Construction Lien Analysis

Did the subcontractor or supplier file for a lien foreclosure action in timely manner? You can verify this by checking with the local superior court. The lien foreclosure action is a lawsuit to foreclose on the mechanics’ lien and force a sale of the property by auction in order to obtain the funds that are owed. It must be filed within 90 days of the date they recorded the mechanics’ lien. In many cases, lien claimants with valid claims will fail to follow through which will make the lien invalid.

Section 52A (2) (b) of the CA, implies prescribed terms, conditions and warranties into the contract. Regulation 8 of the CSOLR directs us to these prescribed warranties in Schedule 3. Clause 1(d) implies a warranty into the contract that other than those disclosed within the contract there is no matter in relation to any building or structure on the land that would justify the making of any upgrading or demolition order or, if there is such a matter, a building certificate has been issued in relation to the building or structure since the matter arose.

A writ of execution applies to a debtor’s nonexempt real or personal property wherever located.

Ex. Owner gets plans for some project from an engineering firm. The plans are flawed. A general contractor also hired by the owner relies on the information provided by the engineering firm and because of the flaws in the plans they run over budget.

26.1)Mechanic's Lien. Ironwood Exploration, Inc. (Ironwood) owned a lease on oil and gas property located in Duchesne County, Utah. Ironwood contracted to have Lantz Drilling and Exploration Company, Inc. (Lantz), drill an oil well on the property. Therafter, Lantz rented equipment from Graco Fishing and Rental Tools, Inc. (Graco), for use in drilling the well. Graco billed Lantz for these rentals, but Lantz did not pay. Graco filed a notice of mechanic's lien on the well in the amount of $19,766. Ironwood, which had paid Lantz, refused to pay Graco. Graco sued to forclose on its

Under the law of partnership, all partners were jointly and severally liable for the debts, because the acts of one partner, acting within the apparent scope of his authority, bound the entire partnership. The court found that the trial court did not clearly err in determining that the mechanic 's liens, held by the suppliers, were inferior to the construction mortgages perfected by the banks. The mortgages were recorded prior to the commencement of the construction of the improvements on each project site, so they were prior to the suppliers ' liens, relating to construction materials obtained thereafter. Further, the mortgages were valid under Ark. Stat. Ann. § 51-605, because the aggregate sum requirement in the mortgage satisfied the

However, lately subcontractor has been put in the spot light because of their lack of responsibility.

(2) Other defendant: Other defendants might be Leanne and also the contractor that is responsible for the renovation.

Florida’s construction defect statutes, F.S. 558.001 was created to set up procedures to reduce the caseload and resulting costs to the state for the Florida Courts. In 2003, a statutory procedure was put in place requiring residential construction owners to meet certain requirements before they could be entitled to file a lawsuit or a demand for arbitration due to construction defects. The requirements included a notice of defect and opportunity to cure procedure. Later, in 2006, the statute was amended again to include all construction and not just residential.

The owner accuses the contractor’s employee to have known the error prior to the tender opening.

On April 10, 2006, WCS and Metropolitan entered a standard form agreement to complete certain portions of the construction of a 397-unit apartment complex located in Camp Springs, Maryland. (E. 932, 947-1007). The agreement consisted of multiple contract documents including: AIA Document A131 CMc-2003 and AGC Document 556, Standard Form Agreement Between Owner and Construction Manager (E. 947-63); AIA Document A201 – 1997, General Conditions of the Contract for Construction (E.964-1007) (the “General Conditions”); and AIA Document A121 CMc – 2003, Amendment 1 (collectively, the “AIA Contract”) (E. 932). The AIA Contract named Metropolitan as the owner and WCS as the construction manager. (E. 947). Sections 11.4.5 and 11.4.7 of the General

In 2012, a marine project manager called Bellingham Marine Inc. (“Bellingham”) hired Major Engineering Marine Inc. (“Major”) for a project to build a travel lift pier at a harbor. Bellingham then hired a civil engineering firm, Moffatt & Nichol

In construction projects, mostly the firms (in this case the firms become client) do not have the skills or develop skills inside the firms to undertake the projects due to amount of the projects should be conducted or the complexity of the projects (Reve and Levitt, 1984). Therefore, the economic decision to conduct the projects is to procure them to third parties. However, more commonly the client agonize the final quality of the projects will meet standard requirements. Thus, impacts to involvement of complex contracts of construction procurement.

When engaging in a construction contract, time is of the essence and running over time projections can cause literally millions of dollars in additional non-contract costs. Therefore, construction contracts that can provide incentives to complete the project on time or early are beneficial because they effectively penalized contractors who fail to deliver on-time performance. With a CPIF contract, the

Eggelston, B (1997). Publisher; Blackwell Publishing, Place of Publish; Oxford, Liquidated damages and extension of time in construction contracts, 2nd ed. p252.