Posts Tagged ‘Lien Waivers’

Changes to Utah Mechanic Lien Laws Take Effect August 1, 2011

As the world turns, mechanic’s lien laws are changed by legislatures across the country.  On average, at least five substantial changes occur each year across the country, and this year, the state of Utah’s number has been called. The legislature has passed two bills that modifies mechanics lien laws, with the majority of these changes to take effect starting August 1, 2011. This post summarizes those changes.

Full text of lien law revision bills:

Utah Legislature HB0115:  Mechanic Lien Amendments (pdf) (html)
Utah Legislature HB0260: Mechanic Lien Revisions (pdf) (html)

A New Category of Liens:  Preconstruction Liens

One substantial change to Utah’s lien laws is the creation of a new category of work that qualifies for mechanic lien filings:  “Pre-Construction Services.” Utah Code 38-1-2 was amended to create this new definition of services and liens:

(13) “Preconstruction service”:
(a) means to plan or design, or to assist in the planning or design of, an improvement or a proposed improvement: (i) before construction of the improvement commences; and (ii) for compensation separate from any compensation paid or to be paid for construction service for the improvement; and
(b) includes consulting, conducting a site investigation or assessment, programming,preconstruction cost or quantity estimating, preconstruction scheduling, performing a preconstruction construction feasibility review, procuring construction services, and preparing a study, report, rendering, model, boundary or topographic survey, plat, map, design, plan, drawing, specification, or contract document.

Any party who provides such “preconstruction services” will now have the right to file a lien against the property for these services even if work never is performed on the property. While this may seem a small change at first glance, it’s pretty significant when you consider the purposes of mechanic lien laws.

As discussed in our Short History of the Mechanic Lien post, a construction participant is given a privilege in property based on work or materials incorporated into an improvement. While there are always exceptions, this incorporation requirement has been a primary consideration in lien laws across the nation for 200 years.

Here, the “preconstruction services” creates a specific type of lien for construction type services that may never get tangibly incorporated into any property or building.  Interestingly, the U.C. 38-1-3 states that a person may claim both a preconstruction and a construction lien on the same property separately. One peculiarity that may cause problems for Utah contractors in the future is that a construction lien may include an amount claimed for preconstruction services, but a preconstruction lien may not include an amount claimed for construction services.

To claim a Preconstruction Lien, the claimant must file a “Notice of Preconstruction Lien” within 90 days after completing preconstruction services. This notice must be actually filed with the county recorder for the county where the property is located, as submitting to the State Construction Registry (SCR) is not provided by the statues. The lien notice must meet statutory requirements, and must be sent to the property owner within 30 days of filing.

Notice of Retention for Preconstruction Services

Whenever a construction participant starts performing pre-construction services, they must file a “Notice of Rentention” with the State Construction Registry within 20 days of beginning that work to preserve their right to later file a mechanic lien for these services.

The failure to file a Notice of Rention results in a complete loss of lien rights for the pre-construction services.

Preliminary Notice Almost Always Required

Prior to these 2011 amendments, subcontractors and material suppliers were excused from filing a preliminary notice if a notice of commencement was not timely filed on the project. This exception, however, has now been eliminated.  Now, unless you are an individual laborer working for wages, you must always file a preliminary notice to preserve your lien rights to file a construction services lien.

Lien Priority Clarifications

When money gets tight on a construction project, Lien Priority issues can become very important. We’ve addressed lien priority issues on this blog under the tag: Lien Priority. The most common lien priority issue is the tension between a mechanic lien filing and a construction loan or property mortgage. Which has priority over the other?

Except in a minority of jurisdictions (i.e. Virginia), the first document filed in county records is the one with priority over others. The question with mechanic’s liens is whether they are effective at the time of recording, or if they relate back to the time when the construction work began.

Prior to these Utah lien law amendments, a mechanic lien related back to the date when the lien claimant first delivered labor or materials. The rule changes effective August 1, 2011, make the rules even more favorable to the lien claimant, now relating all the way back to when construction first began on the entire project, or the date of the first filing of a preliminary notice (depending on circumstances, project type, services type, etc.).  While there are some complications here that affect which priority date sticks, the big-picture change is that the lien priority date is earlier than previously provided.

Restriction on Waiving Lien Rights

Some states allow contractors or suppliers to waive their right to lien before they ever begin work, or before they get paid. Other states prohibit this. We wrote about this situation previously on this blog.  With the new Utah lien law revisions, Utah joins the states that prohibit lien waivers before payment.  The new provision specifically provides:

38-1-29. No waiver of rights — Exception — Payment applied first to preconstruction service lien.

(1) (a) A right or privilege under this chapter may not be waived or limited by contract.(b) A provision of a contract purporting to waive or limit a right or privilege under this chapter is void.

Subscribe to our Feed to Monitor Lien Law Changes

Whenever lien laws are changed across the country, we post about them and throw the post into our “Lien Law Alerts” category. The state affected by the lien law change is tagged with the state name (in this case, Utah).  If you’d like to monitor these law changes, you can subscribe to the category feed, the applicable tag feed, or the blog’s general feed.  It’s a great way to get free updates on lien law changes across the country.

Plus, since keeping up with lien law changes across the country is hard, this presents another reason why it’s smart to outsource your preliminary notice and mechanic lien work to a company like Zlien, who monitors the nuances of lien laws. For more reasons why you should use a service like Zlien, check out this blog post:  Why You Shouldn’t Use Do-It-Yourself Mechanic Lien and Notice Forms.

Posted in:     Lien Law Alerts  /  Tags: , , , , , , ,   /   4 Comments

Can Contract Provisions Alter Your Lien Rights?

My friend Chris Hill recently posted a blog post on Construction Law Musings discussing a recent Virginia trial level decision in TWP Enterprises v. Dressel, wherein the court addressed the question of whether contractual provisions can alter a party’s mechanic lien rights.  The blog post is highly recommended:  Where Mechanic’s Liens and Contracts Collide.

Chris explains the issue in the case well:

[T]he Court considered a provision of a contract between the TWP Enterprises, a supplier of materials to the construction project, and the builder for the defendant. The provision between the supplier and builder essentially stated that until such time as TWP’s materials were paid for in full, TWP kept title to them…

The owners argued – essentially – that since the supplier maintained ownership interest in the materials, they had – in effect – waived their right to lien the project, because they couldn’t lien their own materials.

As an attorney, this argument seems dubious at best; one that doesn’t pass the “smell test.”  With that said, it does have a logical foundation and I suppose I understand how the attorneys got this concept.

The Virginia trial court gave four or five different reasons in rejecting the argument and holding that the mechanic lien was indeed valid. One of the enumerated reasons that caught my attention was one directed to Virginia’s public policy, summarized by Chris in his blog post as follows: “To enforce the provision described above as argued by the owners would create and implied waiver of lien rights.”

In other words, this argument would allow the suppliers – in a round-about way – to waive their lien rights before performing work. And this, as we previously discussed on the Construction Lien Blog – isn’t allowed in most states.

Posted in:     Lien Law Alerts, Mechanic Liens  /  Tags: , , , ,   /   2 Comments

Lien & Bond Law Changes Introduced in North Carolina Legislature

As reported by North Carolina Construction News, NC House Bill 489 (read full text) has been recently introduced to the state’s General Assembly. It is titled “Mechanics Lien and Bond Law Revisions,” and aims to make some important amendments to the lien laws in North Carolina.

We’ll monitor the progress of this bill here on the Construction Lien Blog. Here is a summary of the changes proposed by the original text:

Off-Site Prefabricated Material Suppliers Protected

The new law would allow parties to lien for the “off-site design, fabrication and related labor and materials in connection with noncommodity prefabricated materials, product systems or equipment customized for the use and benefit of improving particular real property whether delivered to the real property or not.” There are only few instances in lien laws across the country when folks can obtain lien rights without having their materials or labor installed into the jobsite. Specially fabricated materials is one of those instances in some states…and North Carolina is looking to add themselves to the mix.

Notice of Commencement Filing Requirement

A Notice of Commencement must be filed for all North Carolina projects with the county clerk. While initially the owner is required to file the notice, if the owner fails to do so, the contractor may file the notice. In addition to the filing requirement, the notice must also be displayed on the job site, and a copy distributed to anyone who requests the same within 5 days of the request. Building inspections will not go forward on the project unless the notice of commencement is properly filed, and displayed on-site.

A special type of notice is required when an owner is acting as the general contractor to build a residential structure that is a four family residential building or less. In this instance, a Notice of Owner Built Project must be filed and displayed on site.

Effective Date of Lien Filing

This particular proposed legislative change is in direct response to a case pending with the North Carolina Appeals Court, previously discussed here on the Construction Lien Blog:  Preserve Holdings LLC v. Superior Construction Corp.

Preserve Holdings is a lien priority case, with a lien claimant contractor pitted against a construction lender, fighting over whose claim has priority over the other’s. The contractor argues its lien claim starts when materials and labor were first delivered, and the construction lender argues that each time the contractor got paid (and executed a lien waiver), the lien claim for that period was waived and the claim only related back to the last unpaid portion of work.

§44A-10 used to read very simply: “A claim of lien on real property….shall relate to and take effect from the time of the first furnishing of labor or materials at the site of the improvement by the person claiming the claim of lien on real property.”

The proposed amendment complicates things a bit, but is certainly more specific:

A claim of lien on real property…shall relate to and take effect from the earlier of (i) the time that the claimant files its claim of lien on real property with the clerk of superior court; (ii) the time that a notice of commencement is filed with the clerk of superior court; or (iii) for a first, second or third tier subcontractor, the date of filing its notice to owner if there has been no notice of commencement previously filed for the contractor through which the subcontractor has provided labor and materials for the improvement of property. In the event there are insufficient proceeds to satisfy all claims of lien on real property, claims of lien shall be satisfied as follows:
(1) Claims of lien on real property shall be satisfied in full by the priority of their effective dates.
(2) Claims of lien on real property with the same effective date shall be satisfied on a pro rata basis with the other claims of lien on real property with the same effective date.

Lien Waiver Policy More Fully Explained

In Another nod to the pending appeals case (Preserve Holdings), the bill proposes some changes to the lien laws treatment of lien waivers.

We’ve discussed lien waivers on this blog in the past:  No Lien Clauses – Are They Valid?

This article was written quite some time ago (2007), but remains completely accurate. Some states allow parties to waive their lien rights before any work begins, and others consider this type of waiver to be against public policy. North Carolina has always been a state that considered such waivers to be against public policy.

But, as the Preserve Holdings case is demonstrating, there is a blur between a pre-work lien waiver, and those partial lien waivers that are executed throughout the course of a project in every state, and understanding what the limits are upon these routine partial lien waivers can be difficult.

The proposed law makes it clear that partial lien waivers (i) do not alter or waive the lien’s effective date; and (ii) are conditional upon the claimant’s actual receipt of funds. Additionally, the proposed law also gives a partial lien waiver form that must be used.

Subcontractor Notices

Currently, North Carolina subcontractors are only required to deliver notices if the general contractor has filed a notice of contract. House Bill 489 proposes that all subcontractors must serve a notice to owner upon the owner, and file the notice with the superior court clerk. Subcontractors more remote than the first tier must also serve the notice upon the property owner.  This notice will be required within 30 days from when labor and/or materials are first provided.

Conclusion

All in all, House Bill 489 proposes some substantial changes to the North Carolina Mechanic Lien system. We’ll watch it closely here at the Construction Lien Blog, and report on any changes and progress. Remember, for now, these new laws are not effective…but merely proposed.

Posted in:     Lien Law Alerts  /  Tags: , , , ,   /   1 Comment

“No Liens” Clauses – Are They Valid?

It is ordinary for a subcontractor or supplier to execute a lien waiver after it receives payment for services and/or materials. Construction contracts, however, sometimes go one step further by requiring a subcontractor or supplier to waive its lien rights as a condition of accepting the contract.

There is some question in Louisiana jurisprudence as to whether these provisions are enforceable or unenforceable.

The 2004 5th Circuit Court of Appeals case that muddied the water on this issue was captioned Shaw Constructors v. ICF Kaiser Engineers, Inc. In deciding whether a pre-work lien wavier would be valid, the court turned to Louisiana jurisprudence on the requirements for a valid waiver in general.

Generally speaking, a “waiver” in Louisiana occurs only when there is “an existing right, a knowledge of its existence and an actual intention to relinquish it or conduct so inconsistent with the intent to enforce the right as to induce a reasonable belief that it has been relinquished.” Steptore v. Masco Constr. Co., Inc., 643 So.2d 1213, 1216 (La. 1994).

In Shaw Constructors, the court reasoned that when the subcontract at issue was formed, Shaw had no known existing legal right to file a claim or lien against the property because no work had been performed. Without an “existing right” to file the lien, there could not be a waiver of that right.

The Court also attacked the pre-work lien waiver from a different angle, by reasoning that the defendants had an obligation to pay Shaw under the contract wherein Shaw waived its lien rights. By not paying its subcontractor, it failed to perform on an obligation of the contract, thereby giving Shaw the right to dissolve the contract entirely. The dissolution of the contract would, according to the 5th Circuit, also dissolve the lien waiver.

The 5th Circuit Court of Appeals therefore held that the lien waiver provision could not be enforced against Shaw.

This ruling should not affect the enforceability of lien waivers executed by subcontractors or suppliers after work is performed.

In contrast to pre-work waivers, post-work waivers occur after the right to lien has vested with the subcontractor/supplier. As a result, the subcontractor or supplier has an actual right to waive, and the waiver would likely be valid.

Furthermore, it is worthwhile to note that while the Shaw decision weighs heavily against “no liens” clauses in contracts, it’s not necessarily the final word on the issue.

First, Shaw was decided by the Federal 5th Circuit and not by a Louisiana court. In its decision, the 5th Circuit simply attempts to “predict” what a state court would do if faced with the same legal question. If and when the “no liens” clause issue gets to the state courts, there might be a different outcome.

Second, the Shaw court hints that circumstances might exist when it would uphold a “no liens” clause. In its comparison of the Louisiana Private Works Act to the similar statutes in Illinois, the court highlights that subcontractors and suppliers in Louisiana can lien a project even when there is no breach in the contract. If a sub or supplier finds itself in this situation, and his claim rights were vested at the time of signing the contract, it is possible that the “no liens” clause would be enforced against it.

For all intents and purposes, however, the Shaw decision places great restraints on “no liens” clauses in contracts.

Generals may want to explore other methods of protecting jobs against liens, and will specifically want to get post-work lien waivers from the subs and supplier regardless of whether they have a pre-work lien waiver.

On the other hand, subs and suppliers should discuss their lien rights with an attorney before the expiration of their claim period even if they signed a contract with a “no liens” clause.

Posted in:     The Legal Corner  /  Tags: , , , , , , , , ,   /   5 Comments

Mechanic’s Lien Solution

  • The most potent tool you have to manage receivables is to preserve, perfect and enforce your mechanics lien and bond claim rights. But, it's so complex? Zlien is a revolutionary enterprise offering to monitor your lien deadlines and automatically file required documents.

Contact Zlien

  • 4819 Prytania Street
    New Orleans, LA 70115
    (866) 720-5436
    email: mail@zlien.com