You told the guy to do the work, the work is done, and now it’s time for payment, right? But, you only told the guy to do the work because somebody else told you do the work and that somebody else now won’t pay. This is, perhaps, the most frequent problem in construction.
Here is the short story of an Owner, GC, and Sub on a public building project in Virginia. During the project, changes were made (imagine that on a construction project). The Sub completed the changes and its scope of work three months later than planned. The Sub submitted Change Requests to the Owner through the GC. The Owner denied the Sub’s Change Requests and did not pay the GC for the delays and changed work. In turn, the GC did not pay the Sub because the Owner did not pay the GC. The Sub sued the GC and lost because of valid pay-when-paid and pay-if-paid provisions in the subcontract.
In reading the court’s opinion (Young Electrical Contractors, Inc. v. Dustin Construction, Inc., Md. App. No. 266 (Dec. 28, 2016)), there are three lessons for general contractors:
- Ask Owners. You’ll have a better chance of enforcing a pay-when-paid or pay-if-paid subcontract provision when you submit subcontractors’ change requests to owners. It’s impossible to say that the owner said NO when the general contractor fails to ask. If you don’t submit a sub’s change requests to the owner, you (the general contractor) may bear the risk.
- Get Paid to Pay. Many words are wasted over whether a clause is a pay-when-paid vs. pay-if-paid provision. Yes, there is a distinction and it can make a difference. But, it’s generally enough to remember that under either clause, the owner will or must pay the general before the general will or must pay the subcontractor.
- Repeat Specifically. You’ll benefit from specific and repeated pay-when-paid or pay-if-paid provisions vs. a blanket or general provision. Insert conditional language (g., “if”) at each of three typical subcontract payment scenarios, including, payment for: (1) undisputed work, (2) disputed (i.e., changed) work, and (3) claims and disputes.
Roads & Bridges | Award Upheld in W. Va. Caisson Dispute
AWARD UPHELD IN W.VA. CAISSON DISPUTE
Federal court reinforces high bar for overturning arbitration
In 2018, the West Virginia Department of Highways (DOH) awarded […]
Roads & Bridges |Let the Contract Lead
LET THE CONTRACT LEAD
Documents offer guidance needed to manage risk without derailing projects
Construction is an industry of managed risk. Whether the prices […]
Roads & Bridges | When is an Invoice Really an Invoice?
WHEN IS AN INVOICE REALLY AN INVOICE?
All court decisions are opinions. Appellate court decisions are typically made by a panel of three […]
Roads & Bridges | Clarifying Punitive Damages
CLARIFYING PUNITIVE DAMAGES
In June 2021, the South Dakota Department of Transportation contracted for the demolition and construction of a bridge on State […]
Roads & Bridges | When Approximate Means Assumed Risk
WHEN APPROXIMATE MEANS ASSUMED RISK
A New York Court Shows How Performance Specifications Can Leave Contractors Holding the Bag
Sometimes when we are told […]
Roads & Bridges | From Roman Arches to AI
FROM ROMAN ARCHES TO AI
Can Construction Evolve Without Risk?
The construction industry blends old with new. From ancient Roman archways and aqueducts and […]
Roads & Bridges | Caught in the Middle
CAUGHT IN THE MIDDLE
New Mexico bridge case highlights the importance of written agreements for changes and delay compensation
In construction contracting, hope for […]
Roads & Bridges | Wait and It’s Waived
WAIT AND IT’S WAIVED
Roads & Bridges | Supreme Court Ruling on Arbitration Delay
Don’t wait to arbitrate! Progressing too far down the litigation […]
Roads & Bridges | Court Defines When Contractors Can Withdraw Due to Mistakes
BIDDING BLUNDER
Roads & Bridges | Court Defines When Contractors Can Withdraw Due to Mistakes
For over 125 years, the vast majority of jurisdictions […]










