Florida Construction Defect Notice (§ 558) Timeline Calculator

How this calculator works

Florida's construction-defect litigation framework is governed by two distinct bodies of law that must be read together: F.S. Chapter 558 (the Construction Defect Pre-Suit Notice Statute) which sets the mandatory procedural detour BEFORE suit can be filed, and F.S. § 95.11(3)(c) which sets the underlying statute of limitations and statute of repose ON the cause of action itself. This calculator walks all of them — the 60-day owner notice (75-day for community associations), the 30-day contractor inspection window, the 45-day contractor response window, the 4-year discovery-based SOL, and the post-SB 360 (2023) 7-year repose from substantial completion — and tells the user exactly where the file stands and what the next step should be.

The calculator does not decide the underlying merits of the defect claim. It tells the user four things: where the § 558 pre-suit notice procedure stands today, where the 4-year statute of limitations stands, where the 7-year statute of repose stands, and what the recommended next step is given the contractor's response (or lack of one). Operators reading the output can walk straight from the verdict into the next procedural action — serving the notice, awaiting a response, accepting or rejecting a settlement / repair offer, or filing suit.

The § 558 pre-suit notice framework

F.S. § 558.003 is a mandatory rule: a property owner (or community association) cannot file suit against a contractor, subcontractor, supplier, or design professional for a construction defect without first serving a written pre-suit notice under F.S. § 558.004. Suit filed without notice — or before the notice window has run — is dismissed without prejudice. The procedural cost of skipping the notice is severe enough that no competent Florida construction-defect counsel files without first running the § 558 sequence.

The procedural arc has four temporal phases.

Phase one: notice served (day 0). The owner serves a written notice of claim on the contractor under F.S. § 558.004(1). The notice must describe the alleged defect with reasonable detail sufficient for the contractor to evaluate the claim — Florida courts have repeatedly dismissed (or required amended notice on) one-line claims that fail to specify the nature, location, and observable manifestations of the alleged defect. The notice must be served on every party whose work is potentially implicated: the general contractor, any subcontractor whose scope is involved, any supplier whose materials are alleged to be defective, and any design professional whose plans or specifications are challenged.

Phase two: 30-day inspection window (days 1 through 30). Under F.S. § 558.004(2), the contractor has 30 days from receipt of the notice to inspect, photograph, sample, and destructively test the alleged defect. The owner must provide reasonable access to the property. The contractor's inspection runs in parallel with the owner's own engineering work — both sides typically retain independent third-party experts to develop their record. The owner's documentation of the inspection — date, attendees, scope, photographs taken, samples removed — is critical evidence in any subsequent litigation.

Phase three: 45-day contractor response window (days 1 through 45 for single-family claims; days 1 through 60 for association claims under § 558.004(8)). Under F.S. § 558.004(5), the contractor must respond in writing within the response window with one of three statutory options. The contractor may offer to settle the claim for a stated monetary amount; offer to repair the defect in writing; or formally deny the claim. Silence past the response window functions as a denial — but a written response, even one denying the claim, preserves the contractor's procedural posture more cleanly than silence.

Phase four: 60-day notice window complete (single-family) / 75-day window complete (association). Once the F.S. § 558.004(1) 60-day window (or § 558.004(8) 75-day window) has run, the procedural precondition to filing suit is satisfied. The owner may file the complaint in the circuit court for the county where the property sits.

A worked example. An owner discovers a recurring water-intrusion problem at the kitchen window on March 1. The owner serves a § 558 notice on the general contractor on March 15. The procedural picture under all three windows:

• 30-day inspection window: closes April 14. Contractor inspects on April 5, documents the inspection with a written engineer's report.
• 45-day response window: closes April 29. Contractor responds on April 20 with a written offer to repair the window flashing and replace the gypsum board on the interior wall.
• 60-day pre-suit window: closes May 14. Owner accepts the repair offer in writing on April 25; contractor commences repair on May 1 and completes on May 10. Suit is not filed; the matter is resolved through the § 558 procedure.

That is the statute working as designed. Most § 558 notices that result in a repair offer (rather than a denial) are resolved without suit — which is precisely why the statute exists.

The 4-year statute of limitations under F.S. § 95.11(3)(c)

Independent of the § 558 procedure, F.S. § 95.11(3)(c) imposes a 4-year statute of limitations on actions founded on the design, planning, or construction of an improvement to real property. The 4-year clock runs from discovery of the defect — or from the date the defect could have been discovered with the exercise of reasonable diligence. For patent defects (visible cracks, failed paint, obviously incorrect installation), the discovery date is typically the date the defect appeared. For latent defects (defects hidden inside walls, beneath floors, or behind built-in finishes), discovery can be substantially later — sometimes years after substantial completion.

Two important wrinkles. First, the SOL is tolled during the § 558 pre-suit notice window. The tolling is built into the statute so the mandatory pre-suit procedure does not cause an otherwise-timely claim to fall outside the SOL. Second, the tolling is finite — it covers only the days the file is parked in the § 558 window. Outside of that, the 4-year SOL clock continues to run as normal. Serving a § 558 notice does NOT revive an SOL that has already expired before the notice was served.

The 4-year clock interacts with the 7-year statute of repose discussed below. The owner must file suit within 4 years of discovery AND within 7 years of substantial completion. Whichever of the two clocks runs first ends the claim.

The 7-year statute of repose under SB 360 (2023)

The most consequential recent change to Florida construction-defect law is SB 360, signed in April 2023 and effective April 13, 2023. SB 360 shortened the F.S. § 95.11(3)(c) statute of repose from 10 years to 7 years and clarified the trigger event. The 7-year clock now runs from the LATER of: the date of issuance of a temporary certificate of occupancy, the date of issuance of a certificate of occupancy, the date of issuance of a certificate of completion, or the date of abandonment of construction.

The repose is absolute. Once the 7-year cap expires, no suit may be filed regardless of when the defect was discovered. This is the critical doctrinal difference between the limitations clock (discovery-based, can run long after construction is complete) and the repose clock (substantial-completion-based, runs hard from a fixed date). For latent defects that surface 8 or 9 years after construction, the repose forecloses the claim even though the limitations clock has not started.

Projects substantially completed before SB 360's effective date have transitional treatment. The legislative analysis indicates that claims that had already accrued under the prior 10-year regime received a transitional window — but the precise contours of how Florida courts apply the SB 360 effective-date provisions to older projects are still being worked out. Consult Florida construction-defect counsel for any project whose substantial-completion date falls in the late-2010s or early-2020s; the SB 360 transition can be outcome-determinative.

The community-association variant under § 558.004(8)

Community associations (HOAs and condominium associations) bringing a defect claim on behalf of members run on a longer procedural cycle. Under F.S. § 558.004(8), the pre-suit notice window is 75 days (rather than 60), and the contractor response window is 60 days (rather than 45). The longer windows reflect coordination requirements across multiple units, the association board's fiduciary obligations to its members under the governing documents, and the practical reality that multi-unit defect claims are typically more complex and more expensive than single-family claims.

Association defect claims often involve common-element defects (roof systems, exterior cladding, structural elements, plumbing risers) that affect every unit. The notice must identify which units or building elements are affected and the association's role in the claim. Under § 558.004(8), the association must also serve notice on each unit owner before filing suit — the unit owners have an interest in any recovery and in any agreed-upon repair scope.

What to do when the contractor responds

The three statutory response options under § 558.004(5) each lead to a different next step.

Settlement offer. The contractor offers a monetary settlement. Acceptance in writing is a binding settlement; rejection preserves the owner's right to file suit after the notice window runs. The owner's evaluation question is whether the offered amount fairly compensates for the repair cost, the diminution in property value, and any consequential damages (lost rent, lost use, mold remediation). If the offer is meaningfully below the engineer-estimated repair cost or fails to address subcontractor / design-professional fault, consider rejecting and proceeding to suit.

Repair offer. The contractor offers in writing to repair the defect. Acceptance binds the contractor to commence repairs within a reasonable time. A reasonable repair offer rejected by the owner may be admissible at trial to limit damages — Florida courts give weight to the statutory preference for non-litigation resolution. The owner's evaluation question is whether the proposed scope of repair fully addresses the defect, whether the contractor is bonded and insured for the repair, whether the warranty on the repair work is acceptable, and (critically) whether the contractor's prior performance on the original work suggests the repair will be done properly. If the answers are unsatisfactory, reject the offer and proceed to suit — but document the basis for rejection carefully.

Denial. The contractor formally denies the claim or its responsibility for it. A denial preserves all affirmative defenses (lack of notice detail, statute of limitations, statute of repose, lack of causation, contributory fault by the owner) for the underlying litigation. Once the 60-day (or 75-day) notice window has run, the owner may file suit.

Silence. The contractor does not respond within the 45-day (or 60-day) response window. Silence functions as a denial under F.S. § 558.004(5). The owner may file suit once the full notice window has run. Document the absence of response in the litigation file — the contractor's failure to engage with the statutory process can be relevant evidence at trial.

Verdict precedence

When multiple issues fire at once, the calculator reports them in this order: pre-suit notice compliance verdict (always present, primary output), statute of limitations status, statute of repose status, and recommended next step. A repose-expired claim is the strongest defense the contractor has — once the 7-year cap runs, no procedural maneuvering on the § 558 notice can revive the action. A SOL-expired claim is similarly fatal except where a tolling doctrine applies (active concealment by the contractor, continuing representation, equitable estoppel). Within the § 558 procedural framework, the temporal phases compose in order: inside the inspection window, past the inspection window but inside the response window, past the response window (deemed denial), and notice window complete (suit-ready).

What this calculator does not do

This calculator is a procedural screening tool. It does not:

• Verify the underlying facts. The stated discovery date, substantial-completion date, notice-service date, and contractor response are taken at face value. The single most common construction-defect dispute is over the discovery date — what counts as discovery (the date the symptom appeared, the date the defect was diagnosed, the date the engineer's report was issued) is litigated on the facts of each case.
• Compute the dollar value of the claim. The repair cost, diminution in value, and consequential damages on a construction-defect claim are computed from engineering estimates, contractor bids, and appraisal data — not from the face of a calculator. Counsel reviewing the engineering report and the cost estimates does that work.
• Read the contract or the warranty. Construction contracts routinely include warranty provisions (typically 1 year for workmanship and 10 years for major structural elements under Florida common practice), liquidated-damages clauses, indemnity flow-down, prevailing-party attorney-fee provisions, and arbitration clauses that materially affect the strategic posture. The calculator screens the statutory framework; counsel reads the contract.
• Replace a Florida construction-defect attorney. Litigation over construction defects involves expert witness testimony, complex causation analysis, multiple-defendant joint-and-several allocation, and the SB 360 transitional analysis for older projects. The calculator screens the procedural framework; counsel handles the litigation.

How this page is maintained

F.S. Chapter 558's procedural framework — the 60-day owner notice, 30-day inspection window, 45-day response window, 75-day association notice — has been stable since the statute's adoption. The most consequential recent change is SB 360 (2023), which shortened the F.S. § 95.11(3)(c) statute of repose from 10 years to 7 years and clarified the substantial-completion trigger event. The 4-year statute of limitations has been unchanged.

We monitor each Florida legislative session and re-stamp this page within the quarter after any substantive change. Florida appellate courts continue to develop the case law on what counts as 'reasonable detail' in a § 558 notice and on the SB 360 transitional treatment for projects substantially completed before April 13, 2023. We update the narrative as the case law clarifies.

Last reviewed: 2026-05-15 against F.S. § 558.001, § 558.003, § 558.004(1), § 558.004(2), § 558.004(5), § 558.004(8), and F.S. § 95.11(3)(c) as amended by SB 360 (2023).