Lien question
Homeowner hires a roofer. Roofer orders roof tile from supplier. Roofer installs roof. However, underlayment and other problems with installation cause roof to be rejected by county inspector and the roof needs to be replaced. There is nothing wrong with the roof tile, but it may not be salvageable when roof is redone and new tile will likely be required.
Roofer never paid for the original roof tile (homeowner paid ½ the contract price to roofer, but roofer never paid the supplier). Supplier liens the house. I think I know the answer, but is there any defense to the supplier's lien based on the defective installation by the roofer thus rendering the original tile largely unusable? The lien appears to be proper in all technical respects.
Thanks,
Brian W. Bennett
Board Certified Construction Attorney
Bennett Legal Group, P.A.
Construction & Business Litigation
214 South Lucerne Circle East, Suite 201x-apple-data-detectors://1/0
Orlando, Florida 32801x-apple-data-detectors://1/0
Direct 407-734-4553tel:407-734-4553
General 407-734-4559tel:407-734-4559
Fax 407-209-1006tel:407-209-1006
www.bennettlegalgroup.comhttp://www.bennettlegalgroup.com/
The information contained in this electronic mail message is privileged and confidential information intended only for the use of the individual or entity named. If the reader of the message is not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution or copying of the communication is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please immediately notify us by telephone at 407-734-4559tel:407-734-4559or reply email and delete this message.
Under 713.01(7) the Contract Price is subject to reduction by amounts attributable to "defects in workmanship or materials". Owner may not use LDs to reduce the Contract Price as to any other lienor but the statute impliedly permits an Owner to reduce the Contract Price as to subs and suppliers for defective work unrelated to LDs. In your case, it appears homeowner may have to essentially pay twice for one roof and the cost of the new roof may serve to reduce the Contract Price of the original Direct Contract that was defectively performed by the original roofer.
Michael R. Gibbons
Shareholder
215 N. Eola Drive
Orlando, FL 32801
D: 407.418.6378 | P: 407.843.4600
Emailmailto:michael.gibbons@lowndes-law.com | Websitehttps://www.lowndes-law.com/ | Biohttps://www.lowndes-law.com/professionals/michael-r-gibbons | LinkedIn | vCardhttps://www.lowndes-law.com/professionals/michael-r-gibbons-vcard
[Lowndes-logo-Web]
LOCAL ROOTS. BROAD REACH. SM
From: clc-discussion-bounces@lists.flabarrpptl.org [mailto:clc-discussion-bounces@lists.flabarrpptl.org] On Behalf Of Brian Bennett
Sent: Monday, December 02, 2019 10:22 AM
To: clc-discussion@lists.flabarrpptl.org
Subject: [CLC-Discussion] Lien question
CAUTION: THIS IS AN EXTERNAL EMAIL
Homeowner hires a roofer. Roofer orders roof tile from supplier. Roofer installs roof. However, underlayment and other problems with installation cause roof to be rejected by county inspector and the roof needs to be replaced. There is nothing wrong with the roof tile, but it may not be salvageable when roof is redone and new tile will likely be required.
Roofer never paid for the original roof tile (homeowner paid ½ the contract price to roofer, but roofer never paid the supplier). Supplier liens the house. I think I know the answer, but is there any defense to the supplier's lien based on the defective installation by the roofer thus rendering the original tile largely unusable? The lien appears to be proper in all technical respects.
Thanks,
Brian W. Bennett
Board Certified Construction Attorney
Bennett Legal Group, P.A.
Construction & Business Litigation
214 South Lucerne Circle East, Suite 201x-apple-data-detectors://1/0
Orlando, Florida 32801x-apple-data-detectors://1/0
Direct 407-734-4553tel:407-734-4553
General 407-734-4559tel:407-734-4559
Fax 407-209-1006tel:407-209-1006
www.bennettlegalgroup.comhttp://www.bennettlegalgroup.com/
The information contained in this electronic mail message is privileged and confidential information intended only for the use of the individual or entity named. If the reader of the message is not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution or copying of the communication is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please immediately notify us by telephone at 407-734-4559tel:407-734-4559or reply email and delete this message.
This email message has been delivered safely and archived online by Mimecast. For more information please visit http://www.mimecast.com
My understanding is that the materials are not defective. As a result, the contract price cannot be reduced by the cost of the materials (including roofer’s markup). The supplier is just as innocent as the homeowner who hired the roofer. Did owner pay ½ before or after the NTO? While it is unfortunate that owner will have to purchase additional materials as a result of roofer’s defective work, and that cost is certainly part of the damages claim against roofer, in my opinion the lien is valid. Just my 2 cents from someone who represents a variety of suppliers.
Steven F. Thompson, Esq.
Thompson Commercial Law Group
412 E. Madison St., Ste 900
Tampa, Fl. 33602
813-387-1821
Fax 813-387-1824
THE ABOVE MAY CONTAIN OR CONSTITUTE A CONFIDENTIAL
AND PRIVILEGED COMMUNICATION. IF YOU ARE NOT THE INTENDED
RECIPIENT, OR IF YOU HAVE OTHERWISE RECEIVED THIS COMMUNICATION
IN ERROR, PLEASE NOTIFY OUR OFFICE BY TELEPHONE
AT (813) 387-1821 [collect] AND INFORM THE OFFICE OF THE ERROR;
AND PLEASE DESTROY OR DELETE THIS MESSAGE. THIS MESSAGE MAY NOT
BE REVIEWED, PRINTED, DISPLAYED, OR RE-TRANSMITTED WITHOUT THE
SENDER'S CONSENT. ALL RIGHTS PROTECTED. THERE MAY BE NO FURTHER
DISTRIBUTION OR PUBLICATION OF THIS COMMUNICATION OR ITS CONTENTS
WITHOUT THE EXPRESS CONSENT OF THOMPSON COMMERCIAL LAW GROUP.
THANK YOU.
From: clc-discussion-bounces@lists.flabarrpptl.org clc-discussion-bounces@lists.flabarrpptl.org On Behalf Of Gibbons, Michael
Sent: Monday, December 02, 2019 10:42 AM
To: 'Brian Bennett' brian@bennettlegalgroup.com; clc-discussion@lists.flabarrpptl.org
Subject: Re: [CLC-Discussion] Lien question
Under 713.01(7) the Contract Price is subject to reduction by amounts attributable to “defects in workmanship or materials”. Owner may not use LDs to reduce the Contract Price as to any other lienor but the statute impliedly permits an Owner to reduce the Contract Price as to subs and suppliers for defective work unrelated to LDs. In your case, it appears homeowner may have to essentially pay twice for one roof and the cost of the new roof may serve to reduce the Contract Price of the original Direct Contract that was defectively performed by the original roofer.
Michael R. Gibbons
Shareholder
215 N. Eola Drive
Orlando, FL 32801
D: 407.418.6378 | P: 407.843.4600
mailto:michael.gibbons@lowndes-law.com Email | https://www.lowndes-law.com/ Website | https://www.lowndes-law.com/professionals/michael-r-gibbons Bio | LinkedIn | https://www.lowndes-law.com/professionals/michael-r-gibbons-vcard vCard
LOCAL ROOTS. BROAD REACH. SM
From: clc-discussion-bounces@lists.flabarrpptl.org mailto:clc-discussion-bounces@lists.flabarrpptl.org [mailto:clc-discussion-bounces@lists.flabarrpptl.org] On Behalf Of Brian Bennett
Sent: Monday, December 02, 2019 10:22 AM
To: clc-discussion@lists.flabarrpptl.org mailto:clc-discussion@lists.flabarrpptl.org
Subject: [CLC-Discussion] Lien question
CAUTION: THIS IS AN EXTERNAL EMAIL
Homeowner hires a roofer. Roofer orders roof tile from supplier. Roofer installs roof. However, underlayment and other problems with installation cause roof to be rejected by county inspector and the roof needs to be replaced. There is nothing wrong with the roof tile, but it may not be salvageable when roof is redone and new tile will likely be required.
Roofer never paid for the original roof tile (homeowner paid ½ the contract price to roofer, but roofer never paid the supplier). Supplier liens the house. I think I know the answer, but is there any defense to the supplier’s lien based on the defective installation by the roofer thus rendering the original tile largely unusable? The lien appears to be proper in all technical respects.
Thanks,
Brian W. Bennett
Board Certified Construction Attorney
Bennett Legal Group, P.A.
Construction & Business Litigation
214 South Lucerne Circle East, Suite 201 x-apple-data-detectors://1/0
Orlando, Florida x-apple-data-detectors://1/0 32801
Direct 407-734-4553 tel:407-734-4553
General 407-734-4559 tel:407-734-4559
Fax 407-209-1006 tel:407-209-1006
www.bennettlegalgroup.com http://www.bennettlegalgroup.com/
The information contained in this electronic mail message is privileged and confidential information intended only for the use of the individual or entity named. If the reader of the message is not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution or copying of the communication is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please immediately notify us by telephone at 407-734-4559 tel:407-734-4559 or reply email and delete this message.
Notice of Confidentiality: This e-mail communication and the attachment(s) hereto, if any, are intended solely for the information and use of the addressee(s) identified above and may contain information which is legally privileged from disclosure and/or otherwise confidential. If a recipient of this e-mail communication is not an addressee (or an authorized representative of an addressee), such recipient is hereby advised that any review, disclosure, reproduction, re-transmission or other dissemination or use of this e-mail communication (or any information contained herein) is strictly prohibited. If you are not an addressee and have received this e-mail communication in error, please advise the sender of that circumstance either by reply e-mail or by telephone at (800) 356-6818, immediately delete this e-mail communication from any computer and destroy all physical copies of same.
Replies Filtered: Any incoming reply to this e-mail communication or other e-mail communication to us will be electronically filtered for "spam" and/or "viruses." That filtering process may result in such reply or other e-mail communications to us being quarantined (i.e., potentially not received at our site at all) and/or delayed in reaching us. For that reason, we cannot guarantee that we will receive your reply or other e-mail communications to us and/or that we will receive the same in a timely manner. Accordingly, you should consider sending communications to us which are particularly important or time-sensitive by means other than e-mail.
[v4.30]
The Proper Payments defense would apply (i.e. reducing owner's lien
liability) as to all proper payments made, plus the cost of completing the
contract resulting from Roofer's defective construction. If the amount of
proper payments when added to the reasonable cost to correct and complete
exceeds contract price, then no monies are available in connection with the
supplier's lien.
Sincerely,
Ronald E. Kaufman, Esq.
Board Certified Construction AttorneyCertified Circuit Civil Mediator
Law Offices of Ronald E. Kaufman, P.A.
3399 Ponce De Leon Boulevard, suite 202
Coral Gables, FL 33134
Main Telephone: (305) 444-1500
Facsimile: (305) 675-3327
Email: rek@reklawfirm.com rekesq@gmail.com
Website: www.miamiconstructionattorney.info
Pursuant to the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act you are hereby advised
that portion of our practice involves the collections of debts and any
information obtained may be used for that purpose.
NOTICE OF CONFIDENTIALITY:
The information contained in this mail is intended for the use of the
intended recipient only and may be confidential and attorney privileged. If
that is not you stop reading, do not distribute or copy this mail, rather
advise me of your receipt, in writing.
CIRCULAR 230 NOTICE:
Unless expressly stated otherwise, any U.S. federal tax advice contained in
this transmittal, is not intended or written to be used, and cannot be
used, by any person for the purpose of (i) avoiding penalties under the
U.S. Internal Revenue Code, or (ii) promoting, marketing or recommending to
another party any transaction or matter addressed in this e-mail or
attachment.
On Mon, Dec 2, 2019 at 11:29 AM Steve Thompson <
sthompson@thompsonbrookslaw.com> wrote:
My understanding is that the materials are not defective. As a result,
the contract price cannot be reduced by the cost of the materials
(including roofer’s markup). The supplier is just as innocent as the
homeowner who hired the roofer. Did owner pay ½ before or after the NTO?
While it is unfortunate that owner will have to purchase additional
materials as a result of roofer’s defective work, and that cost is
certainly part of the damages claim against roofer, in my opinion the lien
is valid. Just my 2 cents from someone who represents a variety of
suppliers.
Steven F. Thompson, Esq.
Thompson Commercial Law Group
412 E. Madison St., Ste 900
Tampa, Fl. 33602
813-387-1821
Fax 813-387-1824
THE ABOVE MAY CONTAIN OR CONSTITUTE A CONFIDENTIAL
AND PRIVILEGED COMMUNICATION. IF YOU ARE NOT THE INTENDED
RECIPIENT, OR IF YOU HAVE OTHERWISE RECEIVED THIS COMMUNICATION
IN ERROR, PLEASE NOTIFY OUR OFFICE BY TELEPHONE
AT (813) 387-1821 [collect] AND INFORM THE OFFICE OF THE ERROR;
AND PLEASE DESTROY OR DELETE THIS MESSAGE. THIS MESSAGE MAY NOT
BE REVIEWED, PRINTED, DISPLAYED, OR RE-TRANSMITTED WITHOUT THE
SENDER'S CONSENT. ALL RIGHTS PROTECTED. THERE MAY BE NO FURTHER
DISTRIBUTION OR PUBLICATION OF THIS COMMUNICATION OR ITS CONTENTS
WITHOUT THE EXPRESS CONSENT OF THOMPSON COMMERCIAL LAW GROUP.
THANK YOU.
From: clc-discussion-bounces@lists.flabarrpptl.org <
clc-discussion-bounces@lists.flabarrpptl.org> *On Behalf Of *Gibbons,
Michael
Sent: Monday, December 02, 2019 10:42 AM
To: 'Brian Bennett' brian@bennettlegalgroup.com;
clc-discussion@lists.flabarrpptl.org
Subject: Re: [CLC-Discussion] Lien question
Under 713.01(7) the Contract Price is subject to reduction by amounts
attributable to “defects in workmanship or materials”. Owner may not use
LDs to reduce the Contract Price as to any other lienor but the statute
impliedly permits an Owner to reduce the Contract Price as to subs and
suppliers for defective work unrelated to LDs. In your case, it appears
homeowner may have to essentially pay twice for one roof and the cost of
the new roof may serve to reduce the Contract Price of the original Direct
Contract that was defectively performed by the original roofer.
Michael R. Gibbons
Shareholder
215 N. Eola Drive
Orlando, FL 32801
D: 407.418.6378 | P: 407.843.4600
Email michael.gibbons@lowndes-law.com | Website
https://www.lowndes-law.com/ | Bio
https://www.lowndes-law.com/professionals/michael-r-gibbons | LinkedIn
| vCard
https://www.lowndes-law.com/professionals/michael-r-gibbons-vcard
[image: Lowndes-logo-Web]
LOCAL ROOTS. BROAD REACH. SM
From: clc-discussion-bounces@lists.flabarrpptl.org [
mailto:clc-discussion-bounces@lists.flabarrpptl.org
clc-discussion-bounces@lists.flabarrpptl.org] *On Behalf Of *Brian
Bennett
Sent: Monday, December 02, 2019 10:22 AM
To: clc-discussion@lists.flabarrpptl.org
Subject: [CLC-Discussion] Lien question
*CAUTION: THIS IS AN EXTERNAL EMAIL *
Homeowner hires a roofer. Roofer orders roof tile from supplier. Roofer
installs roof. However, underlayment and other problems with installation
cause roof to be rejected by county inspector and the roof needs to be
replaced. There is nothing wrong with the roof tile, but it may not be
salvageable when roof is redone and new tile will likely be required.
Roofer never paid for the original roof tile (homeowner paid ½ the
contract price to roofer, but roofer never paid the supplier). Supplier
liens the house. I think I know the answer, but is there any defense to
the supplier’s lien based on the defective installation by the roofer thus
rendering the original tile largely unusable? The lien appears to be
proper in all technical respects.
Thanks,
Brian W. Bennett
Board Certified Construction Attorney
Bennett Legal Group, P.A.
Construction & Business Litigation
214 South Lucerne Circle East, Suite 201
Orlando, Florida 32801
Direct 407-734-4553
General 407-734-4559
Fax 407-209-1006
The information contained in this electronic mail message is privileged
and confidential information intended only for the use of the individual or
entity named. If the reader of the message is not the intended recipient,
you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution or copying of
the communication is strictly prohibited. If you have received this
communication in error, please immediately notify us by telephone at
407-734-4559or reply email and delete this message.
Notice of Confidentiality: This e-mail communication and the
attachment(s) hereto, if any, are intended solely for the information and
use of the addressee(s) identified above and may contain information which
is legally privileged from disclosure and/or otherwise confidential. If a
recipient of this e-mail communication is not an addressee (or an
authorized representative of an addressee), such recipient is hereby
advised that any review, disclosure, reproduction, re-transmission or other
dissemination or use of this e-mail communication (or any information
contained herein) is strictly prohibited. If you are not an addressee and
have received this e-mail communication in error, please advise the sender
of that circumstance either by reply e-mail or by telephone at (800)
356-6818, immediately delete this e-mail communication from any computer
and destroy all physical copies of same.
Replies Filtered: Any incoming reply to this e-mail communication or
other e-mail communication to us will be electronically filtered for "spam"
and/or "viruses." That filtering process may result in such reply or other
e-mail communications to us being quarantined (i.e., potentially not
received at our site at all) and/or delayed in reaching us. For that
reason, we cannot guarantee that we will receive your reply or other e-mail
communications to us and/or that we will receive the same in a timely
manner. Accordingly, you should consider sending communications to us which
are particularly important or time-sensitive by means other than e-mail.
[v4.30]
CLC-Discussion mailing list
CLC-Discussion@lists.flabarrpptl.org
http://mailman.fsr.com/mailman/listinfo/clc-discussion
