Location

Construction law update: The payment regime and why you must comply!

In the last few months of 2023, we represented parties in three different adjudications; an Employer, a Main Contractor and a Sub-Contractor. The common denominator was that all three involved a Referral for a true value adjudication of works undertaken and in each case there were issues concerning compliance with any payment regime and the ineffectiveness of payless notices.

In this article, we consider the requirements of the statutory regime and offer guidance as to how to comply.

What is a Payment Regime in the Construction Industry?

A Payment Regimes is nothing more complicated than the contractual provisions directing when payments are to be made and what the timetable is for applications and payment notices.

The principal parties are the ‘payer’ (often the Employer) and the ‘payee’, often the Contractor.

In the first instance, the payment regime may be set out in the contract. If it is then it must comply with the minimal requirements set out in the Housing Grants Construction and Regeneration Act 1996 (“the Act”).

Where the contractual payment regime is insufficient, or the contract does not provide a regime, the Statutory Payment Regime (Scheme for Construction Contracts 1998) will apply.  The Scheme applies where certain payment provisions are missing, or in some circumstances, the entire Scheme will apply as there is no contractual payment provision at all.

The starting position is that the payee makes an application for payment on a regular basis. The payer then has a limited number of days to assess and issue a valuation of the application. It then issues a Payment Notice setting out the sum it intends to pay. If it intends to deduct money from the assessed value of the application it has to issue a Payless Notice.

The regularity of the payee’s payment applications must comply with the contractual payment regime, and if not applicable, the Statutory Payment Regime. The same applies to the payer when issuing payment notices. This is particularly important where the payer decides to withhold some or all of the payment and issues a Payless Notice. Failure to comply with the relevant regime will render such a Payless notices invalid.

Statutory Payment Regime

There are two key considerations here; content and timing.

Content

The payee’s payment application must be written, specifying the amount of any payment(s) it considers to be due and how those payments are calculated. In short, the payee must be able to support and evidence its claim and calculations.

When issuing a Payment Notice, the payer must also clearly set out how the Payment Notice is calculated, to what it relates and specify the amount it proposes to pay. This is crucial when issuing a Payless Notice – it is simply not enough to deduct an amount from the payment notice without clearly explaining the reasoning.

Timing

If the contract does not provide a regular period for payment, then the Statutory Payment Regime  requires invoices to be issued every 28 days. This is known as the ‘relevant valuation period.’ It does not matter what point in the month this 28-day period runs from but it must be consistent month to month.

The payment ‘due date’ is 7 days after the expiry of the relevant valuation period. Therefore, payment is due 7 days after the date of the invoice (assuming it is has been issued in accordance with the above.)

The ‘final date’ for payment is 17 days from the due date and the date for issuing a payment notice/payless notice is 5 days after the date on which payment becomes due.

For example, if an invoice was raised on 30 January in any given year payment would be due 7 days later on 6 February. The final date for payment would be 17 days later on 23 February. Payment Notices or Payless Notices are only valid if served no later than 5 days after this, on 28 February. Any Payless Notices received after this date would not be enforceable.

Smash and Grab Adjudications

Compliance with the Statutory Regime or a contractual provisions can be difficult, but if undertaken correctly, it opens the option for a technical adjudication, colloquially known as a ‘smash and grab’ adjudication.

Where the payer fails to issue a Payment Notice then the payment application stands as the assessed value. Where the payer gives an assessment of value or even a Payment Notice then in the absence of a valid Payless Notice the payer has no right to make a deduction.

In either case, in the event of non-payment of the assessed sum due, this constitutes a dispute which the payee can refer to Adjudication. The adjudicator is not asked to determine the value of the work in question but instead whether the payee has complied with the relevant regime (contractual or statutory) and if so in the absence of a Payless Notice, the payee will be awarded payment on a technicality.  

True Value Adjudications

Many Employers and Contractors are unaware of these requirements and so their contracts do not comply with the Statutory Regime. In such circumstances, where disputes over payment arise and neither party has complied, it is necessary to seek a true valuation of the works undertaken via an adjudication. By nature, these involve more work, evidence and may require an extension to the 28 days timescale to be determined.

Our Recent Cases

1) Our client was an Employer who had appointed a Contractor to complete construction works. A dispute arose when our client (for various reasons) did not pay the contractor who then referred the matter to adjudication. As the contractor had brought the adjudication based on it having applied for payment in accordance with the Statutory Scheme, the Adjudicator had to consider whether the requirements of the Statutory Scheme had been met. The Adjudicator concluded that the contractor had not adhered to the Scheme and that therefore our client was not in breach of their payment notice obligations and no payment was due.

2) Our client was a main contractor who was completing building works for a development company. Our client sub-contracted an element of the works to a sub-contractor. A dispute arose as to what was payable to the sub-contractor and whether payless notices were valid. In this case, it was clear that the Statutory Scheme had not been complied with and our client referred the matter to an Adjudicator for a true value of the works undertaken by the sub-contractor. The sub-contractor was unable to demonstrate the value of work it had undertaken and no further payment was found to be due.

3) We acted for a sub-contractor company which contracted to undertake maintenance works under a framework agreement. Payless notices were issued by the contractor and our client contested their validity., Our client later commenced a true value adjudication which was successful.

Analysis

In each of these disputes our clients were successful for two specific reasons:

1              They maintained good records; and

2              They won on the law by analysing the facts and applying the law appropriately.

Non-compliance with the contractual (or statutory) regime is commonplace and generally does not cause an issue where the parties have a good relationship and there is no dispute. Unfortunately, disputes will inevitably arise in some construction contracts in terms of valuation and payment. 

Operating under compliant contracts and understanding what notices are due, in what form and when are key to succeeding in adjudications.

If you need assistance with a construction dispute, or advice on how to ensure your payment regime is compliant, please contact us on 020 3814 2020.

This article is for general information only and does not constitute legal or professional advice.

Excluding liability for dishonest breach – A warning

The recent case of Innovate Pharmaceuticals Ltd v University of Portsmouth Higher Education Corporation [2024] EWHC 35 (TCC) provides a salient reminder of the need for parties to carefully consider the limitation of liability in contracts and the construction of these clauses.

Innovate sought damages from the University of Portsmouth arising from a Research Agreement between the parties concerning research into a drug patented by Innovate. An academic paper was published by the University which Innovate alleged had been “infected by dishonesty” because the author of the paper (a scientist at the University) either knew, or was reckless as to whether, the paper was in-part fabricated.

The Research Agreement included an exclusion of liability clause as follows:-

“…the University is not liable to [Innovate] because of any representation (unless fraudulent) or any warranty (express or implied), condition or other term, or any duty at common law, or under the express terms of this Agreement for any loss of profits, business, contracts, opportunity, goodwill, revenues, anticipated savings, expenses, costs or other similar loss; and/or any indirect, special or consequential damages or losses (whether for loss of profits or otherwise).”

Innovate sought to claim loss of profits in excess of £1 million on the basis that it alleged there had been a dishonest breach of the Research Agreement by the University.

The issue before the Court was the construction of the limitation clause. The sole carve out in the exclusion clause was for ‘fraudulent misrepresentation’. As a matter of construction the word ‘fraudulent’ applied only to representation and not to the remainder of the clause. The Court found that the exclusion of liability was applicable to all claims except where the claim was based upon a fraudulent misrepresentation. Therefore a dishonest breach of contract was not sufficient to defeat the exclusion of liability.

Further the Court found that the exclusion of liability was reasonable for the purposes of the Unfair Contract Terms Act 1977 and enforceable. The clause did not provide a blanket exclusion for all liability. There was no inequality in the parties bargaining power. A legally qualified individual had negotiated the Research Agreement on behalf of Innovate. Innovate did not blindly accept the terms put to it but actively negotiated amendments including to the wider exclusion clause. Further, the University was being paid a sum far below the commercial market rate for the work to be undertaken and therefore, it was reasonable that it sought to limit its liability for potentially significant sums far in excess of those rates, on the basis of acts of its agents.

The construction of a clause is an issue that needs to be considered on a case-by-case basis. However, this case is a stark reminder that although a clause may not expressly refer to any limitation for a claim of dishonest breach, it may well be caught and excluded by the overall construction of the clause. Careful review of any exclusion and limitation clauses is essential for parties before entering into any agreement.

If you would like to discuss any aspect of this article or require any further information or advice, please contact Jade Salton-Brooks on jkb@blasermills.co.uk.

The UK-US Data Bridge – What has it changed?

The 12th October 2023 saw the introduction of the UK-US Data Bridge (‘the Data Bridge’), transforming the way both nations handle the flow of information across their borders.

Pre-Data Bridge

Before the Data Bridge, the lawful transfer of personal data from an organisation based in the UK to a counterpart in the US was governed by complex regulations, specifically the EU-US Privacy Shield (‘the Privacy Shield’), the EU General Data Protection Regulation (‘UK GDPR’) and the UK General Data Protection Regulation (‘UK GDPR’).

EU-US Privacy Shield

From July 2016 until July 2020, the Privacy Shield partially governed the exchange of personal data between the US and EU (and then the UK, post-Brexit) for commercial purposes. Its purpose was to enable US organisations to easily receive personal data from EU entities under EU privacy laws, which intended to protect EU citizens. After concerns about the US government surveillance practices and their impact on the privacy of EU citizens’ personal data, the Privacy Shield was invalidated by the European Court of Justice in 2020, creating uncertainty in the transatlantic data-sharing network.

Alternative Data Transfer Mechanisms

By removing the Privacy Shield, UK organisations wishing to transfer personal data to the US had to rely on alternative data transfer mechanisms such as Standard Contractual Clauses (‘SCCs’) and Binding Corporate Rules (‘BCRs’).

Most UK organisations relied on SCCs to lawfully transfer personal data to the US following the demise of the Privacy Shield. However, SCCs were only deemed a lawful mechanism if the data exporter also carried out a potentially complex transfer impact assessment to consider whether the protection for UK data subjects under the UK data protection regime would be undermined by US laws.

In March 2022, the International Data Transfer Agreements (IDTAs) superseded the EU SCCs in the UK after the UK GDPR replaced the EU GDPR in January 2021. IDTAs operate in a similar way to SCCs and therefore, need to be accompanied by a transfer risk assessment to ensure that the transfer adequately protects the rights of UK data subjects.

EU-US Data Privacy Framework

On 25th March 2022, the US and EU announced the EU-US Data Privacy Framework (‘DPF’) which provided a mechanism for personal data to transfer safely from the EU to US organisations participating in the DPF, without the need for additional data protection safeguards. This came into force on 10th July 2023 after the European Commission’s decision that the US ensures an adequate level of protection for personal data transferred under the new framework.

UK-US Data Bridge

The Data Bridge is the UK extension to the DPF, allowing personal data to be transferred from the UK to organisations in the US which are participating in the DPF, with no further safeguards necessary. However, any transfer under the UK extension must be made to a DPF-certified US organisation which has opted into the UK extension. Additionally, any data transferred by this method which is ordinarily covered by the UK GDPR will be subject to the principles of the DPF.

To self-certify, eligible US organisations must agree with the DPF principles, which provide data protections for personal data transferred from the EU. Following this, they must make a public commitment to comply via a published privacy policy. The principles impose commitments in relation to data protection and set out requirements on how an organisation collects, processes, and discloses personal data.

Certain categories of personal data that are treated as ‘special category’ data under the UK GDPR are no considered ‘sensitive’ information under the DPF unless they have been identified as sensitive by the transferring organisation. The categories that must be expressly flagged as sensitive are:

  • Biometric data;
  • Data concerning sexual orientation;
  • Genetic data; and
  • Criminal offence data.

The following rights are not protected under the DPF but are provided for the in the UK GDPR:

  • The right to be forgotten under the UK GDPR;
  • The rights under the UK GDPR relating to decisions based solely on automated processing; and
  • The unconditional right to withdraw consent to data processing.

Before relying on the Data Bridge as a valid transfer mechanism, UK businesses should ensure that all pre-transfer requirements and considerations are satisfied and made.

Benefits

  • Legal clarity – the Data Bridge provides a clear legal framework for data transfers, reducing uncertainty for businesses and individuals in both the UK and US.
  • Enhanced security – agreement prioritises data security, ensuring that personal data remains safe during transit and storage.
  • Reduced compliance costs – administrative obligations under the Data Bridge are much reduced compared to those under alternative compliance measures. The Data Bridge therefore represents a more cost-effective means for businesses to operate in the UK and US.
  • Swift dispute resolution – Data Bridge includes mechanisms for swift resolution of data-related disputes, reducing the need for lengthy legal battles and associated costs. 

Challenges

  • Data privacy – it has been suggested that the agreement may no go far enough in safeguarding data privacy – it is crucial for governments and businesses to strike the right balance between data and individual privacy rights.
  • Security risks – as data sharing becomes more streamlined, there is always the risk of increased exposure to security threats.
  • Regulatory compatibility – Data Bridge must work in harmony with existing data protection regulations like the UK GDPR and US Privacy Act to ensure a seamless and compliant data-sharing environment.

If your business requires advice on its compliance with the Data Bridge, our data protection lawyers can help. For further information please contact James Simpson 01494 478689  on or email jfs@blasermills.co.uk.

This article is not intended to constitute legal advice and you should not take, or refrain from taking, any action based on the information which it contains. Always seek the services of a professional legal adviser.

Benefits of family mediation

January 22nd – 26th marks Family Mediation Week, an opportunity to raise awareness of family mediation and the benefits it may bring to separating families.

Family mediation is a process in which an independent and professionally trained mediator helps separating couples resolve any challenges and disputes faced when parting ways. The mediator will help you to work out arrangements for things such as housing, children, and finances, including pensions and other assets.

Mediation involves an initial assessment meeting, often referred to as a MIAM – Mediation information and assessment meeting, where the mediator will see you on your own to discuss the process and find out what you are hoping to achieve and for you both to consider whether mediation will be appropriate in your case. There will then be a series of joint sessions between you and your partner, which are facilitated by a mediator. The mediator will help you and your partner make decisions in a constructive and confidential setting, making sure all disputes are resolved with as little conflict as possible.

If you do not feel comfortable with face-to- face mediation, the mediator will offer video mediation or shuttle mediation – where you will each be in a separate room and the mediator will shuttle between you.

What are the benefits?
There are several benefits to the mediation process, some of which are set out below:

Cost effective: Mediation tends to be more cost-effective than involving solicitors. Even if you do not come up with a complete agreement in mediation, the mediator should help you narrow the issues that are being disputed.

Confidential: Disputes resolved through mediation and not in court are completely confidential for both parties involved.

Faster outcome: Mediation generally takes less time to complete, allowing for an earlier solution than through the legal or court route.

More control: Mediation increases the control both parties have over the resolution. Both parties are involved in negotiating their own agreement and no settlement can be imposed upon you.

It improves communication: The mediation process helps both parties to focus on communicating effectively and relieves the pressure and stress that court disputes may bring.

Flexible: The process is informal and there are no formal rules and evidence required although the mediators at Blaser Mills Law will explain the advantages of full financial disclosure.

How Blaser Mills Law can help
By focusing on clear and open communication, family mediation has the potential to get you and your partner on the same page.

Voucher Scheme
Blaser Mills Law is part of the Family Mediation Voucher scheme, where in some cases, we can help you claim up to £500 towards your mediation costs.

The Ministry of Justice scheme, offers contributions of up to £500 per case/family for mediation that includes the arrangements for the children / child , encouraging people to seek to resolve their disputes outside of court where appropriate to do so.

The purpose of the scheme is to promote the benefits of mediation and divert matters where appropriate away from the family courts which are backlogged and a much more contentious way of trying to resolve most cases.

Lucinda Holliday
With over 10 years of experience in mediation, Lucinda Holliday qualified as a mediator in 2011 and became accredited in 2018.  Lucinda went on to qualify as a child inclusive mediation in 2020 which means she can facilitate your children being heard in the mediation process when relevant.

She is an expert in her field with expertise in dissolution, divorce, and separation and the associated financial issues and children matters that might occur as a result of the breakdown of a relationship.

To speak to Lucinda further about family mediation services call 01494 478603 or email ljmh@blasermills.co.uk.

Child Care team receives Competence Plus (2) award from the Legal Aid Agency

We are delighted to announce that our Child Care team has been awarded Competence Plus (2) recognition, in the family category, from the Legal Aid Agency Peer Review Report.

The team has been praised for its excellent communication, tailored advice, proactive approach, and ability to achieve great outcomes for its clients.

Denise Herman, Partner and Head of the Child Care team, commented: ‘This achievement is a testament to the dedication and hard work carried out by the Child Care team, who consistently go above and beyond to ensure the families we act for achieve the best possible outcomes during what can be a challenging time.

It reminds us of our ongoing commitment to making a positive impact in the lives of the families we assist’.

For further information or advice from the Child Care team please email enquiries@blasermills.co.uk.

Benefits of instructing a local conveyancer to handle your move

We often find ourselves turning to the internet for various aspects of our daily lives, including tasks like banking, shopping, and ordering takeaways.  However, this might not be the best choice when it comes to property transactions which are a significant financial commitment for most individuals.

Many people assume that the conveyancing process is straightforward, this is far from the truth and difficulties can often arise as matters progress.  Challenges often surface as matters progress, and it is essential to have a skilled professional who can handle these situations, ensuring a smoother and less stressful experience for you.

Sam Bellia, Partner in the Residential Property team at Blaser Mills Law, outlines the key benefits of instructing a local solicitor as opposed to an online e-conveyancer.

  1. Local knowledge and expertise: A local solicitor will have personal knowledge of the area and will be aware of developments with specific issues.
  2. Face to face communication: You can book in a face-to-face meeting with your local solicitor at any point during the transaction.
  3. Witnessing documents: Many documents will need to be witnessed by someone independent and not related to you. These can be signed and witnessed at the office of a local law firm.
  4. Time sensitive matters: On some occasions, matters can become time sensitive which means you can visit your solicitor directly and hand over the hard copy of the documents rather than worry about postal arrangements.
  5. No hidden costs: Many local law firms pride themselves on transparency when it comes to costs. E-conveyancing firms are often known to add on hidden costs throughout the process.
  6. Reputation: Local law firms are usually recommended based on their reputation and expertise. The recommendations can come from the likes of estate agents, financial advisors or even friends and family.
  7. Local connections: A local law firm will have relationships with other professionals that can assist you with your property transaction, such as mortgage brokers and surveyors.
  8. A personal touch: E-conveyancing firms often handle a large volume of cases and lack personal contact with the client, often leaving you to deal with multiple agents. Using a local law firm, like Blaser Mills Law, means you will have a designated lawyer representing you and taking care of your requirements.
  9. Property transactions and beyond: Your local law firm will be able to service all your legal needs, becoming your go to legal partner throughout various stages of your life.

Why choose Balser Mills Law
Blaser Mills Law is regulated by the Solicitors Regulation Authority meaning we are accountable.  We have also been awarded the Conveyancing Quality Scheme accreditation by the Law Society which is a recognised quality standard regulated law firms dealing with residential conveyancing and is a symbol of certain standards of competence and client service levels being met. 

Get in touch
If you are thinking about moving home and are looking for a local, personal service to assist you with the legal aspect of the process, please get in touch with Sam on 01494 478609 or email sxb@blasermills.co.uk.