Minneapolis, Minn., Code of Ordinances § 12 § 250.90
Statutes of limitations for warranties (Minneapolis Housing Code)
Operative Text
(a) A judicial proceeding for breach of any obligation arising under sections 250.60 and 250.70 must be commenced within six (6) years after the cause of action accrues. (b) Subject to subsection (c) hereof, a cause of action under sections 250.60 and 250.70 , regardless of the purchaser's lack of knowledge of the breach, accrues: (1) As to a unit, when the purchaser to whom the warranty is first made enters into possession if a possessory interest was conveyed or at the time of acceptance of the instrument of conveyance if a nonpossessory interest was conveyed; and (2) As to each common element, the later of (i) the time the common element is completed, and (ii) the time the first unit in the condominium is conveyed to a bona fide purchaser. (c) If a warranty under sections 250.60 and 250.70 explicitly extends to future performance or duration of any improvements or component of the condominium, the cause of action accrues at the time the breach is discovered or at the end of the period for which the warranty explicitly extends, whichever is earlier. (79-Or-209, § 1, 10-26-79)
Minneapolis Code § 250.90 sets the time limits within which a legal claim for breach of condominium warranty obligations (established under §§ 250.60 and 250.70) must be filed. Generally, a buyer has six years from the point the cause of action accrues — typically when the buyer takes possession of a unit or when a common element is completed or first conveyed — to bring a judicial proceeding. A special rule applies when a warranty explicitly covers future performance: in that case, the clock starts when the breach is discovered or when the warranty period ends, whichever comes first.
Plain English — not legal advice.
Condominium developers and sellers operating under Minneapolis Code § 250.90 should be aware that warranty obligations tied to individual units and common elements carry a six-year litigation window that begins running at defined trigger points, regardless of whether a buyer is aware of a problem. Operators who provide warranties that explicitly extend to future performance or duration of improvements should document the precise scope and end date of those warranties, since that language directly affects when a cause of action accrues. Maintaining thorough records of conveyance dates, possession transfers, and common-element completion dates is a practice consistent with managing exposure under this provision.
General guidance for property managers — not legal advice for your specific situation. Consult an attorney for advice on your case.
Condominium purchasers in Minneapolis benefit from § 250.90's defined limitations periods, which mean a seller generally cannot argue a warranty claim is time-barred until at least six years have passed from the applicable accrual date. Buyers who discover a defect covered by a warranty that explicitly promised future performance may have additional time, since the clock under that scenario starts at discovery or the warranty's end date — whichever is earlier. Tenants or buyers who believe a warranty claim may be approaching its deadline can consult a tenant-rights organization or housing attorney to understand how the accrual rules under §§ 250.60, 250.70, and 250.90 apply to their circumstances.
General guidance for tenants — not legal advice for your specific situation. Consult a tenant-rights organization or attorney for advice on your case.
Generated September 15, 2026 — auto-generated, not yet human-reviewed. See /transparency for methodology.
Effective Timeline
References Out
No outbound references recorded yet for this provision.
References In
No inbound references recorded yet for this provision.