Consumer Protection — HIPA

Listen to this article

Wisconsin Court of Appeals

Civil

Consumer Protection — HIPA

Under the Home Improvement Practices Act, damages must be caused by a violation of the Act, rather than breach of contract, in order to be doubled and result in an award of attorney fees.

“Brandt argues that the trial court erred in failing to double all of the damages awarded by the jury.  Brandt contends that WIS. STAT. § 100.20(5) requires the damages awarded for Grand View’s breach of contract ($1900) and her pecuniary loss ($250) be combined and the total doubled for a damages award of $4300.  WISCONSIN STAT. § 100.20(5) provides: Any person suffering pecuniary loss because of a violation by any other person of any order issued under this section may sue for damages therefor in any court of competent jurisdiction and shall recover twice the amount of such pecuniary loss, together with costs, including a reasonable attorney’s fee.”

“The statute is clear that the only damages to be doubled are those resulting from a ‘pecuniary loss because of a violation … of any order issued under [WIS. ADMIN. CODE § ATCP 110].’  The jury awarded damages for Grand View’s breach of contract separately from damages stemming from Grand View’s § ATCP 110 violation.  Pecuniary damages stemming from Grand View’s failure to give notice of a delay are not supported by any evidence.  Because the record does not support damages for a pecuniary loss, there are no damages to double pursuant to WIS. STAT. § 100.20(5).”

Affirmed in part, and Reversed in part.

Recommended for publication in the official reports.

2012AP8 & 2012AP746 Grand View Windows, Inc., v. Brandt

Dist. I, Milwaukee County, Flanagan, J., Kessler, J.

Attorneys: For Appellant: Connolly, Gwendolyn G., Milwaukee; For Respondent: Ratzel, James C., Brookfield; Schunk, Leslie; Booth, Terry J., Greenfield; Wirth, Joseph M., Milwaukee