Florida’s Construction Lien Law gives contractors, subcontractors, laborers, material suppliers, and certain construction professionals a powerful tool for securing payment for work performed on real property. However, not every unpaid construction related expense can properly be included in a construction lien. Determining what is lienable requires an examination of Chapter 713 of the Florida Statutes, the nature of the work or materials furnished, the relationship between the parties, and whether the work actually constitutes an improvement to real property.
For contractors and property owners alike, understanding these distinctions is important. Including nonlienable amounts in a claim of lien can jeopardize the lien and, in serious cases, create exposure for filing a fraudulent lien. An experienced Florida construction lawyer can evaluate the underlying contract, invoices, scope of work, and project history to determine what may properly be secured by a construction lien.
Florida’s Definition of an Improvement
The starting point is section 713.01, Florida Statutes. The statute defines an “improvement” as a building, structure, construction, demolition, excavation, solid waste removal, landscaping, or any part thereof that is built, erected, placed, made, or done on real property for its permanent benefit.
The concept of permanent benefit is particularly important. Florida courts have repeatedly recognized that construction lien rights are tied to improving the real property itself. In Parc Central Aventura East Condominium v. Victoria Group Services, LLC, 54 So. 3d 532, 534 (Fla. 3d DCA 2011), the court explained that the purpose of Chapter 713 is to protect those providing labor and materials for the improvement of real property and emphasized the statutory requirement that an improvement provide a permanent benefit.
The improvement does not necessarily have to increase the property’s monetary value. As the Third District explained in E & E Electric Co. v. Gold Coast 72nd Street Diner, Inc., 116 So. 2d 660, 663 (Fla. 3d DCA 1959), an addition to the real property can qualify as an improvement even if it ultimately proves economically disadvantageous to the owner.
What Types of Labor and Services Are Lienable?
Section 713.01 broadly defines what it means to “improve” real property. Lienable work may include constructing, altering, repairing, removing, or demolishing improvements. Excavation work may qualify, as can labor associated with permanently installed fixtures and apparatus.
The statute expressly addresses several categories that might otherwise create uncertainty. Final construction cleanup performed to prepare a structure for occupancy may qualify. Landscaping work involving grading, seeding, sodding, and planting trees, shrubs, bushes, or other plants can also constitute improvement of the property.
Florida law also provides lien rights for certain professional services. Under section 713.03, qualifying architects, landscape architects, interior designers, engineers, and surveyors and mappers may have lien rights for professional services used in connection with improving real property, subject to the requirements and limitations of the statute.
Whether a particular service is lienable can depend heavily on what was actually performed and how that work relates to the improvement.
Landscaping Illustrates the Difference Between Improvement and Maintenance
Landscaping provides a useful example of the distinction between lienable improvement and nonlienable maintenance. Installing landscaping may permanently benefit the property and therefore fall within Chapter 713. Routine maintenance of that landscaping generally does not.
In Legault v. Suncoast Lawn Service, Inc., 486 So. 2d 72, 73 (Fla. 4th DCA 1986), the Fourth District concluded that lawn maintenance services did not constitute an improvement within the meaning of the Construction Lien Law.
That distinction was later discussed in Levin v. Palm Coast Builders & Construction, Inc., 840 So. 2d 316, 317 (Fla. 4th DCA 2003). There, a lien included items such as pool upkeep, lawn maintenance, homeowners association fees, and utility charges. The court determined that these were not lienable items and affirmed the trial court’s finding of a fraudulent lien. The court specifically distinguished planting landscaping, which can constitute an improvement, from maintaining landscaping, which does not.
This case illustrates why a contractor cannot assume that every expense arising from a construction contract is automatically lienable.
What Materials Are Lienable?
Materials incorporated into an improvement are generally within the protection of the Construction Lien Law when the statutory requirements are otherwise satisfied. Section 713.01 also addresses materials used during construction that do not remain in the finished improvement, rental equipment, and specially fabricated materials.
Specially fabricated materials deserve particular attention. Materials manufactured specifically for a particular improvement can potentially support lien rights even though fabrication occurs away from the project site. Section 713.08 requires specially fabricated materials that have not been incorporated into the improvement to be separately identified in the claim of lien.
By contrast, ordinary materials that never reach the project and provide no permanent benefit to the property can present a different result.
A recent example is JM Properties of West Palm Beach, Inc. v. Fort Dallas Truss Company, LLC, No. 4D2024-1593, 2026 WL 466416, at *2 (Fla. 4th DCA Feb. 18, 2026). The supplier contracted to manufacture and deliver trusses, but the trusses were never delivered. The Fourth District held that because no permanent benefit occurred on the property, the supplier was not entitled to a construction lien, although it could still pursue its breach of contract damages. The decision relied on Palm Beach Mall, Inc. v. Southeast Millwork, Inc., 593 So. 2d 1121, 1122 (Fla. 4th DCA 1992), which similarly recognized the importance of a permanent benefit to the property.
Who Can Claim a Construction Lien?
Determining what is lienable also requires determining who is asserting the lien. Section 713.01 identifies the persons who qualify as lienors. They include contractors, subcontractors, subsubcontractors, laborers, certain materialmen, and professional lienors under section 713.03. The statute expressly provides that no other person may have a lien under Part I of Chapter 713.
Florida law therefore does not simply ask whether money is owed. A claimant must fall within a statutorily protected category and must have provided qualifying labor, services, or materials within the required contractual chain.
The distinction is significant because an otherwise valid contractual debt does not necessarily create construction lien rights. A claimant may have a viable breach of contract action while having no enforceable lien against the property.
Subdivision and Site Improvements May Also Be Lienable
Lien rights are not limited to the construction of a building itself. Section 713.04 provides lien rights for certain services and materials furnished to make real property suitable for construction.
Examples include grading, leveling, excavating, filling land, paving streets and sidewalks, constructing drainage facilities, laying utility pipes and conduits, and constructing canals. Altering or repairing these improvements may also qualify.
This means that lienable work can begin well before vertical construction starts. Site contractors, excavation companies, utility contractors, and other participants in land development should understand how Chapter 713 applies to their work.
The Risks of Including Nonlienable Charges
Care must be taken when calculating a claim of lien. Section 713.31 provides remedies when a lienor willfully exaggerates the amount of a lien or includes amounts for work not performed. A fraudulent lien can become unenforceable and expose the claimant to damages and other consequences.
At the same time, not every mistake automatically constitutes fraud. Construction accounts can involve disputed change orders, credits, incomplete work, retainage, and complicated payment histories. The specific facts and the claimant’s good faith are important considerations.
For this reason, contractors should carefully review proposed lien amounts before recording a claim, while owners confronted with a questionable lien should examine whether each component of the claimed amount is actually lienable.
Speak With Florida Construction Lawyer Jonathan P. Cohen, Esq.
Construction lien disputes often turn on technical distinctions involving the scope of work, statutory definitions, contractual relationships, notice requirements, and the character of the amounts claimed. Jonathan P. Cohen, Esq., managing partner of Jonathan P. Cohen, P.A., has extensive experience representing contractors, subcontractors, property owners, and other construction industry participants in Florida construction disputes.
Based in Fort Lauderdale and serving clients throughout Florida, Jonathan P. Cohen, P.A. focuses on construction, surety, and business law, including construction liens, payment disputes, contract claims, bond matters, arbitration, and litigation in state and federal court.
If you have questions about what is lienable under Florida law, need assistance preparing or enforcing a construction lien, or need to challenge a lien containing potentially improper charges, contact Jonathan P. Cohen, P.A. An experienced Florida construction lawyer can review the facts of your project and help determine the appropriate strategy for protecting your rights.
The information provided in this article does not, and is not intended to, constitute legal advice. The content in this article is presented for general informational purposes only.