Lauren Harris
New Member
- Jurisdiction
- California
So this is our second terrible experience with a Palm Springs area contractor. Everything was going great with him until Christmas of last year, when suddenly he had "money problems." Long story short, he asked us to pay extra outside of the contract for flooring, painting, shelving, tiling, etc, then asked us to pay the last $5k on the contract (even though the work wasn't finished) so he could pay his guys, or he would have to take them off the job and start a new job so they could get paid. We were sick to death of everything he had pulled so far, and so stupidly we agreed.
He still took the guys off the job, and didn't pay them the money we gave. Instead, he ghosted, and let his workman's comp lapse so legally he couldnt have people on site anyway. We're out about $10k, so we went to small claims court. He didn't show up, we pled our case, and were awarded $8250.
This is the judgement we received from his bond company:
We have reviewed the additional documents you provided to us – the 9/9/2019 Minute Order from the Court wherein the principal did not appear, and the Court entered a default judgment against Built 4 U Dream Homes Inc. for $8,250 plus costs of $165.
Please note that a default judgment against the bond principal is not binding upon the surety. See, All Bay Mill & Lumber Co., Inc. v. Surety Co. of the Pacific, (1989) 208 Cal. App. 3d 11 ("In our view, it is irrelevant whether the judgment was obtained in a previous action or by default in the same action brought against the surety. In both cases, the surety must be given an opportunity to be heard in defense.") See also, Western Heritage Ins. Co. v. Superior Court (2011) 199 Cal.App.4th 1196, 1211 ("A party's default does not bind non-defaulting codefendants, even when the basis for the action against the codefendants is vicarious liability arising from the acts of the defaulting defendant.")
Here, there was no finding by the Court that the principal violated any Section of Contractor's License Law. Nonetheless, Hudson has elected to compromise your claim by paying the difference between the judgment in your favor and your claim demand - $1,585. Your original claim amount was $10,000. The Court awarded you a default judgment of $8,415.00 against the principal because the principal did not appear at the small claims hearing. Please execute and return the enclosed Final Release and W9. Upon receipt, Hudson will issue payment of $1,585 directly to you.
Ok...so it's really weird they're offering to pay this difference. Why? On what grounds? We weren't awarded "by default." We had to plead our case, and the judge ruled in our favor. Also, it's definitely illegal to continue working after letting workmans comp lapse, so why don't they think he's in the wrong?
Is there anything we can do here? Or should we just accept this payment? Feels like they're trying to buy us off with some arbitrary accounting instead of giving us what we're owed. I will also say, about 3 other claims are being filed against this $15000 bond of the contractor's, because he screwed over a lot of folks. So maybe that's why?
He still took the guys off the job, and didn't pay them the money we gave. Instead, he ghosted, and let his workman's comp lapse so legally he couldnt have people on site anyway. We're out about $10k, so we went to small claims court. He didn't show up, we pled our case, and were awarded $8250.
This is the judgement we received from his bond company:
We have reviewed the additional documents you provided to us – the 9/9/2019 Minute Order from the Court wherein the principal did not appear, and the Court entered a default judgment against Built 4 U Dream Homes Inc. for $8,250 plus costs of $165.
Please note that a default judgment against the bond principal is not binding upon the surety. See, All Bay Mill & Lumber Co., Inc. v. Surety Co. of the Pacific, (1989) 208 Cal. App. 3d 11 ("In our view, it is irrelevant whether the judgment was obtained in a previous action or by default in the same action brought against the surety. In both cases, the surety must be given an opportunity to be heard in defense.") See also, Western Heritage Ins. Co. v. Superior Court (2011) 199 Cal.App.4th 1196, 1211 ("A party's default does not bind non-defaulting codefendants, even when the basis for the action against the codefendants is vicarious liability arising from the acts of the defaulting defendant.")
Here, there was no finding by the Court that the principal violated any Section of Contractor's License Law. Nonetheless, Hudson has elected to compromise your claim by paying the difference between the judgment in your favor and your claim demand - $1,585. Your original claim amount was $10,000. The Court awarded you a default judgment of $8,415.00 against the principal because the principal did not appear at the small claims hearing. Please execute and return the enclosed Final Release and W9. Upon receipt, Hudson will issue payment of $1,585 directly to you.
Ok...so it's really weird they're offering to pay this difference. Why? On what grounds? We weren't awarded "by default." We had to plead our case, and the judge ruled in our favor. Also, it's definitely illegal to continue working after letting workmans comp lapse, so why don't they think he's in the wrong?
Is there anything we can do here? Or should we just accept this payment? Feels like they're trying to buy us off with some arbitrary accounting instead of giving us what we're owed. I will also say, about 3 other claims are being filed against this $15000 bond of the contractor's, because he screwed over a lot of folks. So maybe that's why?
