[CLC-Discussion] 713.346: Time to let Owners in on the party?

Wed Oct 28 16:53:40 PDT 2020

Wow. All you Republicans are worried about protecting consumers? My subs and suppliers must strictly comply but close enough is ok for consumers? Change the law? Didn’t hear this about 558. You go Rob. Biden in 2020!

Jeffrey L Price
NPWC, PA
5216 SW 91st Dr., Gainesville FL
352-373-9031

On Oct 28, 2020, at 4:23 PM, RPPTL CLC-Discussion <clc-discussion at lists.flabarrpptl.org> wrote:

If Jeff says we shouldn’t do it, now I KNOW it needs to happen.

In all seriousness though, I think it would be good public policy all around to add it.  It doesn’t hurt any of the subs or suppliers we represent.  They still have valid liens.   It adds some consumer protection for the (perhaps lazy/cheap, or just helplessly uninformed) owner.  It adds another tool in the tool box for us to use and possibly have a fee award.   The only person it’s bad for is the GC that didn’t pay his subs/suppliers.   Even if they had a legitimate reason for non-payment, it probably shouldn’t be the owner’s fight.

<image002.jpg>
Robert E. Doan
Board Certified Construction Attorney
Supreme Court Certified Circuit Civil Mediator
231 N. Woodland Blvd.
DeLand, FL 32720
(P) 386-736-7700 | (F) 386-785-1549

Offices In Daytona Beach and DeLand

Website<http://www.cobbcole.com/> | Bio<http://www.cobbcole.com/The-Cobb-Cole-Team/Robert-E-Doan.shtml> | vCard<http://www.cobbcole.com/content/includes/vCards/Robert-E-Doan.vcf>

From: clc-discussion-bounces at lists.flabarrpptl.org <clc-discussion-bounces at lists.flabarrpptl.org> On Behalf Of RPPTL CLC-Discussion
Sent: Wednesday, October 28, 2020 3:54 PM
To: clc-discussion at lists.flabarrpptl.org
Subject: Re: [CLC-Discussion] 713.346: Time to let Owners in on the party?

In response to Rob’s original question (“Can anyone think of a compelling reason why 713.346 should not be amended to add a statutory cause of action (with a right to prevailing party fees) for an Owner who is harmed by a lienor’s failure to pay a lower tier lienor?”) – YES. Because of the next part – (“I know the owner should be getting all the proper releases in order to give themselves a proper payment defense, but . . .”). The “but” part is not a good reason to make a change. It is frustrating, “but” everyone has a job to do and the Owner saving a buck by being his own lawyer and getting hosed is no different than a CG saving a buck by being their own lawyer and getting hosed. Hard to legislate away ignorance.
As for Mikes response, I agree - getting a persecutor to give a damn is worthless. The best recourse I’ve found is DBPR. Free, and causes insufferable pain to the contractor. It has always resulted in payment for me because the crappy contractor needs their ticket so they can continue cheating others.

<https://www.npw-law.com/>
<image003.png>

From: clc-discussion-bounces at lists.flabarrpptl.org<mailto:clc-discussion-bounces at lists.flabarrpptl.org> <clc-discussion-bounces at lists.flabarrpptl.org<mailto:clc-discussion-bounces at lists.flabarrpptl.org>> On Behalf Of RPPTL CLC-Discussion
Sent: Wednesday, October 28, 2020 3:03 PM
To: 'clc-discussion at lists.flabarrpptl.org' <clc-discussion at lists.flabarrpptl.org<mailto:clc-discussion at lists.flabarrpptl.org>>
Subject: Re: [CLC-Discussion] 713.346: Time to let Owners in on the party?

Hi Larry!!!!! :0)

<http://www.kubickidraper.com/>
<image005.jpg>
Michelle M. Krone<http://www.kubickidraper.com/staff_detail11.php?MemberID=33>
Shareholder
Board Certified Construction Lawyer
Direct   (239) 461-8103
Fax       (239) 939-0700
mmk at kubickidraper.com<mailto:mmk at kubickidraper.com>
13350 Metro Parkway Suite 401<http://maps.google.com/maps?f=q&source=s_q&hl=en&geocode=&q=13350%20Metro%20Parkway%20Suite%20401+Fort%20Myers,+Florida+33966>
Fort Myers, Florida 33966<http://maps.google.com/maps?f=q&source=s_q&hl=en&geocode=&q=13350%20Metro%20Parkway%20Suite%20401+Fort%20Myers,+Florida+33966>

                                                <https://www.linkedin.com/company/kubicki-draper/>
<image006.png>
 <https://twitter.com/KubickiDraper>
<image007.png>

From: clc-discussion-bounces at lists.flabarrpptl.org<mailto:clc-discussion-bounces at lists.flabarrpptl.org> [mailto:clc-discussion-bounces at lists.flabarrpptl.org] On Behalf Of RPPTL CLC-Discussion
Sent: Wednesday, October 28, 2020 2:54 PM
To: clc-discussion at lists.flabarrpptl.org<mailto:clc-discussion at lists.flabarrpptl.org>
Subject: Re: [CLC-Discussion] 713.346: Time to let Owners in on the party?

You only include the “scary seeming remedies”  (whatever those are) when the contract is drafted within a week of Halloween.  😊

Larry R. Leiby
Larry R. Leiby, Esq.
Adjunct Professor, Florida International University College of Law
Florida Bar Board Certified Construction Law Expert
Emeritus Fellow, American College of Commercial Arbitrators

From: clc-discussion-bounces at lists.flabarrpptl.org<mailto:clc-discussion-bounces at lists.flabarrpptl.org> <clc-discussion-bounces at lists.flabarrpptl.org<mailto:clc-discussion-bounces at lists.flabarrpptl.org>> On Behalf Of RPPTL CLC-Discussion
Sent: Wednesday, October 28, 2020 2:50 PM
To: clc-discussion at lists.flabarrpptl.org<mailto:clc-discussion at lists.flabarrpptl.org>
Subject: Re: [CLC-Discussion] 713.346: Time to let Owners in on the party?

Presently my take away from this scenario is that when drafting a contract on behalf of an owner you should always include a specific payment indemnity with lots of scary seeming remedies.

Sincerely,

Peter B. Rowell
Board Certified Construction Attorney
The Law Office of Peter B. Rowell, P.A.
8950 S.W. 74th Court Suite 2201 A-71
Miami, Florida 33156
Phone: (305) 998-9657
<image008.jpg>
This e-mail communication (including any attachments) may contain legally privileged and confidential information intended solely for the use of the intended recipient. If you are not the intended recipient, you should immediately cease reading this message and delete it from your system. Any unauthorized reading, distribution, copying or other use of this communication (or its attachments) is strictly prohibited.

From: clc-discussion-bounces at lists.flabarrpptl.org<mailto:clc-discussion-bounces at lists.flabarrpptl.org> <clc-discussion-bounces at lists.flabarrpptl.org<mailto:clc-discussion-bounces at lists.flabarrpptl.org>> On Behalf Of RPPTL CLC-Discussion
Sent: Wednesday, October 28, 2020 2:19 PM
To: clc-discussion at lists.flabarrpptl.org<mailto:clc-discussion at lists.flabarrpptl.org>
Subject: Re: [CLC-Discussion] 713.346: Time to let Owners in on the party?

I recently encountered this- the bad actor admitted they had been paid and did not pay my client -  I was shocked at the lack of causes of action to chase the money – yes , it’s a crime , but that does not really get the money back

Kevin J. Taylor, Esq.
Kevin J. Taylor, P.A.
2455 East Sunrise Boulevard
Suite 512
Fort Lauderdale, Florida 33304
954-530-0889

<image009.png>
<image010.png>

www.kevintaylorlaw.com<http://www.kevintaylorlaw.com/>

From: clc-discussion-bounces at lists.flabarrpptl.org<mailto:clc-discussion-bounces at lists.flabarrpptl.org> <clc-discussion-bounces at lists.flabarrpptl.org<mailto:clc-discussion-bounces at lists.flabarrpptl.org>> On Behalf Of RPPTL CLC-Discussion
Sent: Wednesday, October 28, 2020 2:04 PM
To: clc-discussion at lists.flabarrpptl.org<mailto:clc-discussion at lists.flabarrpptl.org>
Subject: Re: [CLC-Discussion] 713.346: Time to let Owners in on the party?

It would be great to be able to plead the permissive inference in Fla. Stat. § 713.345(1)(c) and not try to “shoehorn” it into a cause of action. Can’t be the basis for a civil theft claim.

Thank you,
Jack
Jack Taylor, Esq.
Associate Attorney

Williams Law Firm
212 W. Bay Ave
Longwood, FL 32750
Telephone: 407-926-4100

Jack at WCLfirm.com<mailto:gtwlaw at ymail.com>
www.WCLFirm.com<http://www.wclfirm.com/>
<image011.jpg>

In some circumstances this firm may be deemed a “debt collector” as defined by the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act and other applicable law. In such a case, this is an attempt to collect a debt. Any communication obtained may be used for that purpose.

Important – Williams Law Firm utilizes spam and junk email filtration applications in its email information systems. These systems may prevent or delay delivery of certain email communications. If you do not receive a response to an email communication within two business days, please contact the intended recipient via phone.
This email message including attachments, if any, is intended for the use of the individual or entity named above and may contain attorney-client confidential and/or privileged information.  If the reader of this message is not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any review, use, disclosure, copying, or distribution is strictly prohibited.  If you have received this email message in error, please contact the sender by reply email and destroy all copies of the original message including attachments.  Thank you.
Pursuant to federal regulations imposed on practitioners who render tax advice ("Circular 230"), we are required to advise you that any tax advice contained herein is not intended or written to be used for the purpose of avoiding tax penalties that may be imposed by the Internal Revenue Service.  If this advice is or is intended to be used or referred to in promoting, marketing or recommending a partnership or other entity, investment plan or arrangement, the regulations under Circular 230 require that we advise you as follows: (1) this writing is not intended or written to be used, and it cannot be used, for the purpose of avoiding tax penalties that may be imposed on a taxpayer; (2) the advice was written to support the promotion or marketing of the transaction(s) or matter(s) addressed by the written advice; and (3) the taxpayer should seek advice based on the taxpayer's particular circumstances from an independent tax advisor.

From: clc-discussion-bounces at lists.flabarrpptl.org<mailto:clc-discussion-bounces at lists.flabarrpptl.org> <clc-discussion-bounces at lists.flabarrpptl.org<mailto:clc-discussion-bounces at lists.flabarrpptl.org>> On Behalf Of RPPTL CLC-Discussion
Sent: Wednesday, October 28, 2020 1:31 PM
To: clc-discussion at lists.flabarrpptl.org<mailto:clc-discussion at lists.flabarrpptl.org>
Subject: Re: [CLC-Discussion] 713.346: Time to let Owners in on the party?

I agree with both of you but think  713.346  would be the better place to make the change.

Notice: The information contained in this email transmission is intended by the sender for the use of the named individual or entity to which it is directed and may contain information that is privileged or otherwise confidential. It is not intended for transmission to, or receipt by, anyone other than the named addressee (or a person authorized to deliver it to the named addressee). It should not be copied or forwarded to any unauthorized persons. If you have received this electronic mail transmission in error, please delete it from your system without copying or forwarding it, and notify the sender of the error by reply email or by calling Cobb Cole at 386-255-8171, so that we can update our address records accordingly.
_______________________________________________
CLC-Discussion mailing list
CLC-Discussion at lists.flabarrpptl.org
http://mailman.fsr.com/mailman/listinfo/clc-discussion
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mailman.fsr.com/pipermail/clc-discussion/attachments/20201028/b45f23f0/attachment-0001.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image002.jpg
Type: image/jpeg
Size: 4785 bytes
Desc: image002.jpg
URL: <http://mailman.fsr.com/pipermail/clc-discussion/attachments/20201028/b45f23f0/image002-0001.jpg>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image005.jpg
Type: image/jpeg
Size: 58277 bytes
Desc: image005.jpg
URL: <http://mailman.fsr.com/pipermail/clc-discussion/attachments/20201028/b45f23f0/image005-0001.jpg>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image006.png
Type: image/png
Size: 1025 bytes
Desc: image006.png
URL: <http://mailman.fsr.com/pipermail/clc-discussion/attachments/20201028/b45f23f0/image006-0001.png>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image007.png
Type: image/png
Size: 954 bytes
Desc: image007.png
URL: <http://mailman.fsr.com/pipermail/clc-discussion/attachments/20201028/b45f23f0/image007-0001.png>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image008.jpg
Type: image/jpeg
Size: 5344 bytes
Desc: image008.jpg
URL: <http://mailman.fsr.com/pipermail/clc-discussion/attachments/20201028/b45f23f0/image008-0001.jpg>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image009.png
Type: image/png
Size: 2668 bytes
Desc: image009.png
URL: <http://mailman.fsr.com/pipermail/clc-discussion/attachments/20201028/b45f23f0/image009-0001.png>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image010.png
Type: image/png
Size: 12208 bytes
Desc: image010.png
URL: <http://mailman.fsr.com/pipermail/clc-discussion/attachments/20201028/b45f23f0/image010-0001.png>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image011.jpg
Type: image/jpeg
Size: 2865 bytes
Desc: image011.jpg
URL: <http://mailman.fsr.com/pipermail/clc-discussion/attachments/20201028/b45f23f0/image011-0001.jpg>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image003.png
Type: image/png
Size: 180142 bytes
Desc: image003.png
URL: <http://mailman.fsr.com/pipermail/clc-discussion/attachments/20201028/b45f23f0/image003-0001.png>