Reviewed September 7, 2026.
A residential construction arbitration clause requires more analysis than the blanket statement that all such provisions are void. General Business Law § 399-c prohibits the mandatory arbitration provisions it defines in consumer contracts, including qualifying home construction and renovation agreements.
Federal law can change the result
Where the Federal Arbitration Act applies to a transaction involving interstate commerce, it can preempt this state prohibition. The agreement, supporting evidence, applicable law and properly raised arguments matter. Ordinary contract defenses may still apply; a party should not assume that merely naming the FAA guarantees enforcement.
In Zinna v. StrongArm Ventures, LLC, 2025 NY Slip Op 50072(U), a Suffolk County trial court declined to compel arbitration because the defendants failed to establish a valid clause under § 399-c or a basis for FAA preemption. It nevertheless enforced the applicable nonbinding mediation requirement for certain parties. Other transactions with an established interstate connection can have a different result, as DeOliveira v. Custom Made illustrates.
Have residential dispute-resolution terms reviewed before signing. Address mediation, forum, costs, claim procedures and enforceability together. Do not rely on the old suggestion that the homeowner always has a unilateral choice of arbitration or litigation.
Kushnick Pallaci PLLC assists clients throughout New York with construction arbitration and dispute-resolution agreements. Contact 631-752-7100 or vtp@kushnicklaw.com.
Attorney Advertising. General information, not legal advice.
No comments:
Post a Comment