As of Jan. 1, 2023, pay-if-paid clauses are unenforceable, regardless of whether a surety/payment bond claim is involved. This is only for subcontracts created on/after 1/1/23.
Also for subcontracts created on/after 1/1/23, the prime must specifically identify and notify the sub of withholding as underlined below.
Per Va Code 11-4.6(C), for any withholding, the prime “shall notify the subcontractor, in writing, of his intention to withhold all or a part of the subcontractor’s payment with the reason for nonpayment, specifically identifying the contractual noncompliance, the dollar amount being withheld, and the lower-tier subcontractor responsible for the contractual noncompliance.”
Per Va Code 2.2-4354(1), (SB 550) Requires construction contracts awarded by state or local government agencies “as well as certain private construction contracts in which there is at least one general contractor and one subcontractor” to include a payment clause that obligates the contractors to be liable for the entire amount owed to any subcontractor with which it contracts. The bill provides that “a contractor shall not be liable for amounts otherwise reducible due to the subcontractor’s noncompliance with the terms of the contract; however, the contractor must notify the subcontractor in writing of the contractor’s intent to withhold all or a part of the subcontractor’s payment with the reason for such nonpayment.”
The legislature has not yet, but is working, to reconcile the specificity required by one code section that the other section more broadly outlines.
Insurance Company Had No Duty to Defend Under Eight Corners Rule
To decide if an insurer has a duty to defend, a Virginia State or Federal Court may only look at the allegations in the complaint and the insurance policy to determine if a judgment against the insured will be covered by the policy.
Owner SOL When Mandatory Mediation Didn’t Toll Statute of Limitations
Contract interpretation strives to find the meaning of all parts together.
Government Must Review Claims in Good Faith, Not “Conjure Up” a “Baseless Retaliation”
A contracting officer’s review of certified claims submitted in good faith is not intended to be a negotiating game where the agency may deny meritorious claims to gain leverage over the contractor.
Termination for Convenience was OK to Get a Lower Price
When Massachusetts’ highest State court rejected Federal law on termination for convenience (T4C) a public entity’s “sole discretion . . . for […]
Pirates (Parties) Should Arbitrate Arbitrability
Yes, the word “pirates” is an anagram for “parties.” Participants in a lawsuit, arbitration, or mediation are collectively referred to as parties. Are they pirates too?
Very Bad Behavior Without Bad Faith is Not a Breach of Contract
Despite “abhorrent” behavior by the Army Corps of Engineers, a majority of the Armed Services Board of Contract Appeals held there was […]
Government Construction Contracts Require Bonds, Even When Contract Doesn’t Say So
Yesterday (Nov. 5, 2018), the Fed. Cir. Ct. of Appeals again endorsed the Christian doctrine, which can make unstated requirements part of a government contract.
Government’s Negligent Estimate a Trick?
The Government’s negligent estimate failed to provide the “most current information available.”
Prime Contractor Had No Duty to Help Surety Investigate Sub’s Default
We all know what happens when we “ASS-U-ME” something. So, we should all carefully avoid assuming things unnecessarily.
