UK: Don't forget to have your say: Government Consultations on Retention and the Housing Grants Act close on 19 January 2018

Last Updated: 11 January 2018
Article by Claire King

Introduction

The Government is currently running two parallel consultations aimed at encouraging best practice in fair and prompt payment within the construction sector. These are as follows:

  1. A consultation to support a post-implementation review of the 2011 changes to Part 2 of the Housing Grants, Construction and Regeneration Act 1996 (the "Housing Grants Act" and the "Housing Grants Consultation"); and
  2. A consultation on the practice of cash retention under construction contracts (the "Retention Consultation").

Both consultations close on 19 January 2018 and, as such, only a couple of weeks remain to contribute.  In this Insight we consider some of the key aspects of the Consultation Papers.

The Housing Grants Act –a post-implementation review

At the time the amended Housing Grants Act came into effect in October 2011, the Government promised that it would undertake a review five years later in order to determine how effective the amendments (and the Housing Grants Act as a whole) were. The Housing Grants Consultation, accordingly, states that its primary aim is to test the effectiveness of the amendments made in 2011.

For those who need a refresher these were:

"...

  • remove the restriction on who could issue a payment notice;
  • improve the clarity of payment and withholding notices;
  • introduce a 'fall back' provision – allowing a payee to submit a valid payment notice where a payer has failed to issue one;
  • prohibit payment by reference to other contracts;
  • introduce a statutory framework for the costs of adjudication;
  • remove the requirement for contracts to be in writing for the Act to apply; and
  • improve the right of suspension."

There are two key interests flowing through the consultation.  These are:

  1. Encouraging prompt and fair payment particularly for small companies;1 and
  2. The costs associated with the adjudication process and the extent to which they are a disincentive for using it.

We examine these below.

"Smash and Grabs" and Payment Procedures

If parties implement the provisions of the Housing Grants Act properly, and keep up with their paperwork, then the payment mechanisms as amended should be relatively effective in encouraging prompt payment. At the very least they should encourage transparency as to what is going to be paid and when.

Disputes generally arise in relation to the notice provisions under the Housing Grants Act when a party fails to follow the notice provisions relating to payments (e.g. by failing to issue Payment Notices on time) and/or tries to be "sneaky" in some way (e.g. by not clearly identifying what they are serving or putting it in a slightly different format to normal).2

It is to be hoped that now the notice procedures for payment cycles have bedded in, and familiarity with them has increased, parties are adopting more robust procedures to ensure the relevant notices get issued on time. There is certainly anecdotal evidence that this is the case.  Similarly, parties do now have a better idea of when they can, and cannot, "smash and grab" or enforce their entitlements for that particular payment cycle in light of the guidance issued by the courts over the past few years.

Despite the extensive case law that followed the introduction of amended payment provisions, it is hard to see how amending them again is likely to do anything other than create uncertainty and more case law in the short term.  This is particularly the case where there seems to be a decline in the number of unjustified "smash and grabs", with parties starting to adopt a more sensible approach than seen in some of the cases going through the courts a few years ago.

It remains to be seen, however, whether the consultation results in any ideas for simplifying the notice procedures in a way which is not likely to spark a new range of case law on those procedures should be interpreted.

The Costs of Adjudication

Adjudication sometimes can, unfortunately, be expensive and/or its costs disproportionate especially if the value of the dispute is not that high but the issues are not straightforward.  This can be made worse if one party's position is unclear or badly formulated and/or the adjudicator's charge-out rate is higher than would be ideal for the value of the dispute. Game playing can also result in higher costs than are necessary, although often what could be labelled "game playing" by one party is a jurisdictional challenge that the other party believes is a necessary and fair check on a process that would otherwise plough ahead regardless.

However, adjudication can equally be a very quick and cost-effective method of dispute resolution when used properly by the parties and, just as importantly, where the adjudicator controls the process.

The Housing Grants Consultation is aimed at looking at whether the costs of adjudication are now so high that they are impacting on its use. Some obviously think they are. The article "Is Adjudication too expensive?",3 for example, in the recent Adjudication Society Newsletter suggests that too often adjudication is too expensive for small businesses to undertake. Likewise the recent research carried out by Janey Mulligan and Amy Jackson of Construction Dispute Resolution indicates that hourly rates for adjudicators have increased (the average fee being £210 and the top rate recorded being £330) as well as the average fee charged (up by £4,000 since 2011). That said, they also note that higher rates did not always result in higher overall fees, suggesting a more expensive or experienced adjudicator may understand the issues more quickly and/or run the process more efficiently.4

It will be interesting, therefore, to see what suggestions come out of the consultation in relation to adjudication costs. One thing that would undoubtedly put parties off adjudication, in the author's view, is if one party has to pay the other side's costs as well as their own. It is, by all accounts, extremely rare for a party to agree to pay the other side's costs after an adjudication has commenced.5

To this end it would be helpful to have certainty as to whether the Late Payment of Commercial Debts (Interest) Act 1998 applies to adjudication or not, given that there is now contradictory case law on the topic.6 In the author's view it does not apply, and should not apply, given the express provisions on costs seen in section 108A of the Housing Grants Act.  It should also not be forgotten that for complex and high value disputes it may be better to avoid the temptation of adjudicating and progress straight to TCC proceedings if applicable. Recovering costs is not then going to be an issue (provided you succeed in bringing your claim).

Finally, it remains to be seen whether the consultation results in any proposals for simplifying the adjudication process which will not, at the same time, result in it losing some of its necessary checks and balances.

The Retention Consultation

The Retention Consultation, and its use within the construction sector, was published in parallel with a research paper on retentions in the construction industry generally which was produced by Pye Tait Consulting on behalf of the Department for Business, Energy & Industrial Strategy (the "BEIS Research Paper").7

Previous amendments to the Housing Grants Act sought to prevent delays to the release of retention monies by reference to performance obligations under another contract.8 Under the previous Act, the release of retention monies further down the contractual chain was frequently made conditional upon the main contractor receiving a certificate of making good defects.  This could have serious implications on the cash flow of those further down the contractual chain.

The BEIS Research Paper noted that, despite this reform, there were still substantial delays to the release of retention monies. It noted that:

"Delays in paying retention monies appear to be commonplace in the construction sector. Around 71% of contractors surveyed with experience of having retentions held in the last three years have experienced delays in receiving retention monies over the same period."9

The paper also notes that the higher up the contractor is in the contractual chain the less likely they are to suffer from non-payment of retention monies.10 It notes further that it is the "unjustified late and non-payment of retentions" that "appears to be a significant cause of the issues associated with the practice of holding retentions within the construction sector".11

Another major issue preventing the repayment of retentions is noted as being insolvency higher up the contractual chain. As retention monies are held in the main bank account of the entity holding them (i.e. the monies are not in any way "ring-fenced") they fall into the general insolvency pot of monies and are then distributed to creditors in accordance with the applicable insolvency rules and regulations.

The BEIS Research Paper notes that:

"A significant proportion (44%) of contractors surveyed with experience of having retentions held from them in the last three years have experienced non-payment of retention monies as a result of upstream insolvencies over this same period ..." [Emphasis added]

The impact of the late retentions is noted as being: (1) higher business overheads pursuing outstanding monies; (2) weakened relationships within the contractual chains due to strains being placed on relationships; (3) weakened relationships with clients for main contractors; (4) increased costs for projects as tender prices are increased to cater for the risks associated with retention monies; and (5) impeded business growth.12

The BEIS Research Paper also looks at possible options for increasing protection for retention monies including: Project Bank Accounts, Retention Bonds, Performance Bonds, Escrow Stakeholder accounts, parent company guarantees and retention held in trust funds. In doing so it also examined schemes in other countries such as New South Wales, Australia (where retention money held on projects worth over A$20m must be held in a trust account with an authorised deposit-taking institution)13 and Canada (where retention monies must be held in a separate account).

The BEIS Research Paper itself concludes that there are only two potential options that could be real alternatives to cash retentions: (1) a retention deposit scheme of some sort with the monies held on trust; or (2) retention bonds. However, it notes the cost of retention bonds in particular could be problematic and that their "on demand" nature would also cause issues.  The other suggestion of the Retention Deposit Scheme is examined in the BEIS Research Paper although it is not entirely clear what would trigger the release of the money (unlike the Rent Deposit Scheme which is released at the end of tenancy).14 As such it recommends that further research be carried out into alternative mechanisms for retention and, in particular, "a retention deposit scheme and holding retentions in a trust account".15

Given recent headlines on retentions being lost due to insolvency (the headline in Construction News on 5 January 2018 – "Outrage as McMullen revealed to owe £646k in retentions" – is one such example), it is clear that coming up with a viable scheme for protecting retentions, which is not overly burdensome or costly to run, would benefit the industry as a whole.

As such it can only be a good time for the Retention Consultation which aims to explore further:

"...

  • the effectiveness of existing prompt and fair payment measures for retentions;
  • views on the independent research on retentions in the construction industry and the BEIS Consultation Stage Impact Assessment;
  • late and non-payment of retentions;
  • the appropriateness of a 'cap' on the proportion of contract value that can be held in retention, and the length of time it can be held;
  • the effectiveness of existing alternative mechanisms to retentions; and
  • the costs and benefits of a 'retention deposit scheme'."

Don't forget to have your say!

Finally, it is still not too late to have your say on these consultations by following the links below:

https://www.gov.uk/government/consultations/2011-changes-to-part-2-of-th...

https://www.gov.uk/government/consultations/retention-payments-in-the-co...

With thanks to Laura Bowler for her research and assistance.


  • 1. See the Ministerial Foreword by Lord Prior of Brampton on page 3 of the Consultation.
  • 2. For example, see Caledonian Modular Ltd v Mar City Developments Ltd [2015] EWHC 1855 (TCC) or Henia Investments Inc v Beck Interiors Ltd [2015] EWHC 2433 (TCC).
  • 3. By the anonymous "J.R. Hartley".
  • 4. See "The Costs of Adjudication – What to Expect when You're Expecting" in the Adjudication Society Newsletter, Winter 2017, as well as the more detailed paper "Adjudicators' Fees" by J Milligan and A Jackson, November 2017.
  • 5. See section 108A of the Housing Grants Act which only allows parties to agree to allocate costs if the agreement is in writing and made after the notice of intention to refer to adjudication is issued.
  • 6. See Lulu Construction Ltd v Mulalley & Co Ltd [2016] EWHC 1852 (TCC) and also Enviroflow Management Ltd v Redhill Works (Nottingham) Ltd (unreported).
  • 7. See the BEIS Research Paper.
  • 8. "Retention Payments in the Construction Industry — A consultation on the practice of cash retention under construction contracts", 24 October 2017, page 12 by BEIS.
  • 9. See the BEIS Research Paper, page 20.
  • 10. Ibid.
  • 11. Ibid., page 21.
  • 12. Ibid., pages 22—23.
  • 13. See the Building and Construction Industry Security of Payment Regulation 2008.
  • 14. BEIS Research Paper, "Retention in the Construction Industry", October 2017, page 130.
  • 15. BEIS Research Paper, page 26.

Please click here to view previous issues of Insight

The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.

To print this article, all you need is to be registered on Mondaq.com.

Click to Login as an existing user or Register so you can print this article.

Authors
Claire King
Similar Articles
Relevancy Powered by MondaqAI
 
In association with
Related Topics
 
Similar Articles
Relevancy Powered by MondaqAI
Related Articles
 
Related Video
Up-coming Events Search
Tools
Print
Font Size:
Translation
Channels
Mondaq on Twitter
 
Register for Access and our Free Biweekly Alert for
This service is completely free. Access 250,000 archived articles from 100+ countries and get a personalised email twice a week covering developments (and yes, our lawyers like to think you’ve read our Disclaimer).
 
Email Address
Company Name
Password
Confirm Password
Position
Mondaq Topics -- Select your Interests
 Accounting
 Anti-trust
 Commercial
 Compliance
 Consumer
 Criminal
 Employment
 Energy
 Environment
 Family
 Finance
 Government
 Healthcare
 Immigration
 Insolvency
 Insurance
 International
 IP
 Law Performance
 Law Practice
 Litigation
 Media & IT
 Privacy
 Real Estate
 Strategy
 Tax
 Technology
 Transport
 Wealth Mgt
Regions
Africa
Asia
Asia Pacific
Australasia
Canada
Caribbean
Europe
European Union
Latin America
Middle East
U.K.
United States
Worldwide Updates
Registration (you must scroll down to set your data preferences)

Mondaq Ltd requires you to register and provide information that personally identifies you, including your content preferences, for three primary purposes (full details of Mondaq’s use of your personal data can be found in our Privacy and Cookies Notice):

  • To allow you to personalize the Mondaq websites you are visiting to show content ("Content") relevant to your interests.
  • To enable features such as password reminder, news alerts, email a colleague, and linking from Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) to your website.
  • To produce demographic feedback for our content providers ("Contributors") who contribute Content for free for your use.

Mondaq hopes that our registered users will support us in maintaining our free to view business model by consenting to our use of your personal data as described below.

Mondaq has a "free to view" business model. Our services are paid for by Contributors in exchange for Mondaq providing them with access to information about who accesses their content. Once personal data is transferred to our Contributors they become a data controller of this personal data. They use it to measure the response that their articles are receiving, as a form of market research. They may also use it to provide Mondaq users with information about their products and services.

Details of each Contributor to which your personal data will be transferred is clearly stated within the Content that you access. For full details of how this Contributor will use your personal data, you should review the Contributor’s own Privacy Notice.

Please indicate your preference below:

Yes, I am happy to support Mondaq in maintaining its free to view business model by agreeing to allow Mondaq to share my personal data with Contributors whose Content I access
No, I do not want Mondaq to share my personal data with Contributors

Also please let us know whether you are happy to receive communications promoting products and services offered by Mondaq:

Yes, I am happy to received promotional communications from Mondaq
No, please do not send me promotional communications from Mondaq
Terms & Conditions

Mondaq.com (the Website) is owned and managed by Mondaq Ltd (Mondaq). Mondaq grants you a non-exclusive, revocable licence to access the Website and associated services, such as the Mondaq News Alerts (Services), subject to and in consideration of your compliance with the following terms and conditions of use (Terms). Your use of the Website and/or Services constitutes your agreement to the Terms. Mondaq may terminate your use of the Website and Services if you are in breach of these Terms or if Mondaq decides to terminate the licence granted hereunder for any reason whatsoever.

Use of www.mondaq.com

To Use Mondaq.com you must be: eighteen (18) years old or over; legally capable of entering into binding contracts; and not in any way prohibited by the applicable law to enter into these Terms in the jurisdiction which you are currently located.

You may use the Website as an unregistered user, however, you are required to register as a user if you wish to read the full text of the Content or to receive the Services.

You may not modify, publish, transmit, transfer or sell, reproduce, create derivative works from, distribute, perform, link, display, or in any way exploit any of the Content, in whole or in part, except as expressly permitted in these Terms or with the prior written consent of Mondaq. You may not use electronic or other means to extract details or information from the Content. Nor shall you extract information about users or Contributors in order to offer them any services or products.

In your use of the Website and/or Services you shall: comply with all applicable laws, regulations, directives and legislations which apply to your Use of the Website and/or Services in whatever country you are physically located including without limitation any and all consumer law, export control laws and regulations; provide to us true, correct and accurate information and promptly inform us in the event that any information that you have provided to us changes or becomes inaccurate; notify Mondaq immediately of any circumstances where you have reason to believe that any Intellectual Property Rights or any other rights of any third party may have been infringed; co-operate with reasonable security or other checks or requests for information made by Mondaq from time to time; and at all times be fully liable for the breach of any of these Terms by a third party using your login details to access the Website and/or Services

however, you shall not: do anything likely to impair, interfere with or damage or cause harm or distress to any persons, or the network; do anything that will infringe any Intellectual Property Rights or other rights of Mondaq or any third party; or use the Website, Services and/or Content otherwise than in accordance with these Terms; use any trade marks or service marks of Mondaq or the Contributors, or do anything which may be seen to take unfair advantage of the reputation and goodwill of Mondaq or the Contributors, or the Website, Services and/or Content.

Mondaq reserves the right, in its sole discretion, to take any action that it deems necessary and appropriate in the event it considers that there is a breach or threatened breach of the Terms.

Mondaq’s Rights and Obligations

Unless otherwise expressly set out to the contrary, nothing in these Terms shall serve to transfer from Mondaq to you, any Intellectual Property Rights owned by and/or licensed to Mondaq and all rights, title and interest in and to such Intellectual Property Rights will remain exclusively with Mondaq and/or its licensors.

Mondaq shall use its reasonable endeavours to make the Website and Services available to you at all times, but we cannot guarantee an uninterrupted and fault free service.

Mondaq reserves the right to make changes to the services and/or the Website or part thereof, from time to time, and we may add, remove, modify and/or vary any elements of features and functionalities of the Website or the services.

Mondaq also reserves the right from time to time to monitor your Use of the Website and/or services.

Disclaimer

The Content is general information only. It is not intended to constitute legal advice or seek to be the complete and comprehensive statement of the law, nor is it intended to address your specific requirements or provide advice on which reliance should be placed. Mondaq and/or its Contributors and other suppliers make no representations about the suitability of the information contained in the Content for any purpose. All Content provided "as is" without warranty of any kind. Mondaq and/or its Contributors and other suppliers hereby exclude and disclaim all representations, warranties or guarantees with regard to the Content, including all implied warranties and conditions of merchantability, fitness for a particular purpose, title and non-infringement. To the maximum extent permitted by law, Mondaq expressly excludes all representations, warranties, obligations, and liabilities arising out of or in connection with all Content. In no event shall Mondaq and/or its respective suppliers be liable for any special, indirect or consequential damages or any damages whatsoever resulting from loss of use, data or profits, whether in an action of contract, negligence or other tortious action, arising out of or in connection with the use of the Content or performance of Mondaq’s Services.

General

Mondaq may alter or amend these Terms by amending them on the Website. By continuing to Use the Services and/or the Website after such amendment, you will be deemed to have accepted any amendment to these Terms.

These Terms shall be governed by and construed in accordance with the laws of England and Wales and you irrevocably submit to the exclusive jurisdiction of the courts of England and Wales to settle any dispute which may arise out of or in connection with these Terms. If you live outside the United Kingdom, English law shall apply only to the extent that English law shall not deprive you of any legal protection accorded in accordance with the law of the place where you are habitually resident ("Local Law"). In the event English law deprives you of any legal protection which is accorded to you under Local Law, then these terms shall be governed by Local Law and any dispute or claim arising out of or in connection with these Terms shall be subject to the non-exclusive jurisdiction of the courts where you are habitually resident.

You may print and keep a copy of these Terms, which form the entire agreement between you and Mondaq and supersede any other communications or advertising in respect of the Service and/or the Website.

No delay in exercising or non-exercise by you and/or Mondaq of any of its rights under or in connection with these Terms shall operate as a waiver or release of each of your or Mondaq’s right. Rather, any such waiver or release must be specifically granted in writing signed by the party granting it.

If any part of these Terms is held unenforceable, that part shall be enforced to the maximum extent permissible so as to give effect to the intent of the parties, and the Terms shall continue in full force and effect.

Mondaq shall not incur any liability to you on account of any loss or damage resulting from any delay or failure to perform all or any part of these Terms if such delay or failure is caused, in whole or in part, by events, occurrences, or causes beyond the control of Mondaq. Such events, occurrences or causes will include, without limitation, acts of God, strikes, lockouts, server and network failure, riots, acts of war, earthquakes, fire and explosions.

By clicking Register you state you have read and agree to our Terms and Conditions