a:\newslw.96 [4]Alan Lee MitchellStephen De'ak201998-01-27T18:11:00Z2006-07-01T22:24:00Z2006-07-01T22:24:00Z1115065615415769611.8026 FURRER & SCOTT LLCConsider . . .VOL. 7, ISSUE 1 January, 1998Law OfficesFURRER & SCOTT LLC9185 SW BURNHAM ST. POST OFFICE BOX 23414TIGARD, OR 97223 TIGARD, OR 97281(503) 620-4250 -- (800) 334-8986 -- FAX: (503) 620-43151997 LEGISLATIVE UPDATE, PART II: CONTRACTOR REGISTRATION (CON’T.)As noted in the September, 1997 edition of Consider ..., the 1997 Oregon Legislature changed certain aspects of the construction contractor laws.As you know (or should know), unregistered contractors are severely restricted in their access to legal remedies. One of the new legislative changes addresses contractors who either were not registered at the time when the work was bid or the work was performed or were first registered during those periods.Under the new legislation, these contractors must submit a completed CCB registration within a certain period after they become aware of the requirement to be registered (this period may not exceed 90 days).A new CCB administrative rule clarifies the term “became aware of the requirement” to be registered.New Oregon Administrative Rule 812-002-0000(43) defines this term to be “the date the contractor received a letter or proposed order from the agency” about the need for registration.This rule is further impacted by another new legislative change (found in 1997 Oregon Laws Chapter 301) which provides that notice from the CCB is deemed delivered upon its deposit in the US mail!Thus, it may not matter that the contractor does not receive the notice. Once the agency deposits the registration notice in the mail, addressed to the last known address of the contractor, the notice is, by law, deemed delivered to the contractor.Note that this “deemed delivered” rule also impacts all communications from the CCB to contractors.In other words, the contractor should ensure that the CCB has the contractor’s current and correct mailing address. Do not rely on mail forwarding or anything else.COURT CONSOLIDATIONAnother change enacted by the 1997 Oregon Legislature is the consolidation of Oregon’s state courts. Previously, there had been District Courts and Circuit Courts. As of January 15, 1998, these courts have been consolidated and are now known only as Circuit Courts.One significant impact of this consolidation is a change in how judgment liens attach to real property.Formerly, any judgment entered in the docket of a county’s Circuit Court automatically created a judgment lien on any real property owned by the judgment debtor in that county. The judgment lien could be extended to real property in other counties by means of a recorded document known as a Lien Record Abstract.Now, a judgment lien is never automatically created. When a judgment is obtained (remember, all judgments will now be in Circuit Court), the judgment creditor must file a “Lien Certificate” with the court clerk in the county where the judgment was issued. This should create a judgment lien on real property in the county where the judgment was issued. The form and content of Lien Certificates is generally prescribed by statute.In order to obtain a judgment lien on real property in any other county, the judgment creditor must record (not file) two documents in that county’s real property records. The first document is a “Lien Certificate” substantially identical to the Lien Certificate filed with the original county court clerk.The second document that must be recorded in the other county is a Lien Record Abstract (similar to the old system). Careful judgment creditors will file both of these documents in the originating county as well as in other counties.Businesses that wish to have the potential to obtain judgment liens (this should be almost every business), may wish to consider adding certain information to their credit applications. This information will be useful in filling out the Lien Certificates.The information needed for a Lien Certificate includes the name and address, the driver’s license number, and the social security or taxpayer ID number. This information should be obtained as to all potential judgment debtors.CCB ENFORCEMENT OF CONTRACTSA recent decision by a Construction Contractors Board (“CCB”) administrative law judge illustrates how that agency may look at enforcement of certain contracts. In particular, if the CCB decides that the contract was “unlawful,” then it may deny enforcement of the contract to both of the parties.In this instance, the contractor entered into a homeowner for a remodel of her residence. Both parties knew that this work required permits but they expressly agreed to not obtain permits. The homeowner was not happy with the final results and filed a CCB claim against the contractor for almost $10,000.The Administrative Law Judge (“ALJ”) ruled that the contract was unlawful due to the parties’ agreement that the work required permits and the parties’ agreement that permits would not be obtained. This meant that the homeowner’s claim was denied.The point of this decision is two-fold. First, do not enter into contracts you know are against the law!. While the contractor ended up not having to pay the homeowner any money, the situation could easily be reversed.Second, the failure to obtain permits is not an “escape hatch” for contractors. Here, the parties expressly agreed that permits were required and also agreed that they would not obtain permits.TAX CREDITS FOR POLLUTION CONTROL INSTALLATIONSLOOKING FOR A WAY YOU MIGHT SAVE SOME MONEY AT TAX TIME? The Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ) has several programs whereby businesses might be able obtain tax credit for expenses relating to installation of certain pollution control devices or facilities. The tax credit can be for as much as 50% of the installation cost.This program is not limited to major installations; it can apply to the installation of a single underground or aboveground storage tank. However, tax credits are generally not available for associated cleanup costs of contaminated soil or groundwater.There are a few prerequisites for obtaining these tax credits and they are not automatic (for one thing, they must be approved by DEQ). Consult your tax professional for details.FIRM NEWS:MICHAEL J. SCOTT’s update to his chapter on Oregon construction liens was recently published by the Oregon State Bar in the Construction Law volume of its Continuing Legal Education series. MIKE also recently spoke to the Oregon Paralegal Association on “How to Effectively Collect Judgments.”DOUGLAS R. HOOKLAND and GARY E. ENLOE spoke on “Collecting Judgments” to the Clark County Bar Association on December 17, 1997.MARK YOUR CALENDARS for April 23, 1998 when MIKE, DOUG and ALAN, in connection with Lorman Seminars, will be conducting an all day seminar on Oregon construction lien and bond claims. If you would like a brochure about the seminar, please contact Gayle L. Allen at Furrer & Scott LLC.DOUGLAS L. GALLAGHER joins the firm as an associate. Doug is a June, 1997 graduate of the University of Oregon School of Law.This newsletter is published quarterly by the law firm of Furrer & Scott LLC for the benefit of its clients and friends and is intended to inform them about legal matters of interest. While this information is meant to be current, we do not promise or guarantee that the information is correct, complete or up-to-date. This information is not intended to be, and should not be considered to be, legal advice. No actions should be undertaken in reliance hereon without professional legal counsel.. Alan L. Mitchell, Editor