Litigation-I Win, You Lose vs. Mediation-Win/Win

Image
  Litigation is a zero-sum game.  It destroys relationships and fosters enmity between the parties.  Parties rarely walk away happy.  Even if they win, the expense of litigation is enormous, and collecting on judgments is difficult. Disputes ultimately resolve, but the focus on winning at any cost can lead to prolonged legal battles.  Living with a lawsuit causes ongoing stress, which can distract you from your business and even have an effect on your health. In a courtroom, the final decision lies with a judge or jury who may not fully grasp the complexities of the case. Parties relinquish control over the outcome, potentially leaving them dissatisfied with the final judgment. Mediation has the opposite effect.   Rather than polarizing people, it enables the parties to attack the issues and not each other.     The process promotes open communication, collaboration and problem-solving, which enables parties to actively participate in crafting ...

On a Federal Construction Project? Remember the Miller Act

A New Guest Post from Christopher Hill


Chris Hill is a construction lawyer at DurretteBradshaw, PLC in Richmond, Virginia, LEED AP, author of the Construction Law Musings Blog and member of Virginia's Legal Elite in Construction Law. He specializes in mechanic's liens, occupational safety issues, contract consulting and review and general risk management for all levels of construction professionals from contractors to subcontractors to material men.

Federal and State government work are a growth area in construction these days. With the economy in a downturn (though possibly turning around according to ENR), government projects are even more desirable for commercial contractors.

With this trend toward government contracting, becoming the lowest bidder and squeezing your margins is a big temptation, or even necessity. Along with this lower margin comes higher risk.

However, one saving grace for contractors on Federal projects is the Miller Act. Essentially, the Miller Act was created because contractors cannot put a mechanic’s lien on federal government property. It requires that all projects with a contract value over $100,000.00 have a payment and performance bond, provided by the general contractor.

The payment bond is what I will discuss here as it is the most utilized of the two. As its name implies, this bond is there to assure that subcontractors and suppliers who provide work to the project are paid. With the proper notice, and when meeting the filing requirements, the question then becomes the value of what was provided, and not whether payment will occur.

The Miller Act requires that a subcontractor or party, contracting with a subcontractor, but not in a direct contractual relationship with the general contractor, provide a notice to the general contractor (or principal on the bond if the principal and GC are different) within 90 days of the last work performed or material supplied for which it claims payment. Then, if no payment is forthcoming within 90 days of the date payment is due, suit must be filed within one year of this last work. If this procedure is filed, in my experience a settlement will be forthcoming.

One caveat, the protection of a Miller Act bond extends down only as far as the “second tier” level. In short, a supplier to a second tier subcontractor is not covered. Make sure you keep this in mind when you consider your (or your client’s) claim.

The federal Miller Act has cousins (or “Little Miller Acts”) in most every state that relate to state government projects, so I encourage you to check these out and call an attorney (in MA, Andrea is a good one) to discuss your options with these projects.

Popular posts from this blog

Eligibility Requirements for the LEED Green Associate Exam from Green Building Education and Training

What are the eligibility requirements for the LEED Green Associate exam? http://www.green-buildings.com/content/78626-what-are-eligibility-requirements-leed-green-associate-exam After March 31st, 2009, candidates for the LEED Green Associate (GA) credentials must fulfill eligibility requirements. LEED Green Associate candidates are required to do ONE (1) of the following: Option 1: You must be (or have previously been) employed in a sustainable field of work This is perhaps one of the more nebulous requirements posed by the GBCI, because no definition of a "sustainable field of work" is given. The USGBC does state that the company needs to "relate to environmentalism or the green building industry". If you are in any doubt that your profession would qualify, contact the GBCI at gbci.org or by calling 1-800-795-1746. Option 2: You must be (or have been) involved in a LEED Certification Project To prove eligibility by way of LEED project involvement, you must have bee...
Read more

When the Homeowner is a Bully

I've seen a new trend in contractor disputes lately, and it isn't pretty.  Some homeowners are making unreasonable demands on contractors, and bullying them into doing work without getting paid.  They unreasonably withhold payments, or impose penalties for delays that they cause.  They expect contractors to do all kinds of extra work without being paid or changing the completion date. I have had a series of these recently.  What is a contractor to do? When first meeting with a homeowner, trust your instincts.  If you are sensing red flags, do not take the job. Never let the work get ahead of the money.  If there is a change order, make sure that the payment is contemporaneous with the work. Make sure that all change orders are in writing and reflect any change in the contract price and date of substantial completion. Include a provision in your contract that entitles you to get attorney's fees if you have to go after a client for payment. Make sure t...
Read more

Should a Contractor Have the Homeowner Test for Lead?

I would like to learn more about the advisability of lead testing.  Homeowners might not want their homes tested for lead, because it becomes public record, and may interfere with the sale of a home or the ability to obtain a mortgage or homeowners insurance.  In addition, I strongly advise contractors not to do the testing themselves.  Let the homeowner pay an independent company to do it.  Otherwise if the GC brings a claim against a lead testing company for a false negative, the company might state that the GC did not use the test kit properly.  If the homeowner does have the house tested, consider refusing to do the work unless the homeowner has lead abatement work done.
Read more