred to in the record as Sharif Homes) has not remedied problems; assistant city manager told the commission the property did not receive CRA funding though the builder has worked on other CRA projects.
Get email alerts on the Housing Consumer Protection topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Yvette Patillo, who identified herself as the homeowner at 119 D Street, told the commission she bought the house last April and described multiple concerns including a meter pole at the property, an unusually high electric bill she said Duke Energy attributes in part to the city, debris in a back alley causing flat tires, and construction and warranty problems she says she has experienced with the builder identified in the record as Sharif Holmes/Sharif Homes.
Patillo said the house shows cracking, the vinyl flooring is lifting, she has had repeated electrical and air-conditioning issues, a leak that entered cabinetry, and warranty work that she said has been delayed for nearly a year. She provided photos to staff and said she may need to pursue civil remedies if the warranty company and builder do not resolve the problems.
Assistant City Manager reviewed the property records for the commission and said the specific home at 119 D Street was not purchased with CRA funds and was not a CRA-owned property; the assistant manager added that Sharif Holmes has received CRA funding for other projects in the community. Staff reported contacting the builder (through Daryl Starling) and that the builder's response characterized the remaining issue as between the homeowner and the warranty company.
Commissioners asked for clarification about the CRA’s role and were told the city's responsibility is limited to standard code enforcement and that warranties are between homeowners and builders or manufacturers. No formal action was taken at the meeting; the homeowner was directed to leave documentary photos with staff.
