DBSP, by contrast, never protected the long run show of the mortgage loans

Although parties may contractually agree to undertake a separate obligation, the breach of which does not arise until some future date, the repurchase obligation undertaken by DBSP does not fit this description. To support its contrary position, the Trust relies on our decision in Bulova Watch Co. v <**25>Celotex Corp. (46 NY2d 606 ), where we considered whether the separate repair clause in a contract for the sale of a roof constituted a future promise of performance, the breach of which created a cause of action. The separate clause the seller included in that contract was a “20-Year Guaranty Bond,” which “expressly guaranteed that [the seller] would ‘at its own expense make any repairs . . . that may become necessary to maintain said Roof’ ” (id. at 608-609).

We stored your guarantee “embod[ied] an agreement unlike the deal to offer roof content,” the fresh new violation of which caused this new law out-of limitations anew (id. from the 610). It was very due to the fact defendant when you look at the Bulova Observe “didn’t just guarantee the position or abilities of items, but accessible to carry out a help” (id. at 612). You to services are brand new separate and you may type of guarantee to fix a beneficial defective rooftop-a critical part of the new parties’ offer and you can “an alternate, independent and extra incentive buying” new defendant’s tool (id. on 611). Correctly, the new “preparations considering properties . . . was at the mercy of a half a dozen-12 months statute . . . running ages occasioned each time a violation of obligation so you’re able to resolve the newest bonded rooftop taken place” (id.).

DBSP’s eliminate otherwise repurchase responsibility are the new Trust’s fix for a violation of them representations and you may warranties, maybe not a promise of the loans’ future show

The newest remedial term in the Bulova Watch expressly secured coming efficiency out of the fresh rooftop and you will undertook a pledge to repair the newest roof in the event that they don’t fulfill the seller’s ensure. It [*7] represented and you may justified specific information about the latest loans’ qualities since , when the MLPA and you can PSA was indeed done, and you may explicitly reported that the individuals representations and guarantees did not survive the new closing day. In lieu of the newest independent verify within the Bulova Watch, DBSP’s reduce otherwise repurchase duty cannot relatively be viewed due to the fact a distinct hope regarding upcoming overall performance. It was influenced by, and indeed by-product away from, DBSP’s representations and guarantees, hence did not survive the newest closure and was broken, if at all, on that big date. [FN3]

In fact, absolutely nothing on package given the treat otherwise repurchase duty carry out last for the life span of the funds

And it makes sense that DBSP, as sponsor and seller, would not guarantee future performance of the mortgage loans, which <**25>might default 10 or 20 years after issuance for reasons entirely unrelated to the sponsor’s representations and warranties. The sponsor merely warrants certain characteristics of the loans, and promises that if those warranties and representations are materially false, it will cure or repurchase the non-conforming loans within the same statutory period in which remedies for breach of contract (i.e. loans Cottondale AL, rescission and expectation damages) could have been sought. [FN4]

If the cure or repurchase obligation did not exist, the Trust’s only recourse would have been to bring an action against DBSP for breach of the representations and warranties. That action could only have been brought within six years of the date of contract execution. The cure or repurchase obligation is an alternative remedy, or recourse, for the Trust, but the underlying act the Trust complains of is the same: the quality of the loans and their conformity with the representations and warranties. The Trust argues, in effect, that the cure or repurchase <**25>obligation transformed a standard breach of contract remedy, i.e. damages, into one that lasted for the life of the investment-decades past the statutory period. But nothing in the parties’ agreement evidences such an intent. Historically, we have been