In a Construction Contract, Can the Owner Bring Claims Directly Against the Subcontractor?

In construction disputes, owners often assume they can pursue claims directly against everyone who worked on the project. In reality, the answer is usually no—but with important exceptions. Whether an owner can bring claims directly against a subcontractor depends on the contractual relationship, the nature of the claim, and the law’s treatment of privity and third-party liability. Many construction lawsuits turn on this issue.

The General Rule: No Privity, No Contract Claim

As a general rule, an owner does not have a direct contract claim against a subcontractor because there is no privity of contract. The owner’s contract is with the general contractor, and the subcontractor’s contract is with the general contractor—not the owner.

This means that claims for breach of contract, defective work under the contract, or failure to comply with contract specifications must typically be brought against the general contractor, not directly against the subcontractor.

Owners are expected to enforce their rights through the contractual chain.

When an Owner May Sue a Subcontractor Directly

Although contract claims are usually barred, owners may bring direct claims against subcontractors under certain circumstances. One common exception involves negligence. If a subcontractor performs work in a manner that causes property damage, creates a safety hazard, or results in personal injury, the owner may have a direct negligence claim—even without a contract.

Another exception arises when the subcontractor provides express warranties that extend beyond the general contractor, or when the owner is clearly identified as an intended beneficiary of the subcontractor’s obligations.

In limited cases, statutory claims may also permit direct liability.

Defective Work vs. Property Damage

Oklahoma law often draws a distinction between defective work itself and damage caused by that work.

Claims seeking the cost to repair or replace defective work usually sound in contract and must be pursued against the general contractor. Claims for damage caused to other property, however, may support a negligence claim directly against the subcontractor.

This distinction is frequently litigated and can determine whether a subcontractor remains in—or is dismissed from—a lawsuit.

Third-Party Beneficiary Arguments

Owners sometimes argue they are third-party beneficiaries of subcontracts. While this argument can succeed in narrow circumstances, courts generally require clear intent in the subcontract language to confer enforceable rights on the owner.

In the absence of explicit language, Tulsa courts are reluctant to imply third-party beneficiary status.

Strategic Considerations in Construction Litigation

Owners often name subcontractors in lawsuits to preserve leverage, avoid finger-pointing between contractors, or ensure all potentially responsible parties are before the court. Subcontractors, in turn, frequently seek early dismissal based on lack of privity.

How claims are pled—contract versus negligence—can determine whether a case proceeds or ends early.

Our Tulsa Construction Lawyers Can Help

In Oklahoma, an owner generally cannot bring direct contract claims against a subcontractor due to the lack of contractual privity. However, owners may pursue subcontractors directly for negligence, property damage, or under specific warranty or statutory theories. To discuss your options, contact our Tulsa construction lawyers at Kania Law Office by calling (918)–743-2233 or online.