701.140 Types
of allowable complaints; restriction on processing complaint for recoupment of
lien. A complaint
under ORS 701.139 must arise from the performance, or a contract for the
performance, of work that requires a contractor license issued by the
Construction Contractors Board. The complaint must be of one or more of the
following types:
(1) A complaint
against a contractor by the owner of a structure or other real property for the
following:
(a) Negligent
work.
(b) Improper
work.
(c) Breach of
contract.
(2) A complaint
against a contractor by the owner of a structure or other real property to
discharge, or to recoup funds expended in discharging, a lien established under
ORS 87.010 to 87.060 and 87.075 to 87.093 under circumstances described under
this subsection. The board shall process complaints described in this
subsection under ORS 701.145 only if:
(a) The owner
paid the contractor for that contractor’s work subject to this chapter;
(b) A lien is
filed against the property of the owner under ORS 87.010 to 87.060 and 87.075
to 87.093 because the contractor failed to pay the person claiming the lien for
that person’s contribution toward completion of the improvement; and
(c) The complaint
is described in ORS 701.139 (1) or (3)(a) or (b).
(3) A complaint
against a licensed subcontractor by a licensed contractor for the following:
(a) Negligent
work;
(b) Improper
work; or
(c) Breach of
contract.
(4) A complaint
by a person furnishing labor to a contractor or owed employee benefits by a
contractor.
(5) A complaint,
as limited by rule of the board, by a person furnishing material or renting or
supplying equipment to a contractor. The minimum limit set by the board may not
exceed $150.
(6) A complaint
by a subcontractor against a contractor for unpaid labor or materials arising
out of a contract. [1981 c.618 §4; 1983 c.616 §13; 1989 c.167 §1; 1989 c.928 §16;
1991 c.181 §9; 1991 c.717 §1; 1997 c.301 §3; 1999 c.402 §30; 2001 c.197 §13;
2007 c.793 §12; 2007 c.836 §65; 2011 c.630 §§45,65; 2016 c.99 §7]
Notes of Decisions
Hettle v. Constr. Contractors Bd., 316 P.3d 344 (Or. Ct. App. 2013).
· cites it 25× “Complainant seeks judicial review of a final board order, which dismissed his complaint and concluded that complainant had failed to state a claim for relief for negligent or improper work pursuant to ORS 701.140 1 and OAR 812-004-0535(l)(b).”
Doughty v. Birkholtz, 964 P.2d 1108 (Or. Ct. App. 1998).
· cites it 4× “ORS 701.140. The board’s remedial authority is limited to awarding monetary damages, payable directly from the contractor or from the surety bond that a contractor must post as a condition of registration.”
Langfus, Inc. v. Queirolo, 668 P.2d 1245 (Or. Ct. App. 1983).
“ed to provide in subsection (5): “The bond required under this section is for the exclusive purpose of payment of final orders of the board in accordance with this chapter”, and to provide in subsection (7): *496 “No suit or action may be commenced against a surety on a bond…”
In Re Christensen, 167 B.R. 213 (D. Or. 1994).
· cites it 2× “ORS 701.140, 701.150(1). The surety is not joined as a party, but may intervene.”
Phillips v. Gibson, 893 P.2d 574 (Or. Ct. App. 1995).
· cites it 2× “2 ORS 701.140. On October 16, plaintiff hand delivered to defendants a letter prepared by plaintiffs attorney, accompanied by a check and defendants’ blueprints and *763 building permits.”
Fong v. Windwood Constr., Inc., 986 P.2d 1257 (Or. Ct. App. 1999).
· cites it 2× “That statute provides, in part: “[(1)] Any person having a claim against a contractor of the type referred to in ORS 701.140 may file with the Construction Contractors Board a statement of the claim in such form as the board prescribes.”
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 701.140(1) — 2 cases
Hettle v. Constr. Contractors Bd., 316 P.3d 344 (Or. Ct. App. 2013).
“Complainant seeks judicial review of a final board order, which dismissed his complaint and concluded that complainant had failed to state a claim for relief for negligent or improper work pursuant to ORS 701.140 1 and OAR 812-004-0535(l)(b).”
Fong v. Windwood Constr., Inc., 986 P.2d 1257 (Or. Ct. App. 1999).
“That statute provides, in part: “[(1)] Any person having a claim against a contractor of the type referred to in ORS 701.140 may file with the Construction Contractors Board a statement of the claim in such form as the board prescribes.”
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 701.140(l)(a) — 1 case
Hettle v. Constr. Contractors Bd., 316 P.3d 344 (Or. Ct. App. 2013).
“Complainant seeks judicial review of a final board order, which dismissed his complaint and concluded that complainant had failed to state a claim for relief for negligent or improper work pursuant to ORS 701.140 1 and OAR 812-004-0535(l)(b).”
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 701.140(l)(b) — 1 case
Hettle v. Constr. Contractors Bd., 316 P.3d 344 (Or. Ct. App. 2013).
“Complainant seeks judicial review of a final board order, which dismissed his complaint and concluded that complainant had failed to state a claim for relief for negligent or improper work pursuant to ORS 701.140 1 and OAR 812-004-0535(l)(b).”
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 701.140(l)(c) — 1 case
Doughty v. Birkholtz, 964 P.2d 1108 (Or. Ct. App. 1998).
“ORS 701.140. The board’s remedial authority is limited to awarding monetary damages, payable directly from the contractor or from the surety bond that a contractor must post as a condition of registration.”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the
Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and
treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.