Subcontractor’s Lien Surprises Owner

After 30 years in the U.S. Navy covering duty in three wars, we retired to our home in 1970, hoping we would live happily ever after. All went well until we decided to have our home re-roofed. The roofers re-roofed and, without any qualms or hesitation, I paid the roofer and thanked him for a job well done.

Some time later, after receiving a California Preliminary Notice, I got the impression that something was amiss. I called the originator of the notice and was informed that this was “required by statute ... which in no way indicates the existence of a lien.” The roofer also told me not to worry. But later I was served with a summons from a Superior Court, which included a mechanic’s lien on my home.

I was nailed as the owner and a legitimate target for a mechanic’s lien. Forget that I had paid the roofer his full amount upon completion per our contract, which included the costs of all materials. I now had to pay $3,300 more.

I believe that the people in Sacramento who license contractors should require a form that includes a caveat or warning for the information and guidance of the customer. This warning, in bold type, should let him know of the possibility of a lien’s being placed against his property if any subcontractor is not paid for his work or material.

LEFTERIS LAVRAKAS

Costa Mesa