¶ 8. In determining what is reasonable under the circumstances, courts have looked to such factors as the age of the home and its maintenance history, the nature of the defect and the extent to which it is discoverable through reasonable inspection, and the parties’ expectations as to the reasonable durability of the defective structure. See, e.g., Hershey v. Rich Rosen Constr. Co., 817 P.2d 55, 61 (Ariz. Ct. App. 1991) (“[T]he duration that an implied warranty will exist is a factual determination that will depend, in part, on the life expectancy of the questioned component in a non-defective condition.”); Wagner Constr Co., 403 N.E.2d at 1148 (finding that five years was reasonable duration of implied warranty for latent defect in residential septic system given “common knowledge that the expected efficient life of a properly installed septic system in a newly constructed dwelling is greater than five years”); see generally F. Powell, Builder-Vendor Liability for Environmental Contamination in the Sale of New Residential Property, 58 Tenn. L. Rev. 231, 238 (1991) (“Most courts hold that the *548[implied] warranty [of habitability or good workmanship] lasts for a ‘reasonable time,’ with the duration of the warranty determined by the nature of the defect and the particular circumstances of the case.”).