In J & E Industries of Ossining, Inc. v. Peekskill Housing Authority, 8 NYS 3d 394 (2d Dept 2015) the  contractor’s claim for breach of contract for non-payment was dismissed due to its failure to comply with the notice of claim required by Public Housing Law Sec. 157(1). That section states in relevant part: “[i]n every action …. prosecuted or maintained against an authority … the complaint …. shall contain an allegation that at least thirty days have elapsed since the demand …. upon which such action or special proceeding is founded [was] presented to the authority for adjustment and it has neglected or refused to make an adjustment or payment thereof for thirty days after such presentment.” Further, the court stated that “Compliance with the notice requirement of [the statute] is a condition precedent to the maintenance of an action against the Housing Authority and a failure to comply with the statute requires dismissal of such action.” In this case the contractor apparently filed no claim or demand with the housing authority for payment before filing its lawsuit. Its attempt to file a demand after the suit was filed was rejected by the court. COMMENT: This is another one of that deadly statutory notices of claim which never appear in construction contracts, but are read into them by law. Similar notices are found in Education Law Sec. 3813 for claims against school districts, and Town Law Sec. 65(3)  for claims against towns. These are all “conditions precedent” to recovery. In other words, if the notice is not given strictly as required by the statute, the claim is lost. The notice of claim requirement in PHL 157 is not as formal as other statutes, nor does it have time constraints that must be followed for when the claim must be filed. However, if a contractor is forced to sue a housing authority for payment it must file a “demand” with the authority prior to filing suit, and it is recommended that the demand be detailed to withstand an attack that it was insufficient.