Reason Was That Owners Sought Overly Inflated Fees And Costs, With Fees Not Allowable Because They Did Not Relate To Construction Performance Under B&P § 1029.8.
In a very contentious dispute between residential property owners and carpentry contractors, the trial and appellate courts in Romero v. Brocca, Case No. B316715 (2d Dist., Div. 1 Jan. 23, 2023) (unpublished) affirmed determinations that no one prevailed for purposes of an attorney’s fees award and that owners were not entitled to an award of a little over $41,000 in routine costs although they arguably did prevail for a costs award. There was potential fee exposure for contractors because they were unlicensed so as to possibly trigger a fee award under Business & Professions Code section 1029.8. However, the fee request by owners was properly denied because only a $6,500 down payment by them was involved, not unlicensed contractor performance relating to providing goods and services. With respect to routine costs, owners submitted overly inflated costs requests, such that they were properly denied by the trial court in concluding the claimed costs were not reasonable or necessary for the litigation.