Thomas Baker, along with other who recently purchased new homes, filed a complaint against Osborne Development Corporation. Baker and others, who are the plaintiffs, declared that the homes they purchased from Osborne suffered multiple defects. In response to the complaint, Osborne filed a motion to compel arbitration. Osborne revealed that the plaintiffs had entered into an enforceable arbitration agreement through the Home Buyers Warranty Corporation (HBW). Osborne enrolled the new homes into the HBW program which stated that “…consent to the terms of these documents including the binding arbitration provision contained therein.” The debate now, is whether or not arbitration will still be forced.
This dispute, like most law suits, include two sides which both have rational thought processes and arguments. In this essay, both sides will be debated and weighed using a precedent, and the facts given. …show more content…
When looking at the case as a time sequence, it is quite obvious that the plaintiffs were left in the blind side of the agreement between Osborne and the HBW. When signing the agreement with Osborne, there was nothing concerned with arbitration. It was only when Osborne signed with HBW that they were indirectly under the HBW contract as well. They were notified after the fact that “Any and all claims, disputes and controversies by or between the Homeowner, the Builder, the Warranty Insurer and/or HBW… shall be submitted to arbitration.” To summarize, the arbitration agreement was not included in the terms of any contract between the buyer and the builder. Instead, the clause referring to arbitration was between the builder and