Are You Working On A State Construction Project?

Over the years, I’ve heard state projects referred to as “county,” “public” or “government” projects. It’s all the same. Any project commissioned by a city, state, county, public board or body or other governmental entity is typically a state construction project.  This includes projects commissioned by public school boards, which is a popular type of public work.

This sounds simple, but it’s surprising how many folks are either confused or wrong about whether a project is a state or private work.

Here are some frequently made mistakes:

• Schools:  Schools at every level (elementary, high school, university) can be either state or private, and you may sometimes be unsure.  Go to the school’s website and read the about section.  If the school is operated by a school district or board of education, it’s likely a state project.
• Native Land: Doing construction work on native land can be tricky, because native land has sovereignty rights, and it’s neither federal nor state nor private property.  Many folks confuse native land projects for state projects, but they are not state projects.  Check out this blog post to learn more about your lien rights on native territory.
• Hospitals, Community Centers, and other Quasi-Public Places: Understand what a “quasi public” place is by taking a look at this definition on the Merriam-Webster website:  ‘essentially public (as in services rendered) although under private ownership or control.” Hospitals, community centers, and other similar establishments are usually privately owned properties, which makes it a private project and not a state project.
• Parks:  State parks are typically state projects because they are state owned.  This is the case even when the parks are managed by private managing companies – which is common.  So, while you may be hired by a private property management company, the project itself is state because it’s still state land and under state control.

A Mistake In Identifying The Project Type Can Be Costly

Properly identifying a construction project as either private, federal or state is a critical step to preseving and enforcing your lien or bond claim rights. A mistake in your understanding of a project’s nature can send you down the wrong path of protection, which can leave you with no protection at all.

Over the coming two weeks, we’ll be discussing how to file bond claims and how to protect your rights to file a bond claim. You’ll realize from reading these posts that bond claim laws are just as convoluted, and contain just as many nuances as mechanic lien claims against private projects.

If you’re sending the notices and making the claims under one set of laws when you should be working under a different set, you will have sent and filed all the wrong documents.  Unfortuantely, the law has little to no tolerance for this type of mistake, and that can leave you without lien rights at all.

While determining your project type may seem like a simple affair, there are layers of complexities here. Do some research into who is commissioning the project and who owns the property, and make sure you know the type of project you’re working.

Instead, its the subcontractors, the sub-subcontractors and material suppliers who usually have preliminary notice requirements to meet, and the exact identity of the property owner is less certain to those parties. This post explains why it’s important to know who the owner is, and how you can figure it out.

You Can’t Notify The Owner If You Don’t Know Who It Is

This post needs to begin with the obvious: knowing a property owner’s identity is important because most states require potential lien claimants to send notices to the property owner to preserve its lien rights. In fact, while this requirement is mostly referred to as a “preliminary notice” requirement, in many states they are simply referred to as “notices to owner” or “NTOs.”

We’ve written ad nauseam in the past about why it’s critical to send preliminary notices. By extension, therefore, it’s critical to know who the property owner is.

Sending notice (or filing a mechanics lien without properly identifying the true owner) can be fatal to your notice or lien claim. While there are limited exceptions, most states are not very forgiving when a notice or lien mistakenly misidentifies the property owner. The entire point of preliminary notice requirements and the filing requirement of a mechanics lien is essentially to put the property owner on notice about your claim, and its impossible to provide this notice without knowing the actual property owner.

State legislatures understand that you may not know who the property owner actually is…but, for this point, they don’t really care.  They had to draw a line, and so they placed the burden on potential lien claimants to figure out who owns the property.

You Must Know The Actual and Exact Owner

Mistaken identity of a property owner is a common mistake, and it’s a critical mistake because preliminary notice and notice to owner requirements mandate that notice be sent to the actual property owner.

There are four common errors companies make regarding property owners, and I’ll discuss each.

1)  Mistaken the tenant for the owner

Everyone theoretically understands the landlord / tenant relationship.  Sometimes, the party occupying a property may not actually be the owner of the property. You can’t forget this in the preliminary notice and mechanics lien context, which essentially means this:  Don’t assume that the property occupant is the property owner.

2) Attributing ownership to a person, when property is actually owned by a company (or vice versa)

Frequently, parties on a construction project are encountering the property owner – and that means they are encountering and working with a real live person.  They come to know this person, and when asked who owns the property, they point to this person. This is a mistake made even by those who contract directly with the property owner on a construction project.

You shouldn’t forget, however, that it is very common for individual property owners to create a limited liability company, corporation or other type of business entity to own the property.  So, while you may think John Doe owns the property, the property may actually be owned by John Doe, LLC.  While you may think this is an unimportant detail, it is not. This mistake could ruin your lien claim.

3) Not knowing about a special property holding company used by the owner

This mistake is similar to the 2nd mistake, but addresses the situation when its known that a property is owned by a corporation or LLC.  I came across this issue the other day.  A client was filing a lien on a large company’s property (we’ll call it ABC Company).  The client knew that the property was owned by ABC Company, but assumed it was that easy. However, it’s very common for companies to create property holding companies to hold its property separate from the rest of its assets.

So, in other words, while ABC Company occupied the property and owned it (in a sense), the actual property owner was “ABC Company Holdings, LLC.”  Not knowing about this tiny differences can create a large lien or notice mistake.

4) Not understanding husband and wife relationship to property, and other co-tenants

The final common mistake relates to the relationships between co-owners of properties.  Properties are not always owned by a single individual or company.  In fact, they are very commonly owned by at least two people or companies, and when working on a residential construction project, the most common co-ownership is husband and wife.

When preparing notices and liens, claimants must be careful to contemplate that role of all owners. While the requirements vary from state to state, it’s frequently required (and a good practice) to list and notify all property owners on preliminary notices and mechanic liens.  This means actually listing and notifying both the husband and the wife.

How To Research And Find The Identity Of A Property Owner

You now understand why it’s important to know the property owner’s identity, and you understand some of the mistakes people make when identifying the property owner on a mechanics lien or preliminary notice…but, you may be justifiably wondering, how do you know who owns a property?

This is the bad news.

Most states do not require that the prime contractor disclose the property owner’s identity, nor is there any requirement that the property owner disclose his identity to potential lien claimants in any way. This means that if you don’t have personal knowledge about the property owner (and confident in it!), you need to do some research.  Unfortunately, this research can be hard or expensive.

To determine who owns a property, you can go to the mortgage or recording office where the property is located and research their records for the current owner. Some of these recording offices have an online presence with access to their records, but really, these are still in the minority.  Another online source for finding property owners is accessor websites, which have online access a bit more frequently than the court and recorder offices.  Try searching for these offices in the applicable county and examine their online offerings. You can even call these offices and ask the employees there whether off-site research of any sort is possible

There are also some online property record services that will allow you to research property records nationwide.  Examples of these services are DocEdge and PropertyShark.

Another thing to consider is using a preliminary notice and mechanics lien service like Zlien. When your company orders a notice to owner from Zlien or files a mechanics lien with Zlien, researching the property owner and legal property description is included in the price.  It’s another reason why it’s Smart to Outsource Your Preliminary Notice (and Lien) Work.

In some states, like California, the lien deadline starts from when all construction on the project is completed (in CA, it’s 90 days from the end of the project); in others, like New York, the deadline counts from your completion of work or furnishing of materials (in NY, it’s 8 months from last furnishing on non-residential projects, 4 months on residential projects).

Too often, folks start capitalizing on the lien rights at the eleventh hour, just a few days before the lien deadline expiration. While you can sometimes squeeze through and file before your deadline, waiting until the last minute can have consequences.  Here are three things that frequently go wrong when you wait too long to file your mechanics lien.

1) The Lien Gets Rejected By The Recorder

Recording offices can be very, very sensitive about what they will record. While they are technically required to record everything, some recorders feel they are the legal gate-keepers for deciding what is appropriate to record and what is not.  And they are very frequently incorrect in their determinations.

I’ve had recorders refuse to file mechanic lien documents for reasons that had no legal support whatsoever.  After receiving these rejections, I had to submit a request into the recorder’s legal department to “overrule” the recording clerk’s decision. I almost always get the over-ruling requested, but in some states, it doesn’t help with the filing date.  The filing date is the date we get the over-ruling decision, and not the date the document was originally presented.

As a result, if I’m trying to file a lien against a deadline and encounter a recording problem, that lien could miss its deadline.

While this may seem unfair (it is unfair), it’s the way that some county recorders operate, and you have to be prepared to confront this type of situation.

2) It’s Harder (And More Expensive) To Collect

The cardinal rule about collection a debt is this:  The longer you wait, the harder it is to collect.  That’s simple percentages talking, and it’s difficult to refute the cold data on this.

We’ve written extensively about how the mechanic’s lien remedy is one of  the most effective collection tools available to the construction industry when confronting an unpaid account (see our tag: Why Lien).  And since it’s a collections tool, it is susceptible to the cardinal rule of collections:  The longer you wait, the harder it is to collect.

It’s really just that simple. Those who file mechanic liens earlier are more likely to recover, and one of the primary reasons this is true is because the lien has the effect of freezing funds on the job.  The longer you wait to file the lien, the less funds will be available to subject to your lien.

All of this is not to mention that filing early will save you money in two ways:  (1)  You won’t have to pay a rush filing fee of any type; and (2) You’ll have the chance to submit the matter to collections before it needs to have an attorney associated (and thus, a smaller collections commission).

3) Your Lien Is Late Because Of Legal Interpretation Differences

You may get your lien filed without any problem at the recorder’s office, and you may think it was filed on time.  Because the lien laws in each state are so complex, however, you may later learn that your lien was actually too late.  Why?  Because it’s sometimes really difficult and ambiguous to pinpoint exactly when the lien periods begin.

We addressed this in a post from last year titled “Most Common Lien Mistakes,” as follows:

But consider this question: when is the last day that you’ve furnished labor and/or materials. Is it when the materials left your yard, or when it was delivered to the jobsite? Is it when you substantially completed the work, or after the punchlist items were complete? Or does it include that warranty work you did 2 months after final completion?

Each state answers these questions differently, and so knowing when the period starts can be just as important as knowing how long it is.

While you may think you know when the lien period starts, you may find yourself in a battle of interpretation about what constituted the “last furnishing of materials or labor” or the project’s “substantial completion.”  While the answer to these issues may seem obvious to you, lawyers can clutter and complicate the answer. Getting your lien filed early avoids these legal arguments.

When the Washington Supreme Court delivered its big mechanic’s lien opinion last week in Williams v. Athletics’ Field, I only had a few moments to report it here on the blog (Williams v. Athletics’ Field). However, this decision has significant consequences to mechanic lien jurisprudence in Washington state, and it deserves a blog post or two to explain what the Supreme Court had to say and how it should affect mechanic lien filings.

Summary of Case

If you’re a reader of the Construction Lien Blog, you know we’ve been following this case for more than a year now (read our posts: Williams v. Athletics’ Field tag).

In this case, the lien claimant filed a lien using a form that was provided by the Washington mechanic lien statute.  The lien statute says within it that a filing “using substantially the same form shall be valid.”  (§60.04.091) However, because of some other wording in the statute, lawyers challenging the lien argued that a separate “acknowledgment” of the lien claimant’s signature was required as an attachment to the statutory provided lien form.

While I think the argument is terrible, and a clear misreading of the statute’s plain language making the provided form acceptable per se, the trial court and the appeals court agreed with the party challenging the lien.  This was measurable seismic activity on mechanic lien jurisprudence in Washington state, jeopardizing the validity of thousands and thousands of liens in the state.

The Washington Supreme Court accepted review, and all was made right with the world again. But, the Washington Supreme Court did a lot more with its recent decision than just dismiss this acknowledgement argument. They set law on a growing division between the state’s appeal circuits over whether mechanic lien statutes should be liberally or strictly construed, and this could have far-reaching consequences.

The Liberal v. Strict Construction Divide in Washington

I don’t want to brag, but I saw this decision coming a mile away. While there was a lot of argument in the trial and circuit courts about the friction between §60.04.091′s acknowledgment requirements and the statutory provided form lacking an acknowledgment, what really mattered in deciding whether the lien was valid or invalid was whether courts were to require strict compliance with §60.04.091 or liberal compliance.

Earlier this year, I wrote about this saying:

Interestingly, the decision does a lot more than just address how a Washington mechanic’s lien must be signed and notarized. Instead, it addresses a big-picture difference between Division I and Division II of the Washington Courts of Appeals.

The bigger issue is whether lien laws must strictly or liberally construed by courts. Critizing the Williams v. Athletic Field decision and the underlying reasoning of the Division II court, Division I engaged in the debate about whether strict or liberal interpretation must be applied in lien disputes with the following:

“In the lien context…there is a strong statutory directive that “[the lien statutes]…be liberally construed to provide security for all parties intended to be protected by their provisions.” RCW 60.04.900. This directive clearly applies to RCW 60.04.091. See, e.g. Northlake Concrete Prods., Inc. v. Wylie, 34 Wn.App. 810, 818, 663 P.2d 1380 (1983) (explaining the Legislature’s intent that “the lien laws shall be liberally construed with the view to effecting their object” meant that “when it has been determined that persons come within the operation of the act it will be liberally applied to them” (quoting De Gooyer). N. Coast. Elect. Co. v. Ariz. Elec. Serv., 2010 Wash. App. LEXIS 914, fn4 (Wash. Ct. App. Aug 23 2010).”

The strict v. liberal rub is weird in Washington.  It seems obvious to me, in reading the case law, when liberal construction applies versus when strict construction applies. However, attorneys making confusing or disingenuous arguments combined with misapplication of jurisprudence by district and appeal court judges, created a long-lasting incorrect application of law that caused big problems to Washington lien claimants.

The problem arises because both strict and liberal construction of mechanic liens may be required depending on circumstances. If the court is determining whether a particular claimant falls into the class of parties who are protected by lien laws, strict construction should apply.  If the party is protected by lien laws, and the question is simply whether the lien is valid or meets statutory requirements, then liberal construction should apply.  The strict construction rule comes from jurisprudence (case law), and the liberal construction rule comes straight from statute (§60.040.900).

If you look at the law and jurisprudence, this diachodimy of construction is actually clear.  §60.040.900 requires the mechanic lien statutes to be “liberally construed to provide security for all parties intended to be protected by their provisions.”  Case law picks up on this, stating that to decide who is “intended to be protected” requires strict construction.  Seems simple, yes?

Somehow, however, case law confused the issue. The Supreme Court in Williams pointed to a 1997 Division II case as when mechanic lien jurisprudence went off track:

…more recent cases have expanded the rule of strict construction beyond identifying what services or property the mechanics’ lien statutes protect. In Lumberman’s of Washington, Inc. v. Barnhardt, 89 Wn. App. 283, 286 (1997), the Court of Appeals applied the rule of strict construction in determining whether a lien was valid where the claimant failed to sign a statement swearing it believed the claim of lien to be just.

Williams Decision Restores Liberal Construction

The Supreme Court in Williams recognizes that §60.040.900′s liberal construction has taken a back seat to strict construction since the 1997 Lumberman’s decision.  They drew a comparison between the pre-1997 jurisprudence and the post-1997 jurisprudence and held that the old ways of considering mechanic lien questions should prevail:

We agree with Hos [defendant in Williams] that the appropriate way to view the competing canons of strict and liberal construction is found in our early cases. The strict construction rule, at its origin, was invoked to determine whether persons or services came within the statute’s protection. Expanding the rule of strict construction beyond this inquiry effectively nullifies RCW 60.04.900. As Hos explains, “applying a ‘liberal construction’ to RCW 60.04.091 only after a valid lien is deemed to attach would make no sense. At that point — when by definition the claimant has a valid lien — nothing in RCW 60.04.091 would matter to the claimant.” Appellant’s Reply Br. at 3. To the extent Lumberman’s or other cases suggest that the statute’s mandate of liberal construction has been supplanted by a common law rule of strict construction, we disapprove them.

Conclusion – What Does This Mean?

As I see it, having the Supreme Court weigh in on this question was a long time coming. Practicing law in Washington, I can’t count the number of times opposing attorneys have relied on Lumberman’s to argue a lien was invalid. Defense attorneys loved the Lumberman’s precedent, but to me it always just seemed to be a wrong decision.  Now, the Supreme Court has addressed the discrepancy, and Lumberman’s is tossed.

This is a big deal for Washington lien claimants.  If you’re a party who is intended to be protected by the mechanic lien laws (contractors, subcontractors, suppliers, etc.)….then you’ll have just a bit more leeway in filing your mechanic lien claims.  If there is a small mistake in your lien claim, Washington courts should now look at that mistake liberally, allowing you to amend and fix it in most situations.

As lots of little mistakes can be made in filing a mechanic’s lien, this little bit of breathing room can be a huge difference maker.

Proper preparation of the mechanic lien or preliminary notice form, however, is not as easy as it sounds. This isn’t because it takes a brilliant legal mind (or any legal mind) to understand how to fill in the blanks – that it certainly doesn’t – but because preparing these documents is time-consuming and requires strict adherence to certain procedures.

Let me offer you a few examples:

Legal Property Description Research

It’s nearly uniformly required across the country that mechanic liens identify the property being liened with a legal property description. The street address, in other words, is not enough. What is a legal property description?   We wrote an entire blog post on this subject, and you can read it here:  Identifying Property in a Mechanic’s Lien.

The definition of a legal property description is:

A legal description (also referred to as land description, property description, or land boundary description) is “a written statement recognized by law as to the definite location of a tract of land by reference to a survey, recorded map or adjoining property.” (from: Glossaries of BLM Surveying And Mapping Terms, Second Edition, 1980.)

To properly prepare that mechanic lien form (and even some preliminary notice forms), you need to research and find the legal property description. Hiring someone experienced in researching legal property locations is critical to properly identifying the property in your lien.

Getting The Form To The Right Places

Assuming you have properly filled out the form, the next step is getting the form filed and / or delivered to the right places, in the statutorily required way.  Here are some questions you will confront:

Does this document need to be filed?  If so, in which county office is it filed?
Most liens require filing, and most notices do not. However, there are exceptions to both. Where you file depends on the state’s requirements, with filings usually going to the county’s mortgage, auditor or recording offices.

Service Required After Filing The Lien?
Once the lien is filed, your task is not over. Most states require that the filed and stamped lien be served upon certain interested parties, including the property owner, the lender, the prime contractor, and/or those other parties up your contracting chain. Service can sometimes be through the mail, but other times require delivery by a courier or sheriff. Knowing what service is required and how it must be done is critical to correctly filing the lien.

How to send the preliminary notice?
Most states require that preliminary notices be sent in a certain way.  Most of the time, the notices are to be sent certified mail or certified mail with return receipt requested. But, there are always exceptions. Sometimes, the notice must be sent restricted delivery, sometimes registered mail, or sometimes by common courier (like FedEx) or hand-courier.

Do I Need to Keep Proof of Delivery?
Yes, and the type of proof varies.  The return receipt green card may be enough, but you may also need an affidavit of delivery. Check out this blog post on the topic: Strict Proof of Delivery May Be Required For Your Construction Notice.

Little Mistakes May Invalidate Your Lien

Unfortunately, since lien laws are very strictly construed, many states will consider a mechanic’s lien or preliminary notice invalid if there is some defect in how it is filled out (i.e. no legal property description) and how it is handled (i.e. filed in the wrong place, or delivered / served incorrectly).

The cost of these mistakes can be significant, and since there are so many moving parts in the filing or delivery of these lien and notice products, it’s a mistake to buy a simple do-it-yourself form and try to maneuver through these mazes of requirements.

Hiring a company like like Zlien (or a construction attorney), who is experienced and familiar with each state’s specific requirements, will reduce the likelihood of error for your company, and make sure your lien and notice rights are protected.

For more posts about this subject, take a look at the Tag “Why Us.”

Through the years on the Construction Lien Blog, we’ve published a lot of blog posts about errors folks make with the mechanic lien process.   There’s even a tag for it on our blog, the Lien Errors tag.   Click on that, and you’ll see discussion on the many things that can go wrong.

It’s been a little while since we’ve written a “round-up” of some common lien mistakes.   That’s not to say we haven’t done that in the past, you can take a look at these two articles for examples:   “Top 10 Construction Lien Errors” and “Common Collection Mistakes and Pitfalls.”

I was inspired to write this post by the New York Mechanic’s Lien blog, which has been publishing some excellent material lately.   Earlier in October, Vincent Pallaci published a post titled the “Seven Deadly Sins of Mechanic’s Liens.“   A highly recommended read, he goes into the problems that frequently arise with mechanic lien claims.

Hopefully, this post presents a new perspective from his, but of course, when you’re talking about “common” mistakes….well, they’re common.   So, here goes.

Lien is Missing Information

Vincent’s “Seven Deadly Sins” post actually touches on this, but focuses on New York mechanic lien law only, and focuses on a few particular lien requirements.   But, let’s talk big picture here.  Every state has its own technical requirements for the construction lien, meaning that your mechanic lien should have certain information in it.   No ands, ifs or buts…it’s got to be in the lien, or the lien is invalid.

What kind of stuff may be missing?   Here are some of the most common culprits:  (i) The property is not adequately described; (ii) You didn’t identify the last date you performed labor, or the date you sent a specific notice, or some other date required by statute; or (iii) You didn’t itemize the work you performed or the materials you furnished with enough particularity.

Any of this stuff, while it may seem harmless, can be fatal to the claim.

Lien Not Filed On Time

When determining when your lien claim is due you have to know two important things:   (1)  How long you have to file a lien; and (2) When that period STARTS.

So, let’s say you’re working in a state where you have 90 days from the last date of furnishing labor and materials to file a lien claim.   And let’s say you know that rule.   You’re on your way…

But consider this question:  when is the last day that you’ve furnished labor and/or materials.   Is it when the materials left your yard, or when it was delivered to the jobsite?   Is it when you substantially completed the work, or after the punchlist items were complete?  Or does it include that warranty work you did 2 months after final completion?

Each state answers these questions differently, and so knowing when the period starts can be just as important as knowing how long it is.

Not Understanding Your Notice Requirements

Some states require notices, some states don’t.   When notice is required by the state, determining if its required for your particular job can be quite a feat.  One of the most common errors with a mechanics lien is that the claimant may have lost its right to file the lien weeks or months before they ever thought about filing the lien in the first place.

Understand when you need to send notice, and send it if needed.  If the notice is needed and you didn’t send it…don’t file your lien.

Letting The Lien Expire

Let’s say you delivered all of your notices, filed the lien on time and got it filed without leaving out any critical information.   In other words, you have an enforceable lien claim!

That’s great news…but your claim doesn’t last forever.   And in most states, you can’t “extend” it.    To continue with the enforcement of your lien claim, you must file a lawsuit to foreclose the claim.   This is required within a certain amount of time, and if your period expires by just one day…your lien claim can disappear entirely.

Related articles

Unfortunately for JE Dunn Construction Co., it seems someone may have really dropped the ball filing its $12.4 Million mechanics lien.   The developer of a stalled West Edge project in Kansas City now claims the construction company’s mega-lien has a mistake that invalidates it.

When it comes to filing a mechanics lien, sometimes you only get one chance to get it right. Depending on the merit of  the developer’s claim, JE Dunn Construction Co. may have gotten a very frustrating and expensive lesson about the technical nature of mechanics liens.

From the press, it looks like the lien would have converted the debt from an unsecured claim into a secured claim in the bankruptcy proceedings pending on the West Edge project.   Without the lien, the claim falls to an unsecured one, making collection a lot less likely.  That makes this lien mistake one of the country’s most expensive.

What Could Have Went Wrong?

What could have went wrong with the mechanics lien, you ask?   What kind of mistake could invalidate such a big claim?

Funny enough, the biggest claims in the world can be invalidated by just the simplest and most technical oversight.  Here are examples of common filing errors that could have cost JE Dunn Construction Co. its secured claim:

• Poorly Identifying the Property: Most states require the use of a legal property description, and others require specific descriptions of the property.   In every state, the requirement is technical, and a lien can be invalidated because of an inadequate description.  (See article about describing properties on mechanic liens).
• Signing Mistakes: Mechanic liens must be signed in a particular way.   Some states require they be notarized, some states require a verification with specific and statutory language.  The smallest waiver from these requirements can result in the mechanics lien being invalidated.  (See article on Washington lien invalidated because of verification error)
• Not Sending Notice:   Some states require notice when you begin work.  Some states require notice immediately before filing a mechanics lien.  Some states require notice immediately after filing a lien.   Failing to deliver this notice, can forfeit your mechanic lien rights.  (See blog posts about preliminary and other notices)

Who is Filing Your Mechanics Lien?

Zlien is not a law firm, and let us be the first to tell you that if you are about to file a $12.4 Million mechanics lien, you have no business filing it without the counsel of a qualified and experienced construction attorney.   That is big money, and it’s certainly worth spending a few thousand dollars on counseling.

However, there are occasions when it doesn’t make financial or practical sense to hire an attorney to file a mechanic’s lien.  That’s when we really shine.   And some law firms - like this one in Georgia – have even recommended using a lien service to file a construction lien in the right circumstances.

What’s great about our service?   Take a look at this page which explains why you trust choose us to file your mechanics lien.

Our service is licensed, insured, bonded and experienced.

Now, I’m the first to tell you that filing a mechanics lien is one of the best methods of collecting construction debt, and it’s certainly important to think about filing a construction lien as soon as you’re faced with a non-paying customer. But, being prepared and qualified to file a lien takes discipline.

If we’ve said it once, we’ve said it a thousand times….lien laws are complex and hyper-technical.   Across the country, lien laws protect contractors and suppliers by providing them the right to lien non-paying projects.   Likewise, though, the laws protect property owners to prevent owners from paying for services twice, or having an improper lien filed against its property.

So, why is filing a mechanics lien a discipline?   Because it starts the moment you sign your contract.

• In many (not all) states, you can actually waive your right to lien before ever providing any services or materials.  If you’re in one of these states, it’s important to review your contract for this type of waiver language.

• Many states require contractors and/or suppliers to deliver a Preliminary Notice to the property owner (“NTO”) before furnishing labor or materials.  Failure to deliver notice, and to deliver it properly, may result in the forfeiting of lien rights.

• Many states require contractors and/or suppliers to deliver a “Notice of Intent to Lien” or similar instrument a certain number of days after accounts receivables become due, or a certain number of days before filing a lien.   Failure to deliver this notice, and to deliver it properly, may result in the forfeiting of lien rights.   (Read about the differences between Preliminary Notices and Notices of Intent here).

• Liens must be filed within a certain time period, and each state is absolutely different.   (Get state-by-state lien deadlines here).   Liens must be filed timely, or they are likely void.

Zlien Helps Your Company Be Disciplined About Liens

Zlien is more than a simple notice and lien filing company (although we’re darn good at this, too).  We were founded to help clear the air concerning the complex lien and notice requirements across the nation.

Here’s how we do it:

• Our Lien Wizard guides you through the notice and lien requirements associated with your role in the project, and the state the project is located.   You tell the Wizard some key information, and it pulls the notice and lien requirements from its database.   From there, you can order the products / documents that are relevant to what you and the law requires.  (Watch a Video on how our Lien Wizard Guides You Through Notice and Lien Requirements).

• We provide you with Free Lien Law Punchlists.   This is a summary of the basic notice and lien requirements of each state.

• The Lien Pilot helps you calculate project deadlines.   For free, you can manage your project data, contacts and important dates.   The Lien Pilot calculates applicable deadlines and filing requirements, and prompts you when they are approaching.

• We do the work for you.  If you don’t want to prepare and send the documents out yourself, or if you just have too many to send and want to focus on running your construction or supply business… Zlien will do all the work for you.  For notices, we’ll print them, mail them, track them, and store proof of their delivery on our secure servers.  For liens and other filed documents, we’ll prepare them, have them filed, and deliver notice to the project’s relevant contacts.