Quality Builders Warranty has been protecting America`s homes since 1985. We are committed to providing 10-year home warranties, supported by Liberty Mutual, to the country`s top builders for the most discerning home buyers. Home Buyers will gain lasting trust with the owners in the QBW program because they have been carefully selected and tested to offer the strongest 10-year protection available. Eastwood Construction paid a warranty rate of 1.65 $US per 1,000 $US the sale price of each new home. (Doc. 1, Com. In May 2003, the defendant contacted QBW to lower the rate. The parties agreed that the rate would be reduced to 1.15 $US in exchange for « the defendant`s obligation to maintain its membership in the QBW program. » (Id.) As a result, on May 15, 2003, the parties implemented an amendment to the agreement. In the corresponding part, the amendment amended the agreement as follows: 3. QBW goes beyond its 10-year warranty by providing you with resources for the homeowners to whom you can contact for the maintenance of the house, the resolution of complaints and other useful information. In accordance with these principles of Pennsylvania contract law, we cannot judge Eastwood Construction on the briefs. We must accept QBW that the defendant`s interpretation of paragraph 2 of the amendment, which concerns the extension of the agreement, is ignored and that the plaintiff makes the best interpretation. We begin with paragraph 1, which, as all parties agree, changes the duration of the contract from an indeterminate period to at least three years, at least initially.
This provision refers to the defendant`s « determination of membership » in the guarantee program « for an additional three (3) years » as of May 15, 2003, when the amendment was implemented. In paragraph 2, it is then stated that the reduced rate « remains in effect for the duration of the amendment » and that « the amendment is renewed for a similar mandate, unless thirty (30) days before the end of that mandate or an extension of one of the parties does not inform the other thirty (30) days in writing that they do not intend to apply the time limit at a rate below the master`s , to extend. In paragraph 2, it appears that the reference to a « similar » term reasonably implies an extension equal to the initial three-year term.