779.036 Contracts with payment bond; lien; notice; duty of owner and lender.
(1) In any case in which an improvement is constructed or to be constructed pursuant to a contract and payment bond under s. 779.035, any person performing, furnishing, or procuring labor, services, materials, plans, or specifications to be used or consumed in making the improvement, to any prime contractor or subcontractor shall have a lien on the money or other payment due or to become due the prime contractor or subcontractor therefor, if the lienor, before payment is made to the prime contractor or subcontractor, serves a written notice of the lienor’s claim on the owner or authorized agent and on any mortgage lender furnishing funds for the construction of the improvement. Upon receipt of the notice, the owner and lender shall assure that a sufficient amount is withheld to pay the claim and, when it is admitted or not disputed by the prime contractor or subcontractor involved or established under sub. (3), shall pay the claim and charge it to the prime contractor or subcontractor as appropriate. Any owner or lender violating this duty shall be liable to the claimant for the damages resulting from the violation. There shall be no preference among lienors serving such notices.
(2) A copy of the notice provided in sub. (1) also shall be served by the lienor, within 7 days after service of the notice upon the owner and lender, upon the prime contractor or subcontractor.
(3) If the prime contractor or subcontractor does not dispute the claim by serving written notice on the owner and the lien claimant within 30 days after service of written notice under sub. (2), the amount claimed shall be paid over to the claimant on demand and charged to the prime contractor or subcontractor pursuant to sub. (1). If the prime contractor or subcontractor disputes the claim, the right to a lien and to the moneys in question shall be determined in an action brought by the claimant or the prime contractor or subcontractor. If the action is not brought within 3 months from the time the notice required by sub. (1) is served, the lien rights under this section are barred.
(4)
(a) When the total lien claims exceed the sum due the prime contractor or subcontractor concerned and where the prime contractor or subcontractor has not disputed the amounts of the claims filed, the owner with the concurrence of the lender shall determine on a proportional basis who is entitled to the amount being withheld and shall serve a written notice of the determination on all claimants and the prime contractor or subcontractor. Unless an action is commenced by a claimant or by the prime contractor or subcontractor within 20 days after the service of said notice, the money shall be paid out in accordance with the determination and the liability of the owner and lender to any claimant shall cease.
(b) If an action is commenced, all claimants, the owner and the lender shall be made parties. Such action shall be brought within 6 months after completion of the work of improvement or within the time limit prescribed by par. (a), whichever is earlier.
(c) Within 10 days after the filing of a certified copy of the judgment in any such action with the owner and lender, the money due the prime contractor or subcontractor shall be paid to the clerk of court to be distributed in accordance with the judgment.
History: 1979 c. 32 ss. 57, 92 (9); 1979 c. 110 s. 60 (11); 1979 c. 176; Stats. 1979 s. 779.036; 2005 a. 204.
The initial availability to the supplier of a lien under this section on payments made to a subcontractor did not preclude the bringing of an action on the payment bond since nothing in the statute itself indicates it is to be an exclusive remedy, and the legislative history indicates it was intended as a supplementary remedy to the supplier’s rights under the payment bond provided for in s. 779.035. R.C. Mahon Co. v. Hedrich Construction Co., 69 Wis. 2d 456, 230 N.W.2d 621 (1975).
A construction lien protects employee benefits in addition to hourly wages. Plumber’s Local 458 Holiday Vacation Fund v. Howard Immel, Inc., 151 Wis. 2d 233, 445 N.W.2d 43 (Ct. App. 1989).