In this article, we’ll discuss the various methods for evaluating the validity of a mechanics lien in Illinois. We’ll cover topics such as the proper prerequisites to a mechanics lien, the difference between contractors and subcontractors and the work must have been done to satisfy a lien, information necessary in a mechanics lien, and deadline associated with filing a claim.
Subcontractor Vs. Contractor Mechanics Liens
Have the Prerequisites to the Lien Been Satisfied? The prerequisites for a contractor versus a subcontractor lien differ somewhat, but the basic stipulations are the same.
In order for a mechanics lien claim to be valid, the claimant must be defined as contractor or subcontractor as described in the Mechanics Lien Act. This act defines a contractor as any person who enters into a contract with the owner of the land or property in question for the purpose of improving or maintaining the land or structure on the land. A subcontractor is one who contracts with the general contractor to do a portion of the work but is not privy to the contract between the general contractor and the owner. A first-party materials provider to the general contractor may also be considered a subcontractor. Simply stating that one is a contractor or subcontractor, even in the terms of the contract, is not enough to establish proof when reviewing a case. The facts of the relationship must be examined in order to establish what role was actually played.
The burden of proof is on the lien claimant to show that he or she has a contract to support the claim. Under the Mechanics Lien Act, the contract can be written or oral, however, a case based on an oral contract may be harder to prove. Ultimately, the written or oral contract must exist in some form and support the stipulations in the claim.
The contract must be legal, and not void due to violation of law or public policy. For example, a lien from an unlicensed contractor would be unenforceable.
Who is the contract with?
In order for the lien claim to be valid, it must fall into one of three categories.
Did the Claimant Provide Lienable Labor or Material?
The keyword when asserting a valid lien is “improvement” to the property. Did the claimant actually improve the property in anyway? The Mechanics Lien Act goes into great detail when defining “improve” as it relates to work done or materials provided by a contractor or subcontractor. When considering materials provided, it is not necessary that the materials actually be incorporated into a structure for a lien to be valid, but rather must have at least been delivered and knowingly received by the client.
A contractor must have completed the work set forth in the contract, or be able to show that he or she, in good faith, made the greatest attempt to complete a “substantial portion” of the work agreed upon in the contract. If the appropriate amount of work was not completed the contractor must be able to provide a valid excuse for nonperformance, such as an owner excusing the contractor from a worksite, making it impossible for the contractor to finish the work. Breach of contract by the owner is another valid excuse for nonperformance. In the case of a subcontractor leaving a job site due to action on the part of the contractor, and the work being incomplete, the contractor would not have a valid excuse for nonperformance.
Evaluating all the prerequisites for a lien is the first step in finding a defense against a Mechanics Lien. Beyond the prerequisites, there are a number of other factors associated with a proper Mechanics Lien. These include:
For more information on a Mechanic’s Lien, the Mechanics Lien Act and the applicable deadlines check out the article How to Perfect a Mechanics Lien In Illinois.
O'Flaherty Law is happy to meet with you by phone or at our office locations in: