January 28, 2013 · 9:40 AM
A Grim Tale
Image by Larisa Koshkina / PublicDomainPictures.net
Once upon a time, Best General Contracting, Inc. hired Able Electric Services Co. to perform the $900,000 electrical scope of work on a library project for a local college. Having not worked with Able before, and in light of the value of the electrical scope, Best required Able to obtain subcontractor performance & payment bonds for Best’s benefit, agreeing, of course, to reimburse Able for the $13,500 bond premium. As fate would have it, the library project proved one too many for the not-so-able Able, who ran into cash flow problems, sought bankruptcy protection and abandoned the project. Best immediately fired off a notice of default letter to Superior Surety and hoped that the claims handling process would match previous, positive experiences with subcontractor sureties and culminate in a quick, fairy-tale resolution to this project setback.
To Best’s surprise, it would not. Continue reading →
Filed under Claims Handling, Performance Bonds, Surety Law
Tagged as bond obligee, construction bonding, construction bonding nc, construction bonds NC, construction contract default, construction contract termination, construction default, construction surety, contract bond surety, contract performance risk management, contract surety bond, handling surety claims, irrevocable letter of credit, managing surety claims, nc surety, nc surety law, nc surety lawyer, north carolina surety, North Carolina surety law, North Carolina surety lawyer, subcontractor default insurance, surety, surety claims process, surety obligee, surety principal
February 8, 2012 · 10:52 AM
My recent musings about the Court of Appeals’ December 6, 2011 Southern Seeding decision (my original blawg post about the case is here; a longer treatment in this quarter’s Change Order, published by the Construction Law Section of the North Carolina Bar Association, can be found here) neglect to address the opinion’s implications for surety companies issuing payment bonds in North Carolina.
Those implications are profound and potentially far-reaching, and certainly worthy of discussion. So for those of you, like me, who have a keen interest in North Carolina suretyship law, you’ll definitely want to keep reading.
Continue reading →