Concrete Lien?

[gabeancounter]

In Georgia a lien release in no good unless it is done AFTER the materials are paid for. We used to have all our sub's suppliers file lien releases before we cut the check. We learned that is not correct. Now we pay the material bills on behalf of our turnkey subs.

"...a lien must be filed within three months from the last time the contractor was on the property performing work. Additionally, there are certain notice requirements that must be met to make a Georgia construction lien valid.

"Once a lien is filed, a lawsuit must be filed within one year from the date that the debt became due in Georgia--not one year from the date of the lien filing."

Notice to owner has to be filed within 21 days of first furnishing.



There are many requirements for commercial, personal, and goverment (bond claim) liens. Majority of companies do not process liens correctly. A simple letter from an attorney telling them they did not file within the stated time period will resolve your issues. If they do not remove the lien after being notified, then they are opening themselves to a lawsuit.

 

[lawfarm]

Note that in most states, there are also different rules when the subcontractor is working on an owner-occupied residence. Often, they have to give advance notice within so many days of starting work, to advise the homeowner that they are a sub and should be paid.

I agree with the comments above. Start with the contractor; it's their problem initially. If they are not immediately responsive, talk to an attorney that knows TX law.

 

[FANTASY FACTORY]

Is there a huge market for used driveways by you?

 

[trythis]

I had this happen to me in Missouri.
I could not contact the contractor after is happened.
The law here requires all contractors, sub contractors, etc. to get the signature of a home owner on a document that states that they will file a lien if not paid.

My concrete supplier did not get that signature. They still filed the lien.

In fact I found out through this that even if the lien is fraudulent, which in my case it was, that it is still a lien until they release it. This requires a lawyer. You will have to pay to get the lien removed, fraudulent or not.

You can not go talk to a judge and say, "for these well documented reasons this is fraudulent." They will not talk to you.

The sad part of this is that anyone can record a lien on anyone else's property with a fake document, signed by whomever, Donald Duck, Mickey Mouse, it makes no difference. All they have to do is drop the paper work off at the court clerks office and whammo! (this is the noise the time stamp makes) you have a lien.

The only way to remove it is to file (whammo) a "lien release" that is signed by the original lien holder. That also is not checked by the clerk who files the document. Once the clerk files it it can take weeks for it to show up on the books depending on the court work load.

I had to get mine removed in a very short period of time to close a loan and once the lien holder's lawyer faxed a copy of the release, I filed it, as a faxed copy instead of the original document. He of course sent it certified mail and that document didn't show up at the court for 2 weeks. The court didn't care that it was a faxed copy, it worked fine. The clerks that file these papers are not educated in legal issues in any way.

It can get worse, filing a fraudulent quit claim deed can transfer property from one owner to another. Its all very illegal and can get you in jail.

The best thing to do is get a lawyer, expect to pay them close to what the lien holder wants and find out what your state does in these situations.

I found out that just because the law says one thing in one section, doesn't mean that because of some obscure other section or paragraph that a precedent was set from some case 30 years ago that the major concept and idea of the written law you are looking at is now invalidated in the court. It's the case here that the interpretation that is consistently upheld in court differs from the written word in a significant way. In my case the building I live in was never a residence but because I would occupy it in 6 months it counted as residential. The 6 month rule is not written in regards to converted property. The type of lien you are having and that I had are not valid in residential property here unless it has never been occupied. It is written this way to protect home owners and not builders.

Apparently someone put a lien on a woman's house and she couldn't pay, even though it was not her fault, the Original Contractor did not pay the sub. She burned the house down while she was in it. That apparently affected the law to protect home owners. (dunno how true that is)

 

[twostory]

In Georgia a lien release in no good unless it is done AFTER the materials are paid for.

A "supplier" will not issue you a lien release until the material is paid for.

I agree with you that a "lien release" from a contractor or sub-contractor is useless.

I my case, I has always talked to the concrete supplier & received my lien release directly from them.

 

[Black Moon]

Today I received a carbon copy of the letter from the concrete supplier to my contractor indicating that if they do not receive payment in 10 days that they will place a lien on the house (mine).

The slab was poured around June 10th so the contractor is clearly 60 days past due. The contract was paid in full on June 28th. The contractor did everything in a turn key job.

The concrete bill is $5300 on a $35000 shop. The builder is local, had good references including from the city here.

The location is south of Fort Worth, TX in the county.

How serious of a problem is this?

All depends on TX law.

I agree that if a 'Notice to owner' was never filed you don't have an issue.

Happened to me in TN with my Stucco subcontractor not paying his bill. Only thing they could do is tell me that I would have no warranty until the materials were paid for. TN law prevented them from filing a legal claim.

If you have a lawyer call him if not pay $75 for a consult.

Good luck

 

[jake00]

Why would you lien the homeowner? Not his fault (or his problem). Lien the guy who ordered the material - the contractor! He's the one who owes the money.

probably because the material I have paid my vendor for is in his house....

 

[trackwelder]

probably because the material I have paid my vendor for is in his house....

I think thats kind of $hitty. Maybe you should not give materials on the front. You give materials to a contractor on credit he marks them up and installs them in my home, and then you have the balls to lien my home because he stiffs you. I say thats frickin bull$hit.

 

[OneTon]

I think thats kind of $hitty. Maybe you should not give materials on the front. You give materials to a contractor on credit he marks them up and installs them in my home, and then you have the balls to lien my home because he stiffs you. I say thats frickin bull$hit.

It's frickin bull$hit when a contractor takes my/your money and doesn't pay his suppliers/subs. There has to be some recourse, or suppliers would never get paid.

 

[Tom McDermott]

Texas lien law is (or was) very very different than any other state. My understanding is backwards of a previous poster. If the homeowner witholds 10% of the final payment from the prime contractor for 30 days before releasing that final payment to the prime, then any subcontractors liens against the homeowner are waived. Newspaper articles of the date in my recolleciton always described it in these terms as well.

If you pay the contractor 100% of the amount due on date of payment then you are screwed. The purpose of the homeowner witholding the payment is so that the subcontractor has 30 days to give notice of non-payment. The 10% withheld is then available to pay off the subcontractors. Well, in theory anyway.

When I lived in Texas, I always witheld that final 10% payment for 30 days, and required corresponding language be added to any contract.

In Oregon, I've had a sub send me a lien notice reserving the right to file a lien just in case the prime might fail to pay (even if the prime actually did pay on time).

Texas law could have changed since those days, so consider finding yourself a lawyer now, immediately, don't wait, post haste if you think they've not been paid.


-- Tom

 

[jake00]

I think thats kind of $hitty. I say thats frickin bull$hit.

what would you think it it were your materials in someones home?

furthermore, I have no proof that the homeowner paid the contractor.

 

[trythis]

what would you think it it were your materials in someones home?

furthermore, I have no proof that the homeowner paid the contractor.

I had and provided proof to my fraudulent lien maker. They still filed the lien, even though they knew that they did not have the required documentation. They use the tactic to get the home owner to sue the Original contractor. The legitimacy of the lien is irrelevant. They want you to go after the contractor to get them to pay. Or they will happily take the money from you.

Its a risk that we as customers need to know from the beginning of any project. Contractors know this game, some play it and take advantage of us, others just use it when the home owner doesnt pay up.

I will not pay any contractor for materials they are buying after what I went through. If there is any way for the supplier to know who I am, I will pay them directly.

 

[bazzateer]

This lien business stinks! If suppliers are stupid enough to supply without being paid first then they should take it up with the contractor, not the homeowner. The homeowner has a contract with the contractor, the supplier has a contract with the contractor, not the homeowner.

 

[Justanoldguy]

In my state, the lien is on the property, no matter what you've paid to the GC. Subs can repo their supplies or items ONLY if it's not attached to the property. Once it's installed, the only recourse for the sub is legal action.

Jackhammering a slab for non-payment would be a definite no-no.

Same here in New Zealand.
What is fixed in place, stays there.

 

[trackwelder]

what would you think it it were your materials in someones home?

furthermore, I have no proof that the homeowner paid the contractor.

I could see your point if you sold or installed the materials directly to the homeowner and he failed to pay you. Your ***** is with the contractor that you extended credit to.

How about this one lets say you have a truck with a blown motor. You take it to a nearby garage and have him install a brand new motor. You pay the garage and leave with your truck thinking everythings fine until you get a bill or lein on the truck. Im sure you would not say thats ok I have the engine suppliers motor in my truck that I already paid for here let me cut you a check.

 

[jake00]

Im sure you would not say thats ok I have the engine suppliers motor in my truck that I already paid for here let me cut you a check.

you're right, I would produce my lien waiver and go about my day.

Now if I did not have a lien waiver, I'd be knocking on my mechanics door.

 

[trackwelder]

you're right, I would produce my lien waiver and go about my day.

Now if I did not have a lien waiver, I'd be knocking on my mechanics door.

And what would you do if he didn't answer the door and you could not find him. What if I pay you and you stiff your supplier is he going to come after me as well. You extended the credit not me. In the future I will make sure to have a lein waiver to protect myself from people like you.

 

[bobscogin]

The homeowner has a contract with the contractor, the supplier has a contract with the contractor, not the homeowner.

But it's the homeowner who ultimately enjoys the benefit of the material, in this case the concrete. Thus, the homeowner is indebted to the concrete supplier if the contractor doesn't pay for it. At that point, the owner should seek recourse against the contractor. That's what the contractors bond is for.

Bob

 

[kaffine]

But it's the homeowner who ultimately enjoys the benefit of the material, in this case the concrete. Thus, the homeowner is indebted to the concrete supplier if the contractor doesn't pay for it. At that point, the owner should seek recourse against the contractor. That's what the contractors bond is for.

Bob

As a homeowner I didn't extend credit to the GC well maybe a small deposit to start work but after that I pay for work as it is done. The GC is likely extending me credit since he gets paid as work is completed not before. The subs and suppliers are extending credit to the GC if they don't demand payment up front.

The homeowner already paid for the concrete. He paid the GC for the concrete and the GC who ordered the concrete on the credit that the concrete company extended the GC. If the GC doesn't pay the concrete company it should be between GC and the concrete company the homeowner already paid. For that matter even if the homeowner didn't pay the GC the concrete company should be going to the GC for payment and the GC should be putting the lien on the house. The way it is setup is to protect the GC and the sub contractors while screwing the homwowner. I should only need 1 lien waiver from the GC unless I hired someone myself without it going through the GC. The way it is setup now though I have to get lien waivers from everyone that set foot on the property or sent any materials.

 

[jake00]

to protect myself from people like you.

in the business world, liens are filed every day...

 

[trackwelder]

in the business world, liens are filed every day...

Your right from people that are lower than vermin. Luckily we have this great forum to educate people on how to protect themselves from said scumbags.

 

[bazzateer]

But it's the homeowner who ultimately enjoys the benefit of the material, in this case the concrete. Thus, the homeowner is indebted to the concrete supplier if the contractor doesn't pay for it. At that point, the owner should seek recourse against the contractor. That's what the contractors bond is for.

Bob

Nah, that's ******** (English slang term, look it up).

Grocer (concrete company) supplies foodstuffs (concrete) to Restaurant (GC). Restaurant (GC) cooks foodstuffs into a meal (GC lays slab). You eat said meal at Restaurant getting the benefit of the foodstuffs (homeowner enjoys new floor). GC fails to pay Grocer for the foodstuffs, does the Grocer come after the Restaurant customer for payment? Does he f**k!

It may be legal over there but it still stinks.

 

[OneTon]

Nah, that's ******** (English slang term, look it up).

Grocer (concrete company) supplies foodstuffs (concrete) to Restaurant (GC). Restaurant (GC) cooks foodstuffs into a meal (GC lays slab). You eat said meal at Restaurant getting the benefit of the foodstuffs (homeowner enjoys new floor). GC fails to pay Grocer for the foodstuffs, does the Grocer come after the Restaurant customer for payment?

Foodservice & beverage suppliers do not leave the restaurant without a check.

 

[OneTon]

Your right from people that are lower than vermin. Luckily we have this great forum to educate people on how to protect themselves from said scumbags.

Once again, the "scumbags" are typically contractors who don't pay their bills. If it weren't for scumbag contractors, we wouldn't need lien laws.

 

[4stroker]

Foodservice & beverage suppliers do not leave the restaurant without a check.

what if the check bounces

 

[Justanoldguy]

what if the check bounces

That would be grounds for fraud then wouldn't it?

 

[bazzateer]

Once again, the "scumbags" are typically contractors who don't pay their bills. If it weren't for scumbag contractors, we wouldn't need lien laws.

There are other laws to chase Scumbag contractors, why persecute the innocent homeowner?

 

[bazzateer]

That would be grounds for fraud then wouldn't it?

Depends if they knew it would bounce when they wrote it, and if it could be proved as such (in the UK anyway).

 

[gatchel]

Contractors like this need to be knee-capped. Maybe then they'll get the point.

 

[nehog]

From the law's (and supplier's) viewpoint...

1. Concrete has not been paid for, so it still is the property of the supplier.
2. Supplier cannot reasonably reclaim or repossess the concrete (or other building materials or labor).
3. So a lien is the only fair way to ensure that the item in question is eventually paid for.

Bottom line is the sub who did the work and didn't pay the contractor is on the hook for a civil action, and possibly a criminal action (especially if they acted with malice and forethought...)

 

[Rickstir]

Logical is right. When I built my house the general and I sit down a couple times a month for payment. He gave me an itemized list of work done, by sub contractors and with lien waviers attached. I paid him, filed the waviers. Back to work for everyone. We made this arrangement before the first shovel full of dirt was turned.

 

[scottzilla]

It's obvious there is a loophole in the law to protect contractors. I assume when it comes to collection time the lawyers take full advantage of this law. From a moral standpoint (And let's face it: from a logical standpoint) it's wrong. The contractor should collect the money from his supplier-end of discussion. The homeowners are not dealing directly with the vendors so why should they be responsible for the actions of a vendor the contractor chose to use? They shouldn't. I doubt contractors would like it if you cut them out and went direct with their vendors, huh?

 

[Leevon]

It's disheartening that they would file on a homeowner. Call the contractor first, good ones will tell you they're behind and make good. He might be able to make a special payment just for your materials if you have a good relationship. Call the AP dept at the supplier and explain your situation also ask them to verify the materials were used at your jobsite (which is probably easy for a batch plant but do it anyways) and the amount. Have an attorney ready to draft a letter if nothing happens. I wouldn't get too upset about the whole thing though.

In the world of big construction I live in, lien waivers always accompany applications for payment and money never trades hands without them. The tricky thing is that laws vary by state. Also, determining who the suppliers are can be difficult. What we typically do is request a partial lien waiver (which certifies that ___ sub or supplier was paid ___ dollars through ___ period. This is accompanied by a notarized affidavit that the waivers are accurate and these usually contain also contain state-specific language.

With all of that, when they default and the materials are in place it's still the Owner's property that will get a lien.

Another way we deal with this is joint checks or third party checks. The supplier gets paid at the same time as the contractor.

To the folks calling contractors scumbags and thiefs, just remember most business run on large lines of credit. Construction is no different and the small guys are usually running a balancing act. That's they way it is. What if the concrete guy got stiffed on a large job or an Owner is delaying payment 90+ days? It happens all the time, not your fault but it doesn't make the guy a thief.

 

[bazzateer]

It's disheartening that they would file on a homeowner. Call the contractor first, good ones will tell you they're behind and make good. He might be able to make a special payment just for your materials if you have a good relationship. Call the AP dept at the supplier and explain your situation also ask them to verify the materials were used at your jobsite (which is probably easy for a batch plant but do it anyways) and the amount. Have an attorney ready to draft a letter if nothing happens. I wouldn't get too upset about the whole thing though.

In the world of big construction I live in, lien waivers always accompany applications for payment and money never trades hands without them. The tricky thing is that laws vary by state. Also, determining who the suppliers are can be difficult. What we typically do is request a partial lien waiver (which certifies that ___ sub or supplier was paid ___ dollars through ___ period. This is accompanied by a notarized affidavit that the waivers are accurate and these usually contain also contain state-specific language.

With all of that, when they default and the materials are in place it's still the Owner's property that will get a lien.

Another way we deal with this is joint checks or third party checks. The supplier gets paid at the same time as the contractor.

To the folks calling contractors scumbags and thiefs, just remember most business run on large lines of credit. Construction is no different and the small guys are usually running a balancing act. That's they way it is. What if the concrete guy got stiffed on a large job or an Owner is delaying payment 90+ days? It happens all the time, not your fault but it doesn't make the guy a thief.

That's an awful lot of fuss when all the supplier has to do is take payment from the contractor before he supplies the goods.

 

[trackwelder]

To the folks calling contractors scumbags and thiefs, just remember most business run on large lines of credit. Construction is no different and the small guys are usually running a balancing act. That's they way it is. What if the concrete guy got stiffed on a large job or an Owner is delaying payment 90+ days? It happens all the time, not your fault but it doesn't make the guy a thief.

I stand by what I said anybody who does not pay their bills such as a contractor, home owner, etc are nothing but thiefs. Do you really think its ok for a contractor to take my money and balance his books and then default on payment to HIS supplier and I would have to pay again for the materials. I will be pouring next year for a new shop and will be paying for the materials directly to the supplier. I sure am glad a site like this exists, thanks Ryan.

 

[jktruck150]

Today I received a carbon copy of the letter from the concrete supplier to my contractor indicating that if they do not receive payment in 10 days that they will place a lien on the house (mine).

The slab was poured around June 10th so the contractor is clearly 60 days past due. The contract was paid in full on June 28th. The contractor did everything in a turn key job.

The concrete bill is $5300 on a $35000 shop. The builder is local, had good references including from the city here.

The location is south of Fort Worth, TX in the county.

How serious of a problem is this?

So, what was the result? Have you gotten it fixed or worked out?