Case Updates: Can a Roofing Warranty Transfer to a New Homeowner?
A recent Ohio appellate decision shows why contractors should clearly state whether their warranties transfer—and why a new homeowner should not assume that a warranty disappeared when the property changed hands.
In Kapper v. Valantine Roofing & Home Remodeling, Inc., 2026-Ohio-103, a roofing contractor installed a new roof under a contract containing a ten-year labor warranty. The original homeowner later sold the property and gave the roofing contract to the purchaser as part of the sale. After the new owner discovered significant leaking and water damage, the contractor refused to accept responsibility for the interior damage.
The new homeowner filed a small-claims action and obtained the maximum available judgment of $6,000. The Seventh District Court of Appeals affirmed.
The Warranty Was Transferable
The contractor argued that its labor warranty applied only to the original homeowner and did not transfer with the property.
The problem was that the written contract did not say that.
Ohio law generally permits contractual rights to be assigned unless the agreement clearly prohibits assignment, the assignment materially increases the other party’s risk, or a statute prohibits it. Although the contractor testified that its labor warranty was not transferable, there was no language in the contract limiting assignment of either the material or labor warranty.
The court also found sufficient evidence that an assignment actually occurred. The prior owner gave the roofing contract to the purchaser with the sale of the residence to show that the property had a newer roof. According to the court, that evidence supported the conclusion that the prior owner intended to transfer the contractual rights and the purchaser intended to receive them as part of the purchase.
The contractor’s consent was not required because the assignment occurred between the former homeowner and the new homeowner.
The Consumer Sales Practices Act Applied
The contractor also argued that Ohio’s Consumer Sales Practices Act, or CSPA, did not apply to the roofing contract.
The Seventh District disagreed.
At the time relevant to the case, a “home construction service contract” excluded from the CSPA was defined as a qualifying contract exceeding $25,000. The roofing contract totaled $18,727.09. Because it did not exceed that threshold, the court held that the roof replacement remained a consumer transaction governed by the CSPA.
The court also rejected the argument that the CSPA’s warranty protections applied only to warranties involving goods rather than services. The statutory definition of a consumer transaction expressly includes both goods and services.
Accordingly, the contractor’s refusal to perform repairs under the labor warranty could constitute an unfair or deceptive practice under the CSPA.
Why This Decision Matters
For contractors, the lesson is straightforward: if a labor or workmanship warranty is intended to benefit only the original customer, the contract should say so clearly. An unwritten company policy may not overcome an otherwise transferable written warranty.
For purchasers, warranties connected to recent improvements may have value even when the work was contracted for by a prior owner. Buyers should request copies of roofing, remodeling, HVAC, waterproofing, and other construction contracts during the purchase process.
A warranty does not automatically become unenforceable merely because the home has been sold. The contract language, evidence of assignment, nature of the transaction, and contractor’s response to a warranty claim can all affect the parties’ rights.
This article is provided for general informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. Warranty and assignment rights depend on the language of the particular contract and the facts of the transaction.
