I am a material supplier to a GC on a commercial project. If the GC and Owner are the same (same mailing address, different company names) I was under the impression a pre lien notice was not needed. We are having a tough time getting final payment so I'm looking at filing a notice of intent to lien, but want to make sure we actually have lien rights. I was instructed to go ahead and file a pre lien notice now just incase I was misinformed (which would only protect the last 60 days from pre lien notice date).
In California preliminary notice is required unless you have a contract directly with the owner and there is no lender involved. You only have lien rights with respect to work performed within 20 days of sending your preliminary notice.
In the situation described above the owner and GC appear to be related but different entities. That means, strictly speaking, you should have served preliminary notice. However, because the GC and Owner appear to be related, most likely the owner had actual knowledge of your work on the project. In this sort of situation there is case law that states that the owner is estopped from objecting to your lien rights based on lack of preliminary notice because the owner was well aware of your being a supplier on the project and having lien rights. How strong this argument is will depend on the actual relationship between he owner and the GC and the owner's knowledge of your being a supplier. But you likely have a good faith argument for recording a lien.