What鈥檚 really depressing about Wates鈥� explanation of its retention period is that it鈥檚 symptomatic of how contractors鈥� view payment

Vern Pitt

This week鈥檚 news that Wates and Balfour Beatty are using retention periods of at least six months longer than the JCT standard is depressing. Even the longest recession in the post-war era hasn鈥檛 inspired our sector to work together better.

What鈥檚 really depressing is that Wates鈥� explanation is symptomatic of how contractors view payment. A spokesman said: 鈥淲ates Group policy on retention is in line with industry practice to provide certainty of payment on retention, where an element is released upon the completion of the subcontract works rather than upon practical completion of our works, and payment of the remainder released at a pre-agreed date.鈥�

That sounds like paying subcontractors on completion of a project is a viable option and Wates is going above and beyond to help its subcontractors. But making retention payments dependent on the completion of other works is illegal under the 2011 amendments to the Construction Act.

So, Wates鈥� response amounts to 鈥渨e aren鈥檛 breaking the law鈥�, which should go without saying. It鈥檚 certainly not worth shouting about.

Vern Pitt, senior reporter

Topics