Options are limited with a Washington State contractor who performs sub-standard work, grossly over charges the residential property owner for the work, and the local building inspector issues notices of correction for the work before the job can be continued or issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy.
The residential property owner and contractor’s relationship has already gone sour over disputes about the charges. Property owner would prefer to have another contractor correct the work and sue the substandard contractor for the additional expenses.
Does the residential property owner need to give the defaulting contractor the opportunity to correct the work, or at least a reasonable opportunity to do so? The specific answer about the opportunity to cure is set out in Ch. 64.50 RCW. If the contractor gives this notice to the owner, then the owner has to give the contractor 45 days’ notice and opportunity to negotiate. Every contractor should include this provision in every contract, and if they don’t then the 45 days’ notice isn’t required.
Every contractor must also give every customer (with a few exceptions) the RCW 18.27.114 Notice to Customer (i.e., I have a bond and this is my registration number but my bond may not be sufficient to protect you). If the notice isn’t given then the Department of Labor & Industries (L&I) can issue an infraction, and an infraction can lead to a per se violation of Chapt. 19.86 RCW. Plus without the notice the contractor can’t file or foreclose a lien.
L&I has compliance officers who, with enough prompting, issue citations for RCW 18.27.114 non-compliance – and without this you don’t get the RCW 18.27.350 pot of gold (triple damages).
Contractors who don’t have experienced attorneys prepare their contracts miss many, many opportunities to protect themselves.
Owner strategies include getting building official inspection reports, building code experts, cost experts, et cetera. Getting these experts early gives the owner an idea of costs to cure or complete and are useful for negotiations with the contractor.
Contractor strategies, even when they fail to give the Chapt. 64.50 RCW notice, is to argue long and hard about mitigation of damages – common law still applies when the statute isn’t complied with. “Owner, I would have replaced that code defect list for $2000, and I have reports from these subs to prove it. Had you made a reasonable effort to mitigate your damages, and not enhance them for litigation purposes, this would be a $2000 dispute.”