Author Archives: Melissa Dewey Brumback

Of Mice and Men: Yes, you need a written construction contract!

Posted on by
Field mouse

Photo by delphywnd via Flickr*

 

Does a written contract *really* matter?   Yes; yes it does.

While you can get by for years- decades, even- on handshake deals—when something goes wrong you will wish you had a written contract.  Even the best projects, with familiar clients and trusted contractors, can go awry.  (“The best laid plans of mice and men often go awry”).

Many of my clients come to me after having been in business 20, 30 years or more.  They come to me because they have either already been sued, or the handwriting is on the wall and they are about to be brought into litigation.  They tell me they’ve never needed a written contract before now.  That’s well and good.  However, I’d bet dollars to donuts those same folks have fire insurance, and yet very few if any of them have actually experienced a house fire.  What’s different about business contracts?

The goal, of course, is that you will never need to rely on the written provisions in your contract.  But if you ever find yourself facing a lawsuit, you’ll wish you had a written contract.

A written contract spells out expectations, rights, and responsibilities.  It sets standards that may be understood by the parties, but very different from what the common law would allow.  Without a written contract, you are trusting yourself to laws you may not agree with or giving up protections you may otherwise have.  Why chance it?

Get something in writing—a signed proposal, an email which is confirmed—something that spells out basic agreements that might come into dispute later.  A thorough contract written for each project is ideal, though not always practical on smaller, quick-turn deals.  That’s fine.  But get something on paper.  You’ll be glad you did, if and when you ever find yourself on the courthouse steps.

 ————–

*Photo: Have you seen the Muffin Mouse by delphwynd via Flickr and made available via Creative Commons license.

Pay When Paid Clauses in the NC Construction Contract

Posted on by

“Pay when paid” clauses are clauses found in many construction contracts that state that the contractor will pay his subcontractor only if and/or when the contractor receives payment from the owner.   Are these clauses enforceable?  The answer depends on (1) what state you are in and (2) what choice of law provision is contained in your construction contract.

A limited number of states do honor “pay when paid” clauses under the theory that the parties are usually sophisticated parties who negotiated the contract terms and as such they are duty bound to honor those terms.   When such a clause is enforced, it can prove fatal in a case where the owner files bankruptcy or otherwise defaults on its payments to the general contractor.

In North Carolina,  such clauses are unenforceable as against public policy.

Performance by a subcontractor in accordance with the provisions of its contract shall entitle it to payment from the party with whom it contracts. Payment by the owner to a contractor is not a condition precedent for payment to a subcontractor and payment by a contractor to a subcontractor is not a condition precedent for payment to any other subcontractor, and an agreement to the contrary is unenforceable.

N. C. Gen. Stat. Section 22C-2.

Does that mean that, if you are a subcontractor, you don’t need to worry about such “pay when paid” clauses in North Carolina?  Not necessarily.  It depends on what law is the law that will be applied by the court.  If your contract states that the law of another state will apply, you need to know if that state is one in which “pay when paid” clauses are enforceable.  In some states, such as Virginia, the contract is king and whatever the contract says will be enforced.  Such clauses are also generally enforceable in a few other states such as Connecticut and Michigan.

Other states take a more cautious view, and hold that such clauses are only enforceable if unambiguously written, including  Arizona, Ohio, and Massachusetts.

States which concur with North Carolina’s view that such clauses are unenforceable include New York, California, and South Carolina.

Therefore, it is important to know not only what your contract says, but what state’s law will apply to your contract.

Because case law and statutes change the law regularly, consult a licensed attorney in the jurisdiction you are concerned about to learn the latest status of contingent payment clauses in that jurisdiction.

Tips for hiring and using your Construction Attorney

Posted on by

Often, people in the construction industry don’t bother to hire an attorney until they are in trouble. An owner isn’t paying them. A subcontractor has filed a lien on the property. Another contractor or homeowner is suing them. When your back is up against the wall, how do you find and use a construction attorney to your best advantage?

Check out the post on “How to be an Effective Construction Client” written by Jordan Furlong (@jordan_law21) on Christopher Hill’s Virginia-based construction law blog, Construction Law Musings.

In the article, Furlong discusses how to communicate expectations, bottom line deal breakers, and the like with your attorney both prior to hiring him/her and during the matter itself. Read it. Know it. Use it. Your attorney will thank you and so will your wallet.

 

Green Design | Legal risks to designing a Construction project for LEED certification (take 2)

Posted on by

As I noted in an earlier post about risks related to designing buildings for LEED certification, those involved in construction should proceed cautiously in designing to certain LEED standards.

A recent Insurance Journal article discusses insurance and liability risks for a designer or contractor if he guarantees a certain level of “green” performance in his construction contract.

“If you’re an architect, engineer, or contractor, and you’re guaranteeing to your client that the building will be Gold certified by the U.S. Green Building Council, you’re opening up a pretty big can of worms.”

You should never “guarantee” any performance to keep your risks minimized, your insurance in place, and your attorney happy. This article is another reminder to be especially cautious in green construction, and to not make promises that you may not be able to keep.

ConsensusDOCS- are they an improvement over AIA construction contracts?

Posted on by

Have you had occasion to use the (relatively) new ConsensusDOCS? Having just completed my manuscript for the North Carolina Construction Law seminar I’m speaking at in May, I’ve been spending a lot of time comparing the American Institute of Architect’s standard contract general conditions, the AIA A201 (2007) to the ConsensusDOCS 200 (2007) and the Engineering Joint Contracts Document Committee (EJCDC) standard general conditions of the contract, C-700 (2007).

I haven’t yet seen litigation over the ConsensusDOCS, so how courts will interpret its provisions remains to be seen. One major difference: the ConsensusDOCS do diminish some of the architect/design professional’s role on the project.

For example, in the change order process, instead of the architect being involved in the contract price and time adjustment (see AIA A201 Section 7.2.1), the ConsensusDOCS 200 calls for the owner and contractor to negotiate in good faith. No mention is made of the design professional’s role. (See 8.1.2).

If you’ve had occasion to work under the ConsensusDOCS, drop me a line and tell me the advantages and disadvantages over other form contracts.