{"id":1415,"date":"2014-08-11T00:30:51","date_gmt":"2014-08-11T00:30:51","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/suretyone.com\/blog\/?p=1415"},"modified":"2017-01-03T16:20:31","modified_gmt":"2017-01-03T16:20:31","slug":"performance-bonds-under-the-miller-act","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/suretyone.com\/blog\/performance-bonds-under-the-miller-act\/","title":{"rendered":"Performance Bonds Under the Miller Act"},"content":{"rendered":"

This law has been on the books for a LOOOOOONG time and its not news to contractors, CPAs and attorneys who deal with contract surety bonding<\/a><\/strong><\/span> on a day to day basis. \u00a0We came across this very good piece wanted to share it with you. \u00a0It is a well written, short but complete work by Mr. Daniel M. Carrico of Smith, Currie & Hancock. \u00a0This guy knows his stuff. \u00a0The article follows, with many thanks to Mr. Carrico for his time and effort on this well thought out paper.<\/p>\n

“If you have ever been involved with a federal construction project\u2014either as a contractor, subcontractor, supplier, or surety\u2014you have probably had to deal with the Miller Act. That\u2019s not surprising. Few pieces of legislation are more ubiquitous when it comes to construction work on federal projects. Passed by Congress in 1935, the Miller Act generally requires GCs on all federal public works projects to post two surety bonds as a condition of awarding the contract: a performance bond<\/strong> guaranteeing performance of the work and a payment bond<\/strong> guaranteeing payment of subcontractors and suppliers. These surety bonds are commonly referred to as Miller Act bonds, and they pose unique issues and opportunities for participants on federal projects.<\/p>\n

Although the burden is on the general contractor on a federal public works project to furnish Miller Act compliant bonds, the bonds do not protect the general contractor. The bonds are instead for the benefit and protection of the United States government owner and certain subcontractors and suppliers. Subcontractors and suppliers cannot assert a lien against, or otherwise encumber in any way, property owned by the United States. The Miller Act protects eligible subcontractors and suppliers against nonpayment by providing them with an alternative means of recovery should the GC fail to make payment on federal projects. Rather than recording a lien, qualifying subcontractors and suppliers may bring a civil action on the payment bond for any unpaid amount. The United States also benefits from the Miller Act. If the general contractor defaults in the performance of its work or is terminated for cause, the United States may turn to the surety to step in and take over the general contractor\u2019s obligations under the prime contract. Last but not least are the sureties who provide Miller Act bonds<\/a><\/strong> and benefit from the large market for surety bonds created by the Miller Act.<\/p>\n

The Miller Act<\/strong><\/p>\n

The Miller Act, 40 U.S.C. \u00a7\u00a7 3131\u20133134, provides that, before any contract for the construction, alteration, or repair of any public building or public work of the United States of more than $100,000 is awarded to any person, that person (usually the general contractor) must furnish:<\/p>\n

(1) A performance bond<\/strong> in an amount the contracting officer considers adequate for the protection of the United States; and<\/p>\n

(2) A payment bond for the protection of subcontractors and suppliers. The penal sum of the payment bond is equal to the total amount of the contract unless the contracting officer determines that amount is impractical, in which case the contracting officer may set the amount not less than the amount of the performance bond.<\/p>\n

The Act also delineates who can recover against the payment bond<\/a><\/strong>. Miller Act payment bonds cover subcontractors and suppliers who have direct contracts with the general contractor (first-tier claimants) and subcontractors and suppliers who have contracts with a first-tiersubcontractor (second-tier claimants). Lower-tier subcontractors and suppliers are not protected. Lastly, the Miller Act establishes pre-suit written notice requirements for second-tier claimants (first-tier claimants are excused because of their direct contractual relationships with the general contractor), the proper venue for bringing civil actions on the payment bond, and a one-year deadline for bringing the action after the claimant performs its work.<\/p>\n

Absent from the Miller Act are any forms for the required bonds. There are, however, standard bond forms in Chapter 48 of the Code of Federal Regulations which are commonly used and often required. They are Federal Standard Form 25 Performance Bond, 48 C.F.R. \u00a7 53.301\u201325, and Form 25\u2013A Payment Bond, 48 C.F.R. \u00a7 53.301\u201325\u2013A. The Miller Act does not mandate the use of these forms so long as the bonds meet the requirements laid out in the Act. Because the Miller Act is remedial in nature\u2014and often the only viable recourse available to unpaid subcontractors and suppliers\u2014courts interpret its provisions liberally in order to properly effectuate congressional intent to protect those whose labor and materials go into public projects. This means that, as a practical matter, courts will uphold bonds as Miller Act bonds when possible, even when they deviate from the CFR\u2019s standard bond forms.<\/p>\n

Mandatory Claim Pass-Through Provisions and the Miller Act<\/strong><\/p>\n

A claimant\u2019s right to recover on a Miller Act bond is independent of\u2014and in addition to\u2014the claimant\u2019s contractual rights, and the two should be treated separately. One way this comes into play is when a subcontract contains a mandatory claim \u201cpass-through\u201d provision for bringing claims against the government. Pass-through claims are claims made by a subcontractor against the government (with whom it has no contract) presented by the contractor who has a contract with both the government and subcontractor. The contractor acts as a conduit for the subcontractor\u2019s claim against the government and shields itself from liability by limiting the subcontractor\u2019s recovery to the amounts actually paid by the government. It can take time for a subcontractor to submit a claim to the contractor, for the contractor to pass the claim to the government, and for the government to determine whether it will pay the claim. While this process is ongoing, the clock keeps ticking toward the subcontractor\u2019s 1-year deadline for filing its Miller Act performance bond<\/a><\/strong> claim. A mandatory pass-through provision will not extend the filing deadline. Bringing suit beyond the filing deadline is an absolute bar to recovery. To be safe, prudent claimants will file a Miller Act suit before the deadline expires and stay the suit pending resolution of its pass-through claim. This leaves the bond open as an alternate source of recovery if the subcontractor does not fully recover on its pass-through claim.<\/p>\n

The Miller Act\u2019s Contingent Payment Clause Run-Around<\/strong><\/p>\n

Classifying a bond as a Miller Act bond is important because the Miller Act presents unique risks for principals and sureties on bonded federal public works projects. One feature that differentiates Miller Act bonds from non-Miller Act surety bonds is that the liability of the surety is not always congruent with that of its principal. This apparent oddity occurs when a claimant with a contingent payment clause in its contract\u2014usually an unpaid subcontractor\u2014makes a Miller Act bond claim.<\/p>\n

A basic precept of surety law is that, when a claim is made against a surety bond<\/strong>, the surety \u201cstands in the shoes of its principal\u201d because the surety\u2019s liability is coextensive with that of its principal. If the principal is not liable to the claimant, the surety has no obligation to perform under the bond. It is to the surety\u2019s benefit, therefore, to raise any contractual defenses available to its principal to avoid liability. One such defense often raised by general contractors is the \u201ccontingent payment\u201d defense, also known as \u201cpay if paid\u201d or \u201cpay when paid.\u201d These clauses condition payment to subcontractors upon receipt of payment from the owner. Payment by the owner to the general contractor is a condition precedent to the general contractor\u2019s obligation to pay the subcontractor.<\/p>\n

Some states permit a surety<\/strong> to raise a conditional payment clause as a defense to a state statutory payment bond claim, but federal courts routinely reject the defense in the context of Miller Act claims. They hold that the liability of a surety and its principal on a Miller Act payment bond is coextensive with the contractual liability of the principal, but only to the extent that it is consistent with the rights and obligations created under the Miller Act. By its express terms, the Miller Act conditions a claimant\u2019s recovery on the passage of time from completion of work or provision of materials rather than on payment by the owner. Under the Miller Act, subcontractors and suppliers who have not been paid in full \u201cwithin 90 days after the day on which the person did or performed the last of the labor or furnished or supplied the material for which the claim is made\u201d have the right to sue on the payment bond<\/a><\/strong>. It is possible, therefore, for a Miller Act surety to be liable to a subcontractor on a Miller Act payment bond even though the bonded principal owes nothing to that subcontractor.<\/p>\n

Summary<\/strong><\/p>\n

Miller Act bonds are important risk shifting instruments that have important consequences for participants on federal public works projects. Although similar in some ways to the bonds used on private and state projects, there are important differences that separate Miller Act bonds from the pack. Contractors, subcontractors, suppliers, and sureties need to understand how the Miller Act works to insulate the United States from contractor nonperformance and subcontractors and suppliers from contractor nonpayment because they all have a potential stake in the outcome of a Miller Act claim.”<\/p>\n

Many thanks to Mr. Carrico for the recap on the Miller Act from the legal perspective. \u00a0National surety leader<\/strong>, Surety One, Inc.<\/strong><\/em> focuses on supporting the performance bonding needs of the commercial, highway, heavy industrial and construction contracting industries. We offer performance bonds to construction and commercial service contractor applicants small and large. Visit SuretyOne.com<\/a>, call (787) 333-0222<\/span> or (800) 373-2804<\/span>, or email Underwriting@SuretyOne.com<\/span> for a performance bond<\/a><\/strong> application package or information about any surety bonding need. Recu\u00e9rde que le asesoramos en SU idioma, as\u00ed que comun\u00edquese con nosotros, SU compa\u00f1\u00eda afianzadora preferida para la fianza.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

This law has been on the books for a LOOOOOONG time and its not news to contractors, CPAs and attorneys who deal with contract surety bonding on a day to day basis. \u00a0We came across this very good piece wanted… Continue Reading →<\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":[],"categories":[328],"tags":[26,27,1624,1771,332,1678,1574,1677,1734],"yoast_head":"\nPerformance Bonds Under the Miller Act • Surety One, Inc.<\/title>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/suretyone.com\/blog\/performance-bonds-under-the-miller-act\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Performance Bonds Under the Miller Act • Surety One, Inc.\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:description\" content=\"This law has been on the books for a LOOOOOONG time and its not news to contractors, CPAs and attorneys who deal with contract surety bonding on a day to day basis. \u00a0We came across this very good piece wanted... Continue Reading →\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/suretyone.com\/blog\/performance-bonds-under-the-miller-act\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"Surety One, Inc.\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:publisher\" content=\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/Surety1\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:author\" content=\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/Surety1\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"2014-08-11T00:30:51+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2017-01-03T16:20:31+00:00\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:creator\" content=\"@SuretyOne\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:site\" content=\"@SuretyOne\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"C. Poindexter\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"8 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\/\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/suretyone.com\/blog\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/suretyone.com\/blog\/\",\"name\":\"Surety One, Inc.\",\"description\":\"Our Blog\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\/\/suretyone.com\/blog\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":\"required name=search_term_string\"}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/suretyone.com\/blog\/performance-bonds-under-the-miller-act\/#webpage\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/suretyone.com\/blog\/performance-bonds-under-the-miller-act\/\",\"name\":\"Performance Bonds Under the Miller Act • Surety One, Inc.\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/suretyone.com\/blog\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2014-08-11T00:30:51+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2017-01-03T16:20:31+00:00\",\"author\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/suretyone.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/d34de27c146d5df3d1fb94d9b0c04605\"},\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/suretyone.com\/blog\/performance-bonds-under-the-miller-act\/#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\/\/suretyone.com\/blog\/performance-bonds-under-the-miller-act\/\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/suretyone.com\/blog\/performance-bonds-under-the-miller-act\/#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\/\/suretyone.com\/blog\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Performance Bonds Under the Miller Act\"}]},{\"@type\":\"Person\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/suretyone.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/d34de27c146d5df3d1fb94d9b0c04605\",\"name\":\"C. Poindexter\",\"sameAs\":[\"https:\/\/www.SuretyOne.com\",\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/Surety1\",\"https:\/\/twitter.com\/SuretyOne\"]}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"Performance Bonds Under the Miller Act • Surety One, Inc.","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/suretyone.com\/blog\/performance-bonds-under-the-miller-act\/","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Performance Bonds Under the Miller Act • Surety One, Inc.","og_description":"This law has been on the books for a LOOOOOONG time and its not news to contractors, CPAs and attorneys who deal with contract surety bonding on a day to day basis. \u00a0We came across this very good piece wanted... Continue Reading →","og_url":"https:\/\/suretyone.com\/blog\/performance-bonds-under-the-miller-act\/","og_site_name":"Surety One, Inc.","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/Surety1\/","article_author":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/Surety1","article_published_time":"2014-08-11T00:30:51+00:00","article_modified_time":"2017-01-03T16:20:31+00:00","twitter_card":"summary","twitter_creator":"@SuretyOne","twitter_site":"@SuretyOne","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"C. Poindexter","Est. reading time":"8 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/suretyone.com\/blog\/#website","url":"https:\/\/suretyone.com\/blog\/","name":"Surety One, Inc.","description":"Our Blog","potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/suretyone.com\/blog\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":"required name=search_term_string"}],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/suretyone.com\/blog\/performance-bonds-under-the-miller-act\/#webpage","url":"https:\/\/suretyone.com\/blog\/performance-bonds-under-the-miller-act\/","name":"Performance Bonds Under the Miller Act • Surety One, Inc.","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/suretyone.com\/blog\/#website"},"datePublished":"2014-08-11T00:30:51+00:00","dateModified":"2017-01-03T16:20:31+00:00","author":{"@id":"https:\/\/suretyone.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/d34de27c146d5df3d1fb94d9b0c04605"},"breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/suretyone.com\/blog\/performance-bonds-under-the-miller-act\/#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/suretyone.com\/blog\/performance-bonds-under-the-miller-act\/"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/suretyone.com\/blog\/performance-bonds-under-the-miller-act\/#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/suretyone.com\/blog\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Performance Bonds Under the Miller Act"}]},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/suretyone.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/d34de27c146d5df3d1fb94d9b0c04605","name":"C. Poindexter","sameAs":["https:\/\/www.SuretyOne.com","https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/Surety1","https:\/\/twitter.com\/SuretyOne"]}]}},"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/suretyone.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/1415"}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/suretyone.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/suretyone.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/suretyone.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/suretyone.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=1415"}],"version-history":[{"count":1,"href":"https:\/\/suretyone.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/1415\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":1846,"href":"https:\/\/suretyone.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/1415\/revisions\/1846"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/suretyone.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=1415"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/suretyone.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=1415"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/suretyone.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=1415"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}