A Washington Court of Appeals decision reinforces the limits on quickly defeating a contractor’s construction lien when the underlying dispute involves contested facts. In Feekes v. Triple M Construction, LLC, homeowners sought to invalidate or reduce a lien stemming from excavation and concrete work. The court ruled that Washington’s summary lien procedure is reserved for claims that plainly lack merit or are unquestionably excessive, not disputes over performance, workmanship, breach, or damages.
The ruling has practical implications for property claims adjusters involved in repair and reconstruction disputes. Estimates, invoices, photographs, change orders, inspection findings, and payment records can become important evidence when disagreements between property owners and contractors lead to liens or litigation.
The court also found that the contractor was not required to provide Washington’s Notice to Customer based on the limited scope of its work. It separately held that the state’s summary lien statute permits qualifying attorney fees at the trial court level but does not independently authorize fees for an appeal. For adjusters, the case highlights how careful documentation of construction scope, completed work, deficiencies, and payments can become critical when a property claim develops into a contractor dispute.
