Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Consumer Protection topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Senate passes measure limiting mechanics— liens for small jobs to protect homeowners
Summary
Lawmakers approved a substituted Senate Bill 107 that narrows protections to jobs of $5,000 or less and allows homeowners who can prove payment to obtain a certificate preventing suppliers from maintaining a property lien; final Senate vote was 26-1 with two absent.
The Utah Senate passed First Substitute Senate Bill 107, a bill that changes how mechanics' and supplier liens apply to small construction jobs and offers homeowners a path to prevent liens where they can demonstrate they paid contractors in full.
Sponsor Senator Bramble described the measure as a compromise developed with subcontractors, suppliers, general contractors and the Department of Professional Licensing. Under the substitute, if a job is $5,000 or less — whether or not there is a written contract or a licensed contractor — a homeowner who can show they paid for the work may obtain a certificate of compliance from the lien recovery fund; once issued, a supplier may not maintain a lien against the property and must pursue satisfaction through the fund instead.
Why it matters: Supporters said the change protects homeowners from being made to "pay twice" where a general contractor fails to pay suppliers for small jobs. Suppliers and some industry representatives raised concerns about fund impacts and collection remedies; the sponsor said the change was drafted to minimize fiscal strain on the lien recovery fund by lowering the threshold from $7,500 to $5,000.
Vote and next steps: Final Senate passage was recorded 26 yea, 1 nay and 2 absent; the bill will proceed in the legislative process toward the House.
Quotations from the floor: "What this bill does, it says that if the job is no more than $5,000 ... if the property owner can go to the lien recovery fund and demonstrate that they have paid for the job, then the supplier or the unpaid subcontractor would not be able to maintain a lien against the property," Bramble said during debate.
Sponsor response to fiscal questions: Senator Valentine asked about fiscal impact to the lien recovery fund; the sponsor said the Department of Professional Licensing and fund stakeholders drafted the change and did not believe the fiscal impact would be significant.
Procedural posture: The bill was substituted on the floor after stakeholder discussions and placed at the bottom of the third-reading calendar following Senate passage.
