[CLC-Discussion] Back charge for failure to maintain work comp insurance?

Thu Mar 17 09:19:32 PDT 2016

Wouldn’t the prime contract require all contractors carry the appropriate coverages and if the coverages are not in place, then the sub who is not carrying the coverage be in breach?

Sincerely,

Paul J. Kelly

Paul J. Kelly, P.A.

2959 First Avenue North

St. Petersburg, Florida 33713

(727) 327-3935

cid:image006153c.jpg

CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: A law firm is sending this message; This e-mail message including attachments, if any, is intended only for the person or entity to which it is addressed and may contain confidential and/or privileged material.  Any unauthorized review, use, disclosure or distribution or use of the contents of this information is prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient, please contact the sender by reply e-mail, destroy all copies of the original message, and do not disseminate it further. This message may not be reviewed, printed, displayed, or re-transmitted without the sender’s consent. All rights protected.  There may be no further distribution or publication of this communication or its contents without the express consent of this law firm.

IRS Circular 230 disclosure:
To ensure compliance with requirements imposed by the IRS, we inform you that any tax advice contained in this communication, unless expressly stated otherwise, was not intended or written to be used, and cannot be used, for the purpose of (i) avoiding tax-related penalties under the Internal Revenue Code or (ii) promoting, marketing or recommending to another party any tax-related matter(s) addressed herein.

P Think Green!  Unless necessary, please do not print this email.

From: clc-discussion-bounces at lists.flabarrpptl.org [mailto:clc-discussion-bounces at lists.flabarrpptl.org] On Behalf Of Smith, Jared
Sent: Thursday, March 17, 2016 11:46 AM
To: Brian Solomon; Fred Dudley; clc-discussion at lists.flabarrpptl.org
Subject: Re: [CLC-Discussion] Back charge for failure to maintain work comp insurance?

Thanks, Brian.  Great thoughts.  Much appreciated.  The subsub had actually produced a cert. of insurance before starting the job, but let it lapse during the pendency of the project.

Jared E. Smith
Board Certified in Construction Law

 <http://www.rumberger.com> 

	Main: 813.223.4253
Email: jsmith at rumberger.com
vCard <http://www.rumberger.com/90F6E0/assets/files/vcards/Jared%20E%20Smith.vcf> 

 <http://www.rumberger.com/90F6E0/assets/files/vcards/Jared%20E%20Smith.vcf> vCard <https://www.linkedin.com/company/rumberger-kirk-&-caldwell> LinkedIn <https://twitter.com/rumbergerkirk> Twitter <https://www.facebook.com/rumbergerkirkcaldwell> Facebook <https://goo.gl/maps/ZpASy> Tampa Office

  _____  

100 North Tampa Street | Suite 2000 | Tampa, FL 33602-5830
Mail To: P.O. Box 3390 | Tampa, FL 33601-3390

The information in this e-mail message is legally privileged and confidential information. If you have received this e-mail in error, please delete from any device/media where the message is stored.

From: Brian Solomon [mailto:bsolomon at solomon-law.com] 
Sent: Thursday, March 17, 2016 11:24 AM
To: Fred Dudley; Smith, Jared; clc-discussion at lists.flabarrpptl.org
Subject: RE: [CLC-Discussion] Back charge for failure to maintain work comp insurance?

First, the subcontractor should have obtained a certificate of insurance prior to the subsub beginning work.  At this point I believe the proper action would be to withhold from the payment the estimated premium based on the total amount of payments made to the subsub. At final audit, the subcontractor will be asked to provide all payments made to subsubs and then to provide certificates of insurance for each.  For the subsub at issue, there will not be a certificate so subcontractor will be charged additional premium based on the total amount of the payments made to the subsub.  By deducting it now, the subcontractor will already have the money to pay the additional premium.  However, letting any subcontractor on a job without first getting a certificate of insurance is a very risky, and well could be, a very expensive proposition.

From: clc-discussion-bounces at lists.flabarrpptl.org [mailto:clc-discussion-bounces at lists.flabarrpptl.org] On Behalf Of Fred Dudley
Sent: Wednesday, March 16, 2016 10:28 AM
To: Smith, Jared <jsmith at rumberger.com>; clc-discussion at lists.flabarrpptl.org
Subject: Re: [CLC-Discussion] Back charge for failure to maintain work comp insurance?

This a great  question, Jared, and one for which we need to seek clarification. I’m working on it now with the WC attorney’s I work with on Stop Work Orders and Penalty Assessments, but failure to have required WC coverage is a crime in Florida.

Fred R. Dudley, Partner

Board Certified Construction Lawyer

Dudley, Sellers, Healy & Heath, P. L.

SunTrust Financial Center, Suite 301

3522 Thomasville Road

Tallahassee, Florida 32308

Cell: (850) 294-3471

Direct: (850)692-6368

dudley at mylicenselaw.com

From: clc-discussion-bounces at lists.flabarrpptl.org [mailto:clc-discussion-bounces at lists.flabarrpptl.org] On Behalf Of Smith, Jared
Sent: Tuesday, March 15, 2016 4:29 PM
To: clc-discussion at lists.flabarrpptl.org
Subject: [CLC-Discussion] Back charge for failure to maintain work comp insurance?

Can a subcontractor withhold full payment from a subsub that failed to maintain work comp insurance? (in the past, the subcontractor has been audited by its comp carrier and required to pay additional premium for any subsubs that did not have required coverage—significant dollar amounts).  No written contract exists, so for now am making arguments based on custom and industry standard.  Any guidance or discussion appreciated.

Jared E. Smith
Board Certified in Construction Law

 <http://www.rumberger.com> 

	Main: 813.223.4253
Email: jsmith at rumberger.com
vCard <http://www.rumberger.com/90F6E0/assets/files/vcards/Jared%20E%20Smith.vcf> 

 <http://www.rumberger.com/90F6E0/assets/files/vcards/Jared%20E%20Smith.vcf> vCard <https://www.linkedin.com/company/rumberger-kirk-&-caldwell> LinkedIn <https://twitter.com/rumbergerkirk> Twitter <https://www.facebook.com/rumbergerkirkcaldwell> Facebook <https://goo.gl/maps/ZpASy> Tampa Office

  _____  

100 North Tampa Street | Suite 2000 | Tampa, FL 33602-5830
Mail To: P.O. Box 3390 | Tampa, FL 33601-3390

The information in this e-mail message is legally privileged and confidential information. If you have received this e-mail in error, please delete from any device/media where the message is stored.

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mailman.fsr.com/pipermail/clc-discussion/attachments/20160317/0fbf94c2/attachment-0001.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image005.png
Type: image/png
Size: 5400 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://mailman.fsr.com/pipermail/clc-discussion/attachments/20160317/0fbf94c2/image005-0001.png>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image007.png
Type: image/png
Size: 1759 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://mailman.fsr.com/pipermail/clc-discussion/attachments/20160317/0fbf94c2/image007-0001.png>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image008.png
Type: image/png
Size: 1795 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://mailman.fsr.com/pipermail/clc-discussion/attachments/20160317/0fbf94c2/image008-0001.png>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image009.png
Type: image/png
Size: 7238 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://mailman.fsr.com/pipermail/clc-discussion/attachments/20160317/0fbf94c2/image009-0001.png>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image010.png
Type: image/png
Size: 2015 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://mailman.fsr.com/pipermail/clc-discussion/attachments/20160317/0fbf94c2/image010-0001.png>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image011.png
Type: image/png
Size: 2838 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://mailman.fsr.com/pipermail/clc-discussion/attachments/20160317/0fbf94c2/image011-0001.png>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image002.jpg
Type: image/jpeg
Size: 2345 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://mailman.fsr.com/pipermail/clc-discussion/attachments/20160317/0fbf94c2/image002-0001.jpg>