Appeals Court Rejects Wage Liens That Failed to Name Workers

Washington’s Court of Appeals ruled October 12 that wage liens against two apartment properties were invalid because the filings did not identify the security guards whose work supported the claims.

The published ruling also held that class-action representatives may record wage liens for class members with valid lien rights. The notices must still identify the workers whose claims support the liens, the three-judge panel ruled.

The decision concerned efforts to collect part of a $2.64 million default judgment against West Coast Security. Former guards Andrew Radulescu and Justin Green recorded liens against properties owned by Portsmith Apartments LLC and Sunrise Lane Apartments LLC on behalf of a class of security employees.

The liens claimed $40,507.61 against Portsmith and $18,819.49 against Sunrise Lane. Both named Radulescu and Green as claimants acting for themselves and others similarly situated, and supplied their attorneys’ contact information. Neither man had worked at either property, according to the opinion.

The filings did not name the class members who had worked there.

“Here, the recorded liens failed to comply or substantially comply with the content requirements of the WRA,” Judge Ian Birk wrote, referring to the Washington Wage Recovery Act.

The Washington Wage Recovery Act allows qualifying employees to assert liens against real property for wage claims arising from their work maintaining that property. 

As the court explained, the law’s definition of maintenance includes protecting and monitoring property. A lien places a claim against property to secure payment.

Under RCW 60.90.030, a recorded notice must include the lien claimant’s name, telephone number and address. The appeals court distinguished the worker who holds the underlying lien right from the representative authorized to act for that worker.

Radulescu and Green argued that their appointment as class representatives authorized them to record the liens and that the notices complied with the law because they were filed for guards who provided security at the properties.

The property owners sought dismissal, arguing both that class representatives lacked authority to record such liens and that these filings omitted required information.

The superior court had sided with the workers on those issues, concluding that the notices substantially complied with the statute and citing the Legislature’s intent to provide relief for wage claimants. 

The appeals court rejected the owners’ broader argument that class representatives could not record liens. It reasoned that the statute allows representatives to act for claimants and expressly permits class representatives to bring foreclosure actions to enforce wage liens.

But acting for a class does not make the representative the holder of each worker’s lien rights, the panel explained. Property owners must receive information identifying the workers alleged to have maintained their properties.

The underlying lawsuit alleged unpaid wages, missed meal and rest breaks, unlawful deductions and other employment violations. Radulescu also alleged wrongful discharge and retaliation. After West Coast Security defaulted, the trial court entered a judgment of $2,642,144.36, including compensation, damages, interest and sanctions.

The October 12 decision did not overturn that default judgment. It directed dismissal of the supplemental complaint against the property owners and returned the case to superior court for further proceedings consistent with the ruling.

Judges David Mann and Linda Coburn joined Birk’s opinion.