Home > Newsletters > Issue #21
The Contractors Group
Newsletter : Issue #21 : November 2001 |
Hi!
Welcome to our 21st issue, which is absolutely packed with
valuable information for commercial and residential
contractors as well as for home / property owners. There is
a special article about the importance of estimating your
preliminary notice amount correctly, and information on how
to enter a contest in which the prize is a Milwaukee 6509
Sawzall! Enjoy!! Diane |
IN THIS ISSUE |
|
||
1 |
Spotlight: FREE subscriptions to construction magazines |
||
2 |
Knowing Your Forms Makes A Difference |
||
3 |
No longer available |
||
4 |
Contractor's
Corner: Feature Article by David Barnier |
||
5 |
No longer available |
||
6 |
Hosting a Holiday Office Party? Read this first... |
||
7 |
No longer available |
1 |
SPOTLIGHT |
What more can I say other than, it's TRUE, they are FREE full subscriptions to a huge variety of construction magazines! :) One of our guys subscribed to 10 different magazines and they were all free! Click here to see what they have for you! |
2 |
KNOWING YOUR FORMS MAKES A DIFFERENCE |
|
** Release of Stop Notice (or Notice to Withhold) ** Triplicate: Estimate, Work Order, Invoice (this is too cool!) ** AIA Forms: Unfortunately, I cannot post AIA forms because of copyright laws but I can list information about them and other places to purchase them. AIA Forms |
3 |
No longer available |
|
4 |
CONTRACTOR'S CORNER - Send us your questions... |
California Civil Code Section 3097(c)(1) requires that a contractor's 20-day preliminary notice ("prelim") include "a general description of the labor, service, equipment, or materials furnished, or to be furnished, and an estimate of the total price thereof." How accurate must the estimate be? Until recently, there was little or no California case law to help clarify exactly how accurate a prelim must be. However, in August 2001, the Second District Court of Appeals of California (located in Los Angeles) gave some guidance to the construction industry on this question. The court held that a prelim by an equipment rental company was defective because the estimated price stated in the prelim was not a true "estimate" in that it did not take into account information that was readily available to the company that would have assisted it in better estimating the total price (Rental Equipment, Inc. v. McDaniel Builders, Inc. [109 Cal.Rptr. 922]). This is good news for contractors, rental companies, and materials suppliers. While the ruling in Rental Equipment was not favorable to the equipment rental company in that case, the ruling was favorable to all other contractors, rental companies, and materials suppliers in California. The explanation behind this irony is that the $10,000 estimate by the equipment rental company in the Rental Equipment case was less than the amount already charged to its customer on that job. At trial, the credit manager for the equipment rental company testified that the estimate was merely a "rounded up" amount from the first invoice related to that job. The court held that this was clearly not an "estimate of the total price" as required by California Civil Code Section 3097(c)(1), as it did not involve an evaluation of any of the information available to the equipment rental company as to the equipment already furnished and the equipment still anticipated to be furnished. In making this ruling, the court stated that it was concerned about the negative prejudicial effect of an underestimated prelim on the property owner. In that particular case, the owner had a $145,000 subcontract with the rental company's customer, but the rental company's eventual mechanic's lien was in the amount of $159,898. The owner (which was the party challenging the equipment rental company's prelim) was able to prove to the court that, had the prelim been $75,000 or more, the owner would have called a meeting with the contractor/customer to address the issue of excessive equipment rental charges. In summary, the court's published opinion made it clear that the estimate in a prelim: * must be based upon the total estimated price to be charged for labor, services, and equipment furnished or to be furnished, but that this estimate does not need to be "substantially accurate" * does not need to include a statement of all rental charges to be incurred throughout the rental period, but instead needs to (be an) estimate of the total charges that are anticipated * can be effective despite "badly [missing] the mark with reference to the total charges as finally tallied," so long as the estimate was reasonable at the time it was made and was based upon information available to the claimant at that time * must be more than a "guess, conjecture, or surmise" The California Supreme Court along with lower California courts have repeatedly recognized that the mechanic's lien, stop notice, and payment bond laws exist primarily to protect those parties that bestow value upon property. The courts have cited this policy in supporting various holdings that favor the contractor over the owner/lender/surety. However, the courts have also recognized that the prelim requirement exists to protect the interests of the owner/lender/surety. It was this recognition of the interests of the owner in the Rental Equipment case, especially the prejudicial effect described above, which led the court to invalidate the rental company's prelim. What should a contractor, rental company, or material supplier learn from this recent court decision? While the facts of the Rental Equipment case may have been extreme, the message from the court is clear. The purpose of the prelim is to give the receiving parties notice of the likely amount of a possible future claim. The court did not hold that the amount of the prelim had to be accurate. It did hold that a claimant must make some effort to review available information when estimating total charges, and not choose an arbitrary dollar amount. To protect yourself, your company should reference all information it has before calculating a prelim amount and keep clear records reflecting what information was considered as part of the calculation. These records would help prove your company's good faith effort to estimate the anticipated total price. This article is intended as a topical discussion of general legal principals. While general rules may exist, there are many exceptions and qualifications to these general rules. No party should use this article as a substitute for obtaining specific legal advice from a qualified attorney. David Barnier is an attorney with the law firm of Barker Olmsted & Barnier in San Diego, California. He may be reached at (619) 682-4842 DJB@barkerolmsted.com or through www.barkerolmsted.com |
5 |
No longer available |
|
6 |
HOSTING A HOLIDAY PARTY? |
|
|
|
7 |
No longer available |
|
|
TheContractorsGroup.com was created to support the construction contractor in his day-to-day administrative functions. We hope that you will find our newsletter and website useful! Help!! We need 1,327 new subscribers by 6:33 am Nov. 24, 2001. Please recommend us to your colleagues and urge them to subscribe. |