ORS 87.035¹
Perfecting lien
  • filing claim of lien
  • contents of claim

(1) Every person claiming a lien created under ORS 87.010 (Construction liens) (1) or (2) shall perfect the lien not later than 75 days after the person has ceased to provide labor, rent equipment or furnish materials or 75 days after completion of construction, whichever is earlier. Every other person claiming a lien created under ORS 87.010 (Construction liens) shall perfect the lien not later than 75 days after the completion of construction. All liens claimed shall be perfected as provided by subsections (2) to (4) of this section.

(2) A lien created under ORS 87.010 (Construction liens) shall be perfected by filing a claim of lien with the recording officer of the county or counties in which the improvement, or some part thereof, is situated.

(3) A claim of lien shall contain:

(a) A true statement of demand, after deducting all just credits and offsets;

(b) The name of the owner, or reputed owner, if known;

(c) The name of the person by whom the claimant was employed or to whom the claimant furnished the materials or rented the equipment or by whom contributions are owed; and

(d) A description of the property to be charged with the lien sufficient for identification, including the address if known.

(4) The claim of lien shall be verified by the oath of the person filing or of some other person having knowledge of the facts, subject to the criminal penalties for false swearing provided under ORS 162.075 (False swearing). [Amended by 1961 c.609 §1; 1973 c.671 §3; 1975 c.466 §10; 1983 c.517 §1; 1985 c.596 §1; 1987 c.662 §6]

Notes of Decisions

In General

“Credits and offsets” include only amounts between subcontractor and general or prime contractor and do not include amounts between lienor and third party. Jersey & Son Inc. v. Bailey Const. Co., 262 Or 491, 499 P2d 817 (1972)

Property owners were not entitled to rely on labeling of items in lien claim where item descrip­tion did not mislead prop­erty owners as to amount of valid lien. Myers v. Oregon Shores Associates, 69 Or App 624, 687 P2d 159 (1984), Sup Ct review denied

Time for Filing Generally

When builder, after substantial comple­tion of structure, at request of owner, makes addi­tions to it which are useful or necessary to its enjoy­ment, the final comple­tion dates from time such addi­tions are made. Farrell v. Lacey, 264 Or 505, 507 P2d 31 (1973)

Even though owner in fee of prop­erty may be subject to a lien unless he posts notice of nonliability under ORS 87.030 (Effect of owner’s knowledge of improvement), the lien, to be valid, must still be filed within time re­quired by this sec­tion. Maddox v. Balboa Race­ways, Inc., 267 Or 321, 516 P2d 1293 (1973)

Where improve­ments must necessarily be used as a unit and all are intended to be immediately constructed, temporary interrup­tions beyond the control of the owner or builder, will not interrupt or terminate the time within which to file mechanic’s liens. Tri-City Bldg. Center, Inc. v. Wagner, 274 Or 581, 548 P2d 961 (1976)

Where evidence showed construc­tion project was abandoned, the 60-day time period for filing a lien under this sec­tion would start to run 60 days after work ceased. D.E.C. Eng. and Surveying v. G & J Invest., 57 Or App 742, 646 P2d 643 (1982)

Performance of repair work under warranty did not extend time for filing lien claim. Central Coast Electric v. Mendell, 66 Or App 42, 672 P2d 1224 (1983)

If owner or mortgagee elects to post and record notice of comple­tion as provided in ORS 87.045 (Completion date of improvement), date of notice is determinative of comple­tion date within the meaning of this sec­tion. Star Rentals, Inc. v. Seeberg Construc­tion Co., 66 Or App 822, 677 P2d 708 (1984), Sup Ct review denied

Construc­tion was completed when pump was repaired and reinstalled because of laborer’s conten­tion that continuing malfunc­tions of pump were due to problems with well itself and not with pump and time for filing lien began at that point. Austin v. Carver, 85 Or App 529, 737 P2d 639 (1987)

Limita­tion period for filing began running on date contractor ceased working on project without regard to whether or not project was abandoned. Emmert Industrial Corp. v. Sanders, 131 Or App 113, 883 P2d 1304 (1994), Sup Ct review denied

Who Are Original Contractors

“An original contractor” is one who furnishes labor or ma­te­ri­al and labor on contract direct with owner. Maddox v. Balboa Race­ways, Inc., 267 Or 321, 516 P2d 1293 (1973)

One who furnishes labor and ma­te­ri­als on contract direct with a lessee from owner, but not direct with owner, may be “original contractor” with respect to validity of its lien against the lessee from owner, but is not an “original contractor” with respect to validity of its lien against owner. Maddox v. Balboa Race­ways, Inc., 267 Or 321, 516 P2d 1293 (1973)

Descrip­tion of Property

Where descrip­tion of prop­erty in lien notice incorrectly stated address and tax lot number and referred to business es­tab­lish­ment on prop­erty by incorrect name, but contained sufficient in­for­ma­­tion to enable interested parties to identify prop­erty and no prejudice was shown, there was substantial compliance with this sec­tion and lien was valid. C-3 Builders, Inc. v. Krueger, 56 Or App 502, 642 P2d 344 (1982), Sup Ct review denied

Use of word “descrip­tion” by this sec­tion does not mean lien claim must contain legal descrip­tion of prop­erty covered by lien. C-3 Builders, Inc. v. Krueger, 56 Or App 502, 642 P2d 344 (1982), Sup Ct review denied

Descrip­tion require­ment of general recorda­tion statute does not apply to construc­tion lien. Bell Hardware v. Ed Szoyka Woodworking Co., 129 Or App 332, 879 P2d 208 (1994), Sup Ct review denied

Whether there has been substantial compliance with statutory require­ment depends on de­gree of noncompliance, underlying policy of require­ment and prejudice that prop­erty owner or third party may have suffered as result of noncompliance. C-3 Builders, Inc. v. Krueger, 56 Or App 502, 642 P2d 344 (1982), Sup Ct review denied; Tigard Sand & Gravel Co. v. LBH Construc­tion, 149 Or App 131, 941 P2d 1075 (1997)

Atty. Gen. Opinions

Enforce­ment by subcontractor of lien rights against of residence owner where prime contractor has failed to give proper notice or has been paid in full but failed to pay subcontractor, (1981) Vol 42, p 149

Law Review Cita­tions

41 WLR 95 (2005)

Notes of Decisions

In absence of express waiver by contractor of right to file construc­tion lien, agree­ment to arbitrate disputes did not prevent filing of lien and thereafter foreclosing to recover unpaid amounts and costs and attorney fees incurred in prepara­tion, filing and foreclosure of lien claim. Harris v. Dyer, 50 Or App 223, 623 P2d 662 (1981), as modified by 292 Or 233, 637 P2d 918 (1981)

1 Legislative Counsel Committee, CHAPTER 87—Statutory Liens, https://­www.­oregonlegislature.­gov/­bills_laws/­ors/­ors087.­html (2019) (last ac­cessed May 16, 2020).
2 Legislative Counsel Committee, Annotations to the Oregon Revised Stat­utes, Cumulative Supplement - 2019, Chapter 87, https://­www.­oregonlegislature.­gov/­bills_laws/­ors/­ano087.­html (2019) (last ac­cessed May 16, 2020).
3 OregonLaws.org assembles these lists by analyzing references between Sections. Each listed item refers back to the current Section in its own text. The result reveals relationships in the code that may not have otherwise been apparent. Currency Information