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
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

Force Majeure – Not A Get Out Of Jail Free Card
Woolworths Group Ltd v Twentieth Super Pace Nominees Pty Ltd [2021] NSWSC 344
17.06.2022 Posted in Trade and Transport
Payment Claims: Incorrect Due Date From Delayed Delivery
Nicholls Group Projects Ltd v Plan Design Build Homes Ltd
20.05.2022 Posted in Construction
Employment Court Deems Gloriavale Residents Employees
The definition of “employee” in the Employment Relations Act 2000 (ERA) can at times be tricky to navigate; recent cases involving builders, couriers, and uber drivers can attest to the issues tha...
18.05.2022 Posted in Employment
New proposals on modern slavery place higher responsibilities on NZ organisations
Over recent years, modern slavery has become a more prominent issue in New Zealand.
13.05.2022 Posted in Business Advice
Insurance Contracts Bill – submissions on exposure draft closing soon
As we reported in late February, the Ministry of Business, Innovation and Employment (MBIE) is seeking submissions on the exposure draft Insurance Contracts Bill.  Submissions close on 4 May 2022. MB...
20.04.2022 Posted in Insurance
Matariki and Fair Pay Agreements
Matariki Te Pire mō te Hararei Tūmatanui o te Kāhui o Matariki (Te Kāhui o Matariki Public Holiday Bill) received Royal Assent yesterday, and the new Act comes into force today – 12 April 20...
12.04.2022 Posted in Employment
A Landmark Change? – Proposed reform of the occupational regulation of engineers
Engineers engage in building work that is critical to public safety. Despite this, few restrictions are placed on who can carry out and supervise complex and specialised projects that require high levels of professional judgement, skill and technical competence.
07.04.2022 Posted in Construction
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.
-->