ILCS » Chapter 815 · Act 515
Illinois Compiled Statutes

815 ILCS 515/3 (2026)

Home Repair Fraud

✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section IL-ILGAilga.gov JustiaChapter on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar
(815 ILCS 515/3) (from Ch. 121 1/2, par. 1603)
    Sec. 3. Home Repair Fraud.
    (a) A person commits the offense of home repair fraud when he knowingly enters into an agreement or contract, written or oral, with a person for home repair, and he knowingly:
        (1) Misrepresents a material fact relating to the
    
terms of the contract or agreement or the preexisting or existing condition of any portion of the property involved, or creates or confirms another's impression which is false and which he does not believe to be true, or promises performance which he does not intend to perform or knows will not be performed; or
        (2) uses or employs any deception, false pretense or
    
false promises in order to induce, encourage or solicit such person to enter into any contract or agreement; or
        (3) enters into an unconscionable agreement or
    
contract requiring payment to the contractor of at least $4,000. A contract is unconscionable within the meaning of this Act when an unreasonable difference exists between the value of the services, materials and work to be performed and the amount charged for those services, materials and work. For purposes of this Section, prima facie evidence shall exist that the contract or agreement is unconscionable if the total payment called for by the contract or agreement is in excess of four times the fair market value for those services, materials and work; or
        (4) fails to comply with the provisions of "An Act in
    
relation to the use of an assumed name in the conduct or transaction of business in this State", approved July 17, 1941, as amended, and misrepresents or conceals either his real name, the name of his business, or his business address.
    (b) A person commits the offense of home repair fraud when he knowingly:
        (1) damages the property of a person with the intent
    
to enter into an agreement or contract for home repair; or
        (2) misrepresents himself or another to be an
    
employee or agent of any unit of the federal, State or municipal government or any other governmental unit, or an employee or agent of any public utility, with the intent to cause a person to enter into, with himself or another, any contract or agreement for home repair.
    (c) For purposes of subsection (a), paragraph (1), it shall be a rebuttable presumption of intent or knowledge that a person promises performance which he does not intend to perform and knows will not be performed when, after no performance or no substantial performance of a contract or agreement for home repair, he fails or refuses to return payments made by the victim and he:
        (1) fails to acknowledge or respond to a written
    
demand for commencement or completion of home repair within 10 days after such demand is mailed or presented to him by the victim or by the victim's legal representative or by a law enforcement or consumer agency acting on behalf of the victim; or
        (2) fails to notify the victim in writing of a change
    
of business name or address prior to the completion of the home repair; or
        (3) makes false statements or representations to the
    
victim to excuse his non-performance or non-substantial performance; or
        (4) uses deception to obtain the victim's consent to
    
modification of the terms of the original contract or agreement; or
        (5) fails to employ qualified personnel necessary to
    
perform the home repair; or
        (6) fails to order or purchase the basic materials
    
required for performance of the home repair; or
        (7) fails to comply with municipal, county, State or
    
federal regulations or codes relating to the performance of home repair.
    Intent and knowledge shall be determined by an evaluation of all circumstances surrounding a transaction and the determination shall not be limited to the time of contract or agreement.
    Substantial performance shall not include work performed in a manner of little or no value or work that fails to comply with the appropriate municipal, county, State or federal regulations or codes.
(Source: P.A. 87-820.)

    
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 23 cases (3 in the last 5 years), 1995–2025 · leading case: People v. Watts, 692 N.E.2d 315 (Ill. 1998).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
People v. Watts, 692 N.E.2d 315 (Ill. 1998). · cites it 11× “" 815 ILCS 515/3 (West 1994). Subsection (a), paragraph (1), of the Act sets forth the two elements of home repair fraud under which defendant was convicted: (1) entering a contract for home repair; and (2) having no intent to perform as promised under the contract.”
People v. Reimer, 2012 IL App (1st) 101253 (Ill. App. Ct. 2012). · cites it 11× “Defendant attached to his motion as exhibits the transcript of the grand jury proceedings, a copy of section 3 of the Home Repair Fraud Act (815 ILCS 515/3 (West 2008)), and his criminal history report.”
People v. Flynn, 792 N.E.2d 527 (Ill. App. Ct. 2003). · cites it 4× “JUSTICE GROMETER delivered the opinion of the court; Following a jury trial in the circuit court of Du Page County, defendant, Harry Flynn, was convicted of one count of theft (720 ILCS 5/16 — 1(a)(2)(A) (West 2000)) and one count of home repair fraud (815 ILCS 515/3(a)(2) (West…”
People v. Jordan, 843 N.E.2d 870 (Ill. 2006). “2d at 148 , quoting 815 ILCS 515/3(c) (West 1994). In this context, we see no significant difference in the phrases “there is” and “it shall be.”
People v. Hart, 661 N.E.2d 1154 (Ill. App. Ct. 1996). · cites it 5× “815 ILCS 515/3(a)(1), 5 (West 1992). The original information filed by the State in this case alleged that defendant violated the Act "in that [defendant] represented that he was acting as R&M Construction, an insured and licensed contractor, when the company was no longer in…”
People v. Watts, 667 N.E.2d 150 (Ill. App. Ct. 1996). · cites it 9× “] * * * Intent and knowledge shall be determined by an evaluation of all circumstances surrounding a transaction and the determination shall not be limited to the time of contract or agreement.”
People v. Hofer, 806 N.E.2d 662 (Ill. App. Ct. 2004). · cites it 2× “Hofer, was convicted of home repair fraud (815 ILCS 515/3 (West 1998)) and was sentenced to, inter alia, 30 months’ reporting probation and 60 days’ home detention.”
People v. Thompson, 656 N.E.2d 77 (Ill. App. Ct. 1995). · cites it 2× “JUSTICE CERDA delivered the opinion of the court: After a bench trial, defendant, Henry Thompson was convicted of two counts of aggravated home repair fraud (815 ILCS 515/3, 5 (West 1992)) and one count of theft (720 ILCS 5/16—1(A) (West 1992)).”
People v. Steele, 851 N.E.2d 920 (Ill. App. Ct. 2006). “2d 133 , the supreme court held unconstitutional a portion of the home repair fraud statute that required a defendant to disprove intent not to perform a contract where the State proved any of a number of predicate facts (815 ILCS 515/3(c) (West 1994)). The court explained: “We…”
In re Angel P., 2014 IL App (1st) 121749 (Ill. App. Ct. 2014). “The grand jury indicted the defendant for violations of the Home Repair Fraud Act (815 ILCS 515/3(a)(1) (West 2008)). The defendant alleged that the indictment resulted from prosecutorial misconduct in that the prosecutor misstated the law as to the element of intent to the…”
People v. Miller, 2021 IL App (1st) 192517-U (Ill. App. Ct. 2021). · cites it 3× “815 ILCS 515/3(a)(2) (West 2016). A person commits aggravated home repair fraud they commit home repair fraud against a person 60 years of age or older.”
People v. Flynn (Ill. App. Ct. 2003). · cites it 4× “Alternatively, defendant asserts that (1) the trial court's evidentiary rulings deprived him of a fair trial; (2) his convictions of both home repair fraud and theft violate the one-act, one-crime rule; and (3) the State failed to prove him guilty beyond a reasonable doubt of…”
Show all 23 citing cases →
— 815 ILCS 515/3(a)(1) — 11 cases
People v. Reimer, 2012 IL App (1st) 101253 (Ill. App. Ct. 2012). “Defendant attached to his motion as exhibits the transcript of the grand jury proceedings, a copy of section 3 of the Home Repair Fraud Act (815 ILCS 515/3 (West 2008)), and his criminal history report.”
People v. Watts, 692 N.E.2d 315 (Ill. 1998). “" 815 ILCS 515/3 (West 1994). Subsection (a), paragraph (1), of the Act sets forth the two elements of home repair fraud under which defendant was convicted: (1) entering a contract for home repair; and (2) having no intent to perform as promised under the contract.”
In re Angel P., 2014 IL App (1st) 121749 (Ill. App. Ct. 2014). “The grand jury indicted the defendant for violations of the Home Repair Fraud Act (815 ILCS 515/3(a)(1) (West 2008)). The defendant alleged that the indictment resulted from prosecutorial misconduct in that the prosecutor misstated the law as to the element of intent to the…”
People v. Hart, 661 N.E.2d 1154 (Ill. App. Ct. 1996). “815 ILCS 515/3(a)(1), 5 (West 1992). The original information filed by the State in this case alleged that defendant violated the Act "in that [defendant] represented that he was acting as R&M Construction, an insured and licensed contractor, when the company was no longer in…”
People v. Watts, 667 N.E.2d 150 (Ill. App. Ct. 1996). “] * * * Intent and knowledge shall be determined by an evaluation of all circumstances surrounding a transaction and the determination shall not be limited to the time of contract or agreement.”
— 815 ILCS 515/3(a)(2) — 3 cases
People v. Flynn, 792 N.E.2d 527 (Ill. App. Ct. 2003). “JUSTICE GROMETER delivered the opinion of the court; Following a jury trial in the circuit court of Du Page County, defendant, Harry Flynn, was convicted of one count of theft (720 ILCS 5/16 — 1(a)(2)(A) (West 2000)) and one count of home repair fraud (815 ILCS 515/3(a)(2) (West…”
People v. Flynn (Ill. App. Ct. 2003). “Alternatively, defendant asserts that (1) the trial court's evidentiary rulings deprived him of a fair trial; (2) his convictions of both home repair fraud and theft violate the one-act, one-crime rule; and (3) the State failed to prove him guilty beyond a reasonable doubt of…”
People v. Miller, 2021 IL App (1st) 192517-U (Ill. App. Ct. 2021). “815 ILCS 515/3(a)(2) (West 2016). A person commits aggravated home repair fraud they commit home repair fraud against a person 60 years of age or older.”
— 815 ILCS 515/3(a)(3) — 1 case
People v. Miller, 2021 IL App (1st) 192517-U (Ill. App. Ct. 2021). “815 ILCS 515/3(a)(2) (West 2016). A person commits aggravated home repair fraud they commit home repair fraud against a person 60 years of age or older.”
— 815 ILCS 515/3(a)(l) — 4 cases
People v. Watts, 692 N.E.2d 315 (Ill. 1998). “" 815 ILCS 515/3 (West 1994). Subsection (a), paragraph (1), of the Act sets forth the two elements of home repair fraud under which defendant was convicted: (1) entering a contract for home repair; and (2) having no intent to perform as promised under the contract.”
People v. Hart, 661 N.E.2d 1154 (Ill. App. Ct. 1996). “815 ILCS 515/3(a)(1), 5 (West 1992). The original information filed by the State in this case alleged that defendant violated the Act "in that [defendant] represented that he was acting as R&M Construction, an insured and licensed contractor, when the company was no longer in…”
People v. Hofer, 806 N.E.2d 662 (Ill. App. Ct. 2004). “Hofer, was convicted of home repair fraud (815 ILCS 515/3 (West 1998)) and was sentenced to, inter alia, 30 months’ reporting probation and 60 days’ home detention.”
People v. Parks, 934 N.E.2d 582 (Ill. App. Ct. 2010).
— 815 ILCS 515/3(c) — 8 cases
People v. Watts, 692 N.E.2d 315 (Ill. 1998). “" 815 ILCS 515/3 (West 1994). Subsection (a), paragraph (1), of the Act sets forth the two elements of home repair fraud under which defendant was convicted: (1) entering a contract for home repair; and (2) having no intent to perform as promised under the contract.”
People v. Jordan, 843 N.E.2d 870 (Ill. 2006). “2d at 148 , quoting 815 ILCS 515/3(c) (West 1994). In this context, we see no significant difference in the phrases “there is” and “it shall be.”
People v. Reimer, 2012 IL App (1st) 101253 (Ill. App. Ct. 2012). “Defendant attached to his motion as exhibits the transcript of the grand jury proceedings, a copy of section 3 of the Home Repair Fraud Act (815 ILCS 515/3 (West 2008)), and his criminal history report.”
People v. Steele, 851 N.E.2d 920 (Ill. App. Ct. 2006). “2d 133 , the supreme court held unconstitutional a portion of the home repair fraud statute that required a defendant to disprove intent not to perform a contract where the State proved any of a number of predicate facts (815 ILCS 515/3(c) (West 1994)). The court explained: “We…”
People v. Watts, 667 N.E.2d 150 (Ill. App. Ct. 1996). “] * * * Intent and knowledge shall be determined by an evaluation of all circumstances surrounding a transaction and the determination shall not be limited to the time of contract or agreement.”
— 815 ILCS 515/3(c)(5) — 1 case
People v. Watts, 667 N.E.2d 150 (Ill. App. Ct. 1996). “] * * * Intent and knowledge shall be determined by an evaluation of all circumstances surrounding a transaction and the determination shall not be limited to the time of contract or agreement.”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.