[CLC-Discussion] Warning on Claim of Lien

Tue Feb 15 05:46:20 PST 2022

Thanks, Gentlemen, for the feedback.  I agree with the NTO analysis.  I also realize that 713.08(3) is not as specific and will allow an omission that does not prejudice the owner.  It may be stronger than the 713.015 language that requires the warnings to be in contracts.  However, the language does give the Leeway that I have not yet seen a court opinion decide.
Regards,

Paul 
Paul S. Martin, Esq. Law Offices of Paul S. Martin & Associates, P.A. 2134 Hollywood Boulevard Hollywood, FL  33020 USA 
Phone 954.923.4604 Telefax 954.923.6545 
___________________________ 
This message is intended only for the use of the individual or entity to which it is directed.  The information contained in this E-mail message is privileged, confidential, and may be protected from disclosure; please be aware that any other use, printing, copying, disclosure or dissemination of this communication may be subject to legal restriction or sanction. If you think that you have received this E-mail message in error, please immediately reply to the sender.

-----Original Message-----
From: RPPTL CLC-Discussion <clc-discussion at lists.flabarrpptl.org>
To: clc-discussion at lists.flabarrpptl.org <clc-discussion at lists.flabarrpptl.org>
Sent: Mon, Feb 14, 2022 1:55 pm
Subject: Re: [CLC-Discussion] Warning on Claim of Lien

Like Lee, I am aware of a case where the Notice to Owner was invalid because it was not in substantially the statutory form.  The statue was subsequently warning language.  Section 713.06(2)(c) was subsequently changed to state “and must include the information and the warning contained in the following form….”  This is slightly different than the language in section 713.08(3) but the intent is the same even though it does not include the term “must.”    Good luck, 
Cary    Wm. Cary Wright
Attorney at Law | Carlton Fields
4221 W. Boy Scout Blvd., Ste. 1000|Tampa,Florida33607-5780
Direct: 813.229.4135 | Fax: 813.229.4133
cwright at carltonfields.com
  From: clc-discussion-bounces at lists.flabarrpptl.org <clc-discussion-bounces at lists.flabarrpptl.org>On Behalf Of RPPTL CLC-Discussion
Sent: Monday, February 14, 2022 11:24 AM
To: clc-discussion at lists.flabarrpptl.org
Subject: Re: [CLC-Discussion] Warning on Claim of Lien    Good morning Paul,  It is a statuory requirement, see below. I haven’t seen an opinion negating the lien but I wouldn’t think the issue would make it to an appeals court. Maybe there is a trial court order out there but I am not aware of it.    “The claim of lien shall be sufficient if it is in substantially the following form,and includes the following warning: “ § 713.08(3), Fla. Stat. Ann.   Thanks, Jack    Jack Taylor |Attorney Direct Line: (321) 204-4012   Angius & Terry LLP Ft. Lauderdale     |      Orlando      |      Palm Harbor (954) 839-6200           (407) 624-3070          (727) 474-0200 www.constructiondefectlaw.com   Check out our new and improved website at constructiondefectlaw.com! Don’t forget to like us on social media!      CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE. This communication contains information which (a) may be legally privileged, proprietary in nature, or otherwise protected by law from disclosure, and (b) is intended only for the use of the addressee/s named. If you are not the intended addressee, or the person responsible for delivering this to the addressee/s, you are hereby notified that reading, copying, or distributing this communication is prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please notify the sender immediatelyby calling (800) 680-4001. Thank you.   From: clc-discussion-bounces at lists.flabarrpptl.org <clc-discussion-bounces at lists.flabarrpptl.org>On Behalf Of RPPTL CLC-Discussion
Sent: Monday, February 14, 2022 10:18 AM
To: clc-discussion at lists.flabarrpptl.org
Subject: [CLC-Discussion] Warning on Claim of Lien   Good morning.   Has anyone seen any court rulings that invalidated a Claim of Lien for not having the "WARNING" language on it?  I have not seen any that finds there was prejudice or bring adversely affected for that language or the required language in the contract for the Construction Lien law notice.   Similarly, I had not seen a Claim of Lien without the WARNING for awhile and have just run across one.   Curious what is being seen out there.   Paul   Paul S. Martin, Esq. Law Offices of Paul S. Martin & Associates, P.A. 2134 Hollywood Boulevard Hollywood, FL  33020 USA   Phone 954.923.4604 Telefax 954.923.6545 
___________________________    This message is intended only for the use of the individual or entity to which it is directed.  The information contained in this E-mail message is privileged, confidential, and may be protected from disclosure; please be aware that any other use, printing, copying, disclosure or dissemination of this communication may be subject to legal restriction or sanction. If you think that you have received this E-mail message in error, please immediately reply to the sender.    Disclaimer The information contained in this communication from the sender is confidential. It is intended solely for use by the recipient and others authorized to receive it. If you are not the recipient, you are hereby notified that any disclosure, copying, distribution or taking action in relation of the contents of this information is strictly prohibited and may be unlawful.

This email has been scanned for viruses and malware, and may have been automatically archived byMimecast Ltd, an innovator in Software as a Service (SaaS) for business. Providing asafer and more useful place for your human generated data. Specializing in; Security, archiving and compliance. To find out moreClick Here. _______________________________________________
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/20220215/3e6b3533/attachment-0001.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image005.png
Type: image/png
Size: 1193 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://mailman.fsr.com/pipermail/clc-discussion/attachments/20220215/3e6b3533/image005-0001.png>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image002.gif
Type: image/gif
Size: 1200 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://mailman.fsr.com/pipermail/clc-discussion/attachments/20220215/3e6b3533/image002-0001.gif>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image003.png
Type: image/png
Size: 1260 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://mailman.fsr.com/pipermail/clc-discussion/attachments/20220215/3e6b3533/image003-0001.png>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image001.gif
Type: image/gif
Size: 2952 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://mailman.fsr.com/pipermail/clc-discussion/attachments/20220215/3e6b3533/image001-0001.gif>