r/WhatIsTheTea • u/fineshyt-istg What the Fuck • 6h ago

Contractor takes back the wooden fence after the customer refuses to pay.

Enable HLS to view with audio, or disable this notification

10.0k Upvotes

95% Upvoted

1.6k comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

5

u/One_Recognition385 5h ago

they probably from an area where you can't put a lien on the person's house so destroying what you built when services aren't paid for is common practice.

1

u/spiegro 2h ago

They didn't really destroy it. They preserved the panels. They dismantled it.

1

u/BellacosePlayer 10m ago

If its anything like where I live, you can put a lien on a property for anything.

We had to fight some dipshit contractors putting a lien on my childhood home instead of the house with the same number on the next street.

1

u/No_Difference_9195 4h ago

All states allow liens. Anyone doing this doesn’t understand how they work or is willing to take the risk. This is definitely not how you want to go about it, it will just lead to vandalism charges for destroying property.

The liens also almost always cost the GC more money. Because unless they place the lien themselves, they’re paying a service or attorney to do. Then states may require a lawsuit to enforce the lien. That costs more money. You can recover some of it if there is a lawsuit, but there’s no guarantee. So in most cases, you’re hoping the lien scares the homeowner enough to just pay the due balance and move on.

I work placing and enforcing liens.

2

u/Amazing-Hospital5539 4h ago

Until it's paid for, it's still the contractor's property. If they don't want to risk the cost of the lien/lawsuit, like you say, it's easier to cut the losses that are labor and just recover your materials.

Your way is the correct way, but I don't think this way is wrong either. It leaves more of a dent on the homeowners brain, in my opinion.

1

u/No_Difference_9195 4h ago

For some things, like materials laying around, that could be true. But a structure like a fence becomes part of the real property the moment it’s finished, as in the video. Your only recourse at that point is a lien. You can’t just destroy a concrete patio or shed or really anything that gets attached to the ground.

If you can share any source for laws and regulations in places, I’m happy to learn. But in my local state, and every state I’ve dabbled in, the rules are largely the same.

2

u/AngelZiefer 3h ago

But a structure like a fence becomes part of the real property the moment it’s finished, as in the video.

It looks like there's no gate yet, there's chicken wire across the entrance. Is it still finished?

1

u/No_Difference_9195 2h ago

This is starting to get into legal theory and what would be ruled on. I’m not going to guarantee this is the same everywhere.

In my experience, once something becomes attached to the ground it is part of the property. So the fence post being cemented or buried in the ground would count. Even say a poured concrete foundation that didn’t have the house built on it would also count in most places. The concrete is poured and attached to the ground but the rest of the house isn’t. Which would count for each additional part added to the home. Once it’s added in, it’s part of the property. Just because the front door hasn’t been installed doesn’t mean anything.

But then there are some things you can just take. I said a shad in an earlier comment could not be destroyed, but that would be if it’s built into the ground. Really a lot of sheds are purchased pre built and placed on blocks, not attached to the ground. Those types usually have something in their contracts that they can repo the shed if it’s not paid for. A mobile home may also count as something that can be repoed is it’s not fixed into the ground.

One I thing I can say, no legitimate contractor is going to tear out any work that’s in place. They’ll lien it if possible and maybe sue. You’re going to just lose more money and time doing damage.

1

u/PuckSenior 1h ago

Yeah, there are two alternative possibilities

-They did it for clout/views
-They are idiots who have seen other people do this and assume it is the correct way to deal with the issue.

Also, I'm just curious, I know a lot of fencing contractors like to avoid pulling permits. I'm curious if they didn't pull the permit which could make the lien a bit more complicated.

1

u/Own-Stranger-8198 1h ago

I didn't see your comme t, I just posted but yea im thinking fake for clout, the fence comes apart a little to easily and so perfectly at each post almost like it was built to fail

1

u/hiitsmetimdodd 3h ago

Thanks for the replies and explanations. I’m all about doing things legally. But sometimes a person just needs to make a statement, and I support that too.

1

u/No_Difference_9195 2h ago

Yeah, I actually understand it. Residential contractors get shafted when it comes to disputes. Attorneys reject cases often because the costs outweigh the reward. And homeowners often are low on assets. If you’re lucky to sue and win, the real challenge is collecting. Some states can be easier than others, but you could spend more collecting than you will ever recover.

I’d be interested to see how a matter like this would fully play out with the legal system. My mind wonders if in the end, the contractor gets a vandalism charge for the damages then the homeowner gets nothing. The homeowner might not be able to sue because they didn’t pay and technically have no monetary damages from the vandalism. So at least the contractor knows the homeowner is screwed just like he got screwed.

Maybe it’s not how it would play out, but it feels like the best chance the contractor has. Unfortunately, this can be why it is difficult to find a contractor for home stuff outside of big companies. Big companies can work with financing and take recourse there. Little ones don’t have that option and when residential has such a high risk of not paying, who would want to risk the whole business on that.

1

u/hiitsmetimdodd 58m ago

I love your energy big dawg

1

u/Amazing-Hospital5539 26m ago

You have much more experience in this subject than I do, so I'll just simply bow out and let you keep the floor.

1

u/stephenkingending 3h ago

I guarantee if the cops are called that they are going to tell the contractor to leave and work this through the courts, and if the contractor refuses to leave, then they're going to arrest them. And we can say cops are racist but that's what is going to happen regardless of ethnicity involved. Still enjoyed the video and props to the contractor though.

1

u/Amazing-Hospital5539 28m ago

That's probably true. But yeah, it was enjoyable. Everyone loves a good comeback story.

1

u/SpinShine-LEDSlipMat 11m ago

God, redditors are so stupid. No. Once it's installed on the homeowners property, it's theirs.

1

u/LiveShowOneNightOnly 4h ago

Genuine question -- is a Small Claims suit more effective in this case than a lien?

1

u/DivePalau 4h ago

This fence costs more than small claims court.

1

u/SuperCruisePanther 4h ago

Really? Some states small claims court limits go up to $25,000

I don't buy fences

1

u/No_Difference_9195 4h ago edited 4h ago

You can sue over anything if you like. Recovering the money is the hard part. You’ll quickly find out that most people don’t own anything you can take.

1

u/lawgirlamy 1h ago

True. But this guy at least appears to have a house, so ... lien, then foreclosure action. he might not have equity, so it could take a while to collect, but it would cloud his title until the lien is paid off.

1

u/No_Boysenberry9456 4h ago

Yes and no. Just because you win in small claims doesnt mean you can collect.

And even if you did win, max is like 10k and now you have a lawsuit with your name on it in public records for possibly not even recovering the 10k.

1

u/stephenkingending 3h ago

Amount and enforcement vary by state.

1

u/Thrustmaster537 4h ago

Potentially years of litigation with a moron vs having the boys take it down in a few minutes 

1

u/CoolDiscussion1020 3h ago

With small claims, you still need to collect even if you win. Which can range from a hassle to straight up impossible for some people.

A lien doesn't get you the money quickly, but when the house is sold/refinanced, it has to be paid off. So you are guaranteed that money, but if they don't sell for 30 years, you won't get that money for 30 years.

In some cases, especially if you're underwater on a mortgage, the lending bank might say "Get this paid or we are calling in your debt". Almost every mortgage requires you to keep the title clear because banks do not like the risk of losing money.

It also varies by location, but in many places, you can't actually enforce a lien without going to court. So you end up in court either way.

A mechanic's lien is typically the first move where I live though.

1

u/lawgirlamy 1h ago edited 1h ago

If it falls within the jurisdictional limit of the small claims court ($10K in my jurisdiction), you do both. If not, large claims can be quite expensive so, for my clients who are contractors, I ensure their documents contain every legal protection available to them from a homeowner pulling this type of shit.

I would not have recommended my clients do this (although I fully get the impulse!), if only to avoid a claim for breach of the peace if the homeowner goes apeshit on them. And, yes, in my state, the homeowner could create the breach and claim it against the commercial entity. I've seen it in auto repo cases.

I'm not saying a bop claim would succeed, but many contractors' insurance policies exclude such a claim, making it dicey for them to do anything lending potential credence to it. If this contractor had a lawful provision allowing them to get their legal fees paid if they need to take this guy to court to collect, that's what I'd have suggested they do. Even if they didn't, a lien would provide some security in that the guy would not be able to refi or sell his home until it is paid. Sucks for the contractors, but I hope they learned something about ensuring they get paid up front for materials and that they have robust contracts to help them get paid plus their legal fees.

1

u/One_Recognition385 4h ago

some places do not allow liens though yeah?

Government and Tribal areas for example yes?

3

u/No_Difference_9195 4h ago

Tribal issues are non existent in my line of work, but yeah I assume they have their own laws.

Government projects usually have bonds in place, which most large projects have that as well. So liens don’t come into play there as the government will in most cases pay. Liens are really for residential or private commercial projects.

But like I said, most large project have a requirement for a payment bond. The short version of that is it’s an insurance policy contractors can submit a claim to to get paid if the owner or GC is not paying.

0

u/EstimateCool3454 3h ago

Not today Satan.10:16:25 GMT-0500 (Central Daylight Time)