4.06.2020

Retentions Regime: Government Announces Changes

On 27 May 2020 the Government announced several in-principle changes to strengthen the retentions regime (Regime) in the Construction Contracts Act 2002 (the CCA).

Despite the Regime’s introduction in 2017, many subcontractor retentions have still been left unprotected and various gaps in the legislation have been exposed. These shortcomings were highlighted by the high-profile insolvency of Ebert Construction and resulting litigation by its Receivers for directions on administering an inadequate retentions account. 

In view of this, MBIE commissioned KPMG to undertake a review in 2019 before releasing (on a limited basis) a consultation paper in February this year.  Although the KMPG review suggested a tolerable level of compliance, on closer examination the survey evidence would tend to indicate that around one third or more of retentions holders are not complying with the Regime in light of Ebert.  The consultation paper therefore focused on amendments to the CCA that aimed to clarify the obligations for holding retentions on trust and impose sanctions for non-compliance.

The recently announced changes appear to be a progression of that paper.  Perhaps surprisingly, to our knowledge, MBIE has not consulted more widely despite the limited circulation of the paper, nor publically considered other models including the possibility of abolishing retentions altogether.  It is unclear at this stage whether the changes have been brought forward by the government in response to the Covid-19 crisis.

The announced changes include:

  • Trust requirements: Strengthening how retention money is held to prevent firms from dipping in to retention money to use it as working capital;
  • Transparency: Requiring those who hold retention money to issue a “transparency statement” stating how much is being held and where; and
  • Penalties: Making non-compliance an offence with fines of up to $ $200,000 for businesses and $50,000 for company directors.

Further details of the amendments, including the legislative drafting, and when they might be implemented are still awaited.  For example, it is currently unclear what the modified trust requirements will be, when the “transparency statement” will need to be issued and what it must contain, or whether the Courts will publically administer fines.[1]  There is also currently no indication as to whether the changes will include statutory machinery for administering retentions in an insolvency (to avoid the need for Court orders), which would seem to be essential.

That said, subject to the details, the changes should tighten up the Regime, provide greater certainty for the industry, and seem to be in line with the information sharing objectives from the Construction Sector Accord.  For those reasons they are encouraging.  The introduction of statutory offences represents the most significant change, which should see improved compliance and help redress the problem of those who do not comply being afforded a commercial advantage. 

The announcement focuses on tweaking the existing Regime.  In doing so, it is hoped that the process to get here has not been unduly narrow or rushed, and that we will not be revisiting the Regime once again in a few years time.  Another update will be provided once more is known.

See our previous commentary on the Retentions Regime:

Administration of Retentions Trust:  Oorshot v Corbel Construction

Ebert Construction:  Court provides Guidance on the Retentions Regime

Ebert Construction:  Receivership and Liquidation

Ebert Construction:  What you need to know

Clarification of retentions requirements for construction contracts

Changes to the Construction Contracts Act 2002

[1] MBIE’s consultation paper had floated the idea of adjudicators having jurisdiction to administer fines, noting that adjudication under the CCA is a confidential process.

Do you need expert legal advice?
Contact the expert team at Hesketh Henry.
Kerry_100x100 1
Media contact - Kerry Browne
Please contact Kerry with any media enquiries and with any questions related to marketing or sponsorships on +64 9 375 8747 or via email.

Related Articles / Insights & Opinion

Bereavement Leave Confirmed for Miscarriages and Stillbirths 
New Zealand has become the second country in the world to pass legislation that provides bereavement leave for mothers and their partners after a miscarriage or stillbirth.
26.03.2021 Posted in Business Advice & Employment Law
Court of Appeal Overturns Employment Court’s Decision in Tourism Holdings
Tourism Holdings Limited v A Labour Inspector of the Ministry of Business, Innovation and Employment (Tourism Holdings) is the first decision in which the Employment Court considered section 8(2) of the Holidays Act 2003 (Act). The Court of Appeal has recently overturned this decision.
26.03.2021 Posted in Business Advice & Employment Law
Guarantees must be in writing and signed to be enforceable
For a guarantee to be enforceable, the requirements set out in section 27 of the Property Law Act 2007 (Act) must be strictly complied with.  This is what the NZSC held in Brougham v Regan. The key i...
19.03.2021 Posted in Business Advice
UK Supreme Court Delivers Decision on Uber Driver Employment Status
The distinction between employee and independent contractor can be complex, particularly where the nature of the business model blurs the lines of standard employment practices.
16.03.2021 Posted in Business Advice & Employment Law
Holidays Act Overhaul – Taskforce Recommendations
There have been calls for an amendment of the Holidays Act 2003 (Act) for some time.
16.03.2021 Posted in Business Advice & Employment Law
Unwanted Land Covenants and Easements: Seeking a Court Order
The Supreme Court recently considered an application by Synlait Milk to modify a land covenant restricting the burdened land use to farming, grazing and forestry operation to protect the ability of the benefited land owner to develop a quarry.  This article looks at the circumstances in which the courts might give relief to parties in an application to extinguish or modify a covenant or easement.
15.03.2021 Posted in Property Law
New ICC Arbitration Rules 2021 come into force
The revised International Chamber of Commerce (ICC) Arbitration Rules for 2021 (2021 Rules) have now come into force and apply to all ICC arbitrations begun after 1 January 2021.  While the new Rules...
10.03.2021 Posted in Litigation & Dispute Resolution
Send us an enquiry
For expert legal advice, please complete the form below or call us on (09) 375 8700.
  • This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.
-->