Roofing job gone bad - Mechanic's Lien Threat

Previous | Next
 rated by 0 users
Latest post 11-06-2009 10:01 AM by Jeni9. 9 replies.
  • 10-28-2009 10:42 AM

    • Jeni9
    • Not Ranked
    • Joined on 08-21-2009
    • CO
    • Posts 13

    Roofing job gone bad - Mechanic's Lien Threat

    We hired a roofer to do our roof. He suggested we add a second layer rather than tear off complete roof. Told us that we are allowed two layers and would not have to pull permit for job. Said it would take only one day to do job. He got sick on first day and had to leave. Next day he came back and completed job to about 90% complete. After he left I received notice from city that we needed to pull permit for job and that code only allows one layer (code changed 2 yrs ago). I called contractor and told him this. He said he told us we should have checked w/city before he started the job (not true). City told us they would allow the roof to stay until spring, but then we would have to do a complete tear off and re-roof. We were also informed that a drip edge is required, but contractor never told us about this. When we asked him about it, he said he DID tell us and that we told him not to put it on. Total lie. Never even heard of a drip edge until now. We told contractor we aren't paying him because we have already paid out $1500 in materials for job (purchased ourselves) and now we are going to have to re-do the roof in the spring because of his mistake. He said the city isn't his concern and that he put the roof on as promised and now wants to be paid. When he left, he said he is going to file a lien against our house.  Can he do that? Are we required to pay him? Do we have recourse against him? We are in Colorado.  Thanks for any help!

  • 10-28-2009 11:13 AM In reply to

    Re: Roofing job gone bad - Mechanic's Lien Threat

    CO does not require roofing contractors be licensed.  However, it may be a requirement at the local level.

    What does your contract state?  He most certainly can file a lien. 

    It is up to the homeowner to apply for local permits.   As for him telling you no permit was required (when it is up to the homeowner to make this determination) and failing to inform you of drip edge requirement, it's your word against his.

  • 10-28-2009 11:24 AM In reply to

    Re: Roofing job gone bad - Mechanic's Lien Threat

    The devil is in the details of the contract.

     

    C.R.S. (sec)38-22-109 sets forth the requirements for the perfection of a valid mechanic's lien.

    A. Notice of Intent to File Lien

    i. In order to preserve the lien, notice of intent to file a lien statement must be served upon the owner or reputed owner of the property or his agent, and the principal or prime contractor or his agent, at least ten days before the time of recording the lien statement with the County Clerk and Recorder. Service of the notice of intent is effected when the notice is either delivered in person or deposited in the US mail, certified mail, and return receipt is requested. It is the date of mailing, not the date of receipt, which establishes the ten-day waiting period prior to recording the lien statement.

    ii. The notice of intent shall be served by personal service or by registered or certified mail, return receipt requested, and addressed to the last-known address of the owner or reputed owner of the property and the principal contractor.

    iii. An affidavit of such service or mailing shall be filed for record with the statement of lien and shall constitute proof of service. Courts have strictly construed the notice requirement by requiring service upon the proper party

    B. Mechanic's Lien Statement

    The required information in a Mechanic's Lien Statement is set forth in C.R.S. (sec)38-- 22-109.

    i. The name of the lien claimant.

    ii. The owner or reputed owner if known, and if unknown, a statement to that effect. Reputed owner is defined as one who has all appearances of the title to the property. iii. The description of the lien claimant in the lien statement as a subcontractor is not binding.

    iv. The name of the contractor if known, and if unknown, a statement to that effect. If the lien claimant had a direct contract with the owner, the lien claimant is a principal contractor.

    v. A description of the real property to be charged with the lien sufficient to identify the same.

    vi. A "blanket lien" covering more than one lot may be filed where the lien claimant furnished labor or materials for two or more buildings when they are constructed by the same person under the same contract.

    vii. The amount claimed to be due and owing must be shown.

    AmoUNT DuE

    The lien will be valid even if nonlienable items are included if the nonlienable items can be separated from the lienable items.

    A lien claimant cannot perform a portion of his work, record a lien for the entire work and complete after the lien is recorded.

    C.R.S. (sec) 38-22-128 provides that if a lien is filed for an amount greater than is due, without a reasonable possibility that the amount claimed is due, and with the knowledge that the amount claimed is greater than the amount then due, the entire lien is void, and the person filing the lien is liable for an amount equal to costs and all attorneys' fees.

    SIGNED

    The lien statement must be signed, verified and notarized.

    RECORDING

    Affidavits of service of the notice of intent to file a lien must be recorded in the county where the real property is located. In addition, the lien statement must be recorded in the same county. Recording the lien statement in the wrong county causes the lien to be void.

    TIME TO FILE

    A. Laborers, by the day or piece, must file after their last work and before two months after completion of the improvements.

    B. All other lien claimants must have their liens filed before the expiration of four months after such claimant's last work or materials furnished.

    EXCEPTION

    EXCEPTION

    C.R.S. (sec) 38-22-125 provides that for single and double family dwellings, no lien excep[t those of laborers, by the day or piece, filed more than two months after completion of the building shall encumber the interest of a bona fide purchaser, unless: 1) the purchaser at the time of conveyance shall have actual knowledge of the amount due and paid; or 2) a notice extending the time to file a lien under C.R.S. (sec) 38-22-109(10) is filed within one month after completion or prior to conveyance, whichever is later; or 3) the lien statement has been recorded prior to conveyance.

    NOTICE EXTENDING TIME TO FILE LIEN STATEMENT

    The lien claimant may also file a notice extending the time to file a lien statement.

    The effect of the notice is twofold: a) first, it extends the time for the lien claimant to file the lien statement to four months after completion of the improvements; and b) second, the filing of the notice extending time avoids the effect of a conveyance to a bona fide purchaser. The notice automatically terminates six months after it is filed for record, unless the claimant files a new or amended notice extending time.

    DURATION OF LIEN

    No lien shall hold the property longer than six months after completion, unless an action to foreclose the same is commenced within that time. Completion is not a welldefined standard. It could mean actual completion or last work on the project to the issuance of a certificate of occupancy, either temporary or final.

    The abandonment of all work for three months is deemed completion. Where there is such an abandonment, the six month time period for foreclosure of the lien starts to run at the end of the three months of abandonment. No lien shall hold the property for more than one year after the date it is recorded, unless within 30 days after the anniversary date the lien claimant records an affidavit of noncompletion.

    DISBURSER'S NOnCE

    C.R.S. (sec) 38-22-126 places a duty on a disburser to record a notice stating the name and address of the owner; the names, addresses, and telephone numbers of the principal contractor, if any; and the disburser and the legal description of the property.

    A disburser is any lender who loans money to the contractor or owner, the proceeds of which are to be periodically disbursed as work on the construction progresses. The disburser may also hold retainage funds. A disburser may also include those who receive funds from an owner, contractor or lender for disbursement to pay for the construction draws. An example of this type of disburser is a title company. Any lien claimant may give notice to the disburser in writing. It then becomes the duty of the disburser, before paying out any funds to the general contractor, to ascertain the amount due the claimant, and to pay such amount directly to the claimant. If the disburser fails to comply, the disburser is liable to the claimant for the amount claimed to the extent of loss.

    OTHER PROVISIONS

    A. Trust Funds

    C.R.S. (sec) 38-22-127 provides that monies disbursed to any contractor or subcontractor are to be considered trust funds for the payment of other subcontractors, material suppliers or laborers, who have a lien or "may have a lien" against the property. The statute makes provisions for the posting of a bond, which makes the statute inapplicable and provides that it shall not be applicable if the owner of the property has executed a written release. It further requires the contractor or subcontractor to keep separate records of accounts for each project. The last subsection makes it a crime-"theft"-if any person violates Sections 1 or 2 of the Act. An owner/officer may be personally liable for violation of the trust fund statute.

    B. Bond

    C.R.S. (sec) 38-22-129 is a provision providing that the contractor may provide a bond prior to the commencement of the work in the amount of 150 percent of the contract price. This, in effect, takes away all lien rights and provides that the person having such lien rights shall proceed directly against the principal contractor and the surety. Any such action must be brought within six months after completion of the last work on the project. In order to be effective, notice of such bond must be filed with the Clerk and Recorder and the principal contractor must post a notice on the property that notice of such bond has been filed and make copies of the bond available upon request.

    C. Bond to Discharge Mechanic's Lien C.R.S. (sec) 38-22-131 is a provision providing that, if a lien claim is filed, the owner may file a bond with the Clerk of the district court of the county wherein the property is situated and the lien is released. There are some conditions: 1) the bond or other undertaking must be approved by the judge of the district court; 2) the amount of the bond or undertaking must be at least one and one-half times the amount of the lien, plus costs; and 3) the bond or undertaking must be conditioned that, if the lien claimant will be finally adjudged to be entitled to recover upon his claim, he shall recover the amount of his judgment, together with any interest, costs, and other sums to which he would have been entitled upon foreclosure of his lien.

    Time to File Foreclosure Action In order to perfect a mechanic's lien foreclosure, the lien claimant must commence his action to foreclose within six months after completion of the last work or of when labor was supplied or completion of the building or construction, whichever occurs later.

    PRIORITY

    A. A trust deed takes priority as of the date it is recorded.

    B. Generally, mechanics' liens relate back and take their priority as of the date of commencement of the first work under the contract between the owner and the first contractor, and if not in writing, to the date of first work on the structure or improvements.

    i. First, work has been held to be the date the architect started work on the plans under the contract with the owner. Priority cannot be based on preliminary work and drawings done by an architect for the general contractor if the work predated the prime contract.

    ii. The commencement of work by a surveyor can also constitute "commencement of work."

    iii. Superintendence or project management has also been held to be first work.

    iv. Where a person purchases a property under construction and contracts for work to be done, a lien claimant of the new owner will relate his priority back to the date of first work on the project if there has been no threemonth abandonment.

    C. Where a deed of trust is a "purchase money" mortgage or "land loan" and is recorded before work on an entire structure, the deed of trust is prior on the land and a mechanic's lien will be prior on the improvements. However, if work is commenced on the improvements prior to the recording of the trust deed, all lien claims will be prior to the deed of trust on the land-even a "purchase money" deed of trust.

    D. A construction loan deed of trust should state it is being used for construction purposes, otherwise it may be found to be a land loan. Under a recent ruling by the Colorado Court of Appeals, a pre-existing construction loan deed of trust has priority over a mechanic's lien if the deed of trust is recorded prior to the attachment of the mechanic's lien and the loan proceeds are used for construction purposes.

    E. If a construction loan deed of trust has priority, its priority is only to the extent of money used in the construction. Where money is advanced for construction purposes, but is not actually so used, the trust deed will not have priority for the funds not so used.

    F. Where work has been commenced prior to the recording of the construction loan deed of trust, all lien claimants have priority over the construction lender on both the land and improvements, even where the lien claimants thereafter receive money from the construction lender knowing of the loan and its function in the construction. Where, however, the foreclosing lien claimant fails to join the holder of a deed of trust, within the six-month foreclosure period, the holder of the deed of trust's interest was not affected and the lien is not valid against the holder.

    G. Where improvements are made to an existing improvement covered by a permanent loan deed of trust, the deed of trust will take priority over the mechanics' liens.

    H. Where the vendor on a contract for deed records his contract before first work and the lien claimant knows of the contract, the vendor is not required to post a notice of nonliability and his interest is not subject to a lien.

    I. Where the holder of a deed of trust on the land only subordinates to a construction loan deed of trust, his deed of trust may be subordinated to any mechanics' liens that are filed and are prior to the construction loan deed of trust.

    J. All lien claimants take the same date of priority; however, a different priority as between them in the satisfaction thereof is established in C.R.S. 38-22-108(1). The first priority among mechanic's lien claimants is with laborers or mechanics working by the day or piece who do not furnish materials; the second priority is to subcontractors and material suppliers; and the third priority is to the principal contractor.

    K. Where there are different priorities on the land separate from the improvements, both the land and improvements should be sold together with separate appraisals made of each, and the proceeds of the sale should be paid out accordingly.

  • 10-28-2009 11:45 AM In reply to

    • Jeni9
    • Not Ranked
    • Joined on 08-21-2009
    • CO
    • Posts 13

    Re: Roofing job gone bad - Mechanic's Lien Threat

    Ok. so if the homeowner is responsible for local permits, you are saying we are also required to know about codes and building requirements? Isn't that what we hire a contractor for? Isn't he required to do the job to code (i.e. drip edge)? If it's a required code, I'm thining he shouldn't do the job unless the drip edge is installed, right? Can we sue him for failing to do the job as required and correctly? There has to be some laws that protect us if the job isn't done correctly. I'm thinking of taking him to small claims court on this for the $1500 we spent on materials.

  • 10-28-2009 11:52 AM In reply to

    Re: Roofing job gone bad - Mechanic's Lien Threat

    I suggest you not wait, but make a pre-emptive strike by suing him for the $1500 you paid for wasted materials, plus the additional cost of reroofing properly (get an estimate). CO small claims limit is 7500.

    This gets it into court right now and taking the offensive gives you the upper hand.

    If he files a lien and then his own lawsuit you end up looking like the bad guy for not paying.

    • The right of the people 
    • to keep and bear arms,
    • shall not be infringed.
  • 10-28-2009 12:00 PM In reply to

    • Jeni9
    • Not Ranked
    • Joined on 08-21-2009
    • CO
    • Posts 13

    Re: Roofing job gone bad - Mechanic's Lien Threat

    That's what we are thinking as well. As far as our "contract" with him.  Well, he had us sign a general "contractors invoice" that states he is to install the shingles that we provide him and we are to pay him for labor only upon completion of roof. Yes, pretty vague, I realize that now.  One question: What does everyone think about the fact he did a two-layer roof when code only allows for one?  Was that OUR responsibility to know this? Isn't that what contractor's are paid for....to know what the codes and rules are? Also, if WE were required to pull the permit to have the roof legally done, isn't he obligated to make sure that the permit was pulled and is displayed properly BEFORE he does the job?  

  • 10-28-2009 4:41 PM In reply to

    • Jeni9
    • Not Ranked
    • Joined on 08-21-2009
    • CO
    • Posts 13

    Jurisdiction for Small Claims Court?

    Not sure if I should post this seperately or not...But, if I do end up filing in small claims court against this guy, can I file in my county/state even though he lives in another state?  On the invoice he gave me, he has a Denver address listed under his name, but it is the address of a hotel where he was staying while working in Colorado.  His business card states he is located in Alabama, but there isn't an address....just a city and state and phone number (cell). I tried to find his address in the white pages online in Al... but nothing comes up.  When he called me from his cell phone, a woman's name comes up...I think it may be his wife's name, not sure.  So, without a known address, what can I do?

  • 10-28-2009 4:52 PM In reply to

    Re: Roofing job gone bad - Mechanic's Lien Threat

    Jeni9:
    What does everyone think about the fact he did a two-layer roof when code only allows for one? Was that OUR responsibility to know this? Isn't that what contractor's are paid for....to know what the codes and rules are? Also, if WE were required to pull the permit to have the roof legally done, isn't he obligated to make sure that the permit was pulled and is displayed properly BEFORE he does the job?

    It's the age old argument between responsibility and accountability.

    My belief is this.

    Whatever you do or don't do in your life is your responsibility. If you do it or don't do it based on information or advice you obtained from somebody else and you get it wrong, the consequences are ultimately yours.

    That the person providing the information or advice got it wrong might make him accountable to you for his mistake. But if his mistake costs you lots of money and you are unable to hold him accountable because he's a broke, fly-by-night, judgment proof deadbeat, then what difference does it make claiming that it's not your responsibility.

    As far is I'm concerned, If I have to ultimately pay for somebody else's mistakes I'm going to make darn sure at the getgo that I verify what he's telling me.

    In your case, you are the homeowner and you have a statutory obligation to obey the building codes, have the roof done to code, and get a permit.

    You can delegate the accountability for those things but not the responsibility. The city doesn't care that the contractor gave you the wrong information. The city only cares that you redo it and redo it properly no matter what it costs you. That makes it your responsibility.

     

    • The right of the people 
    • to keep and bear arms,
    • shall not be infringed.
  • 11-05-2009 7:30 PM In reply to

    Re: Roofing job gone bad - Mechanic's Lien Threat

    Interesting, we have a similar problem as far as the lien goes.  We had a roofer replace our roof about four weeks ago. 

    First a couple of things:

    1. The roof is fantastic! 
    2. Our contract states that he will provide the permit.
    3. Our contract also states that full payment is due upon completion
    4. We have the money, it's in the bank and we would love to give it to him as soon as he supplies the permit thats stated in the contract.
    5. We live in a county in Colorado that does require a permit, but it can be obtained after the work is completed

    Our problem is that he wants the balance of the money owed NOW, but has not yet supplied the permit.  He stated that he was unable to pay the insurance so he cannot obtain the permit until his insurance is paid. He has no money to pay the insurance until we pay him.  Catch 22! But he will only take the FULL amount.  We offered to pay him $2000 so he could pay the insurance and get the permit, but he just started cussing at us and said we are stealing from his kids.  He went on to say he is coming over to kick my a$$ and beat me to death.  Now the police are involved.  In between the cussing and threats, he also stated that he is putting a lien on my house. 

    So my questions are:

    1. Could the contract be considered complete even though he has yet to supply a permit?
    2. If the contract has not been completed, can he obtain a lien on the house?
    3. He threatened us bodily.  The Sherriffs Department said we really should make a complaint (and have him arrested) instead of the report (we wanted it on file) because he threatened us, but all I want is the permit!  Should we pursue the complaint?

    HELP!

    Thanks so much to all of you who help with this and sorry this is so long.

  • 11-06-2009 10:01 AM In reply to

    • Jeni9
    • Not Ranked
    • Joined on 08-21-2009
    • CO
    • Posts 13

    Re: Roofing job gone bad - Mechanic's Lien Threat

    You were smart to get it in writing that he would provide the permit.  I wish I had double checked when our contractor said we did not need a permit for a second layer; I would have been informed that second layers are not longer allowed by code.  Getting the permit after the job is done is also o.k. in my county, so the  permit really isn't the issue, the fact a second layer isn't allowed is.  I still plan to fight with the city to keep the second layer as I now know of many homes that put second layers on AFTER the code date.  My neighbor down the street went to check with the city AFTER her roof was done to see when they were going to come out and give it the inspection because she thought the contractor pulled a permit, but was told that no permit was pulled.  That's all they said to her.  They didn't ask her to pull one now, they didn't ask if she did one or two layers...nothing.  So, to single out one homeowner and hold them accountable, but not other's is simply wrong.  I understand that sometimes things fall through the cracks and they can't know what is going on at every house at every moment, but I live in a town of about only 16,000 people, not some big city.  I feel that if they are going to make me tear off my roof and do a single layer, then they need to find out what other roofs were done in our town in the last couple years and see if they pulled permits and did only one layer. Anyway, I hope things work out for you.  In my opinion, they can't put a lien on your house until the work is done as contracted.  I would not pay another penny to him until the job is done, especially if he has threatened you.  Keep us posted on how things go. 

Page 1 of 1 (10 items) | RSS

My Community

Community Membership New Users:

Terms & Conditions   Privacy   Copyright © 2009 LexisNexis, a division of Reed Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.