The consumer versus cashflow
Language: English Series: Construction News ; (7022) 14 June 2007, 26(1)Publication details: 2007Subject(s): Summary: Discusses the legal situation for the protection of contractors' cashflow. The Construction Act provides for this, but dopes not apply to contracts with resident occupiers. Such occupiers are protected by the Unfair Terms in Consumer Contracts Regulations. In a landmark ruling, a clause requiring that a residential occupier serve a withholding notice has been held unenforceable. As a result, contractors may consider entering into contracts with residential occupiers is riskier. Courts may enquire into the correctness of adjudicator rulings before enforcement against residential occupiers.| Item type | Current library | Call number | Copy number | Status | Barcode | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Journal article | London Journal article | L138579 (Browse shelf(Opens below)) | 1 | Available | 138579-1001 |
Browsing London shelves, Shelving location: Journal article Close shelf browser (Hides shelf browser)
Discusses the legal situation for the protection of contractors' cashflow. The Construction Act provides for this, but dopes not apply to contracts with resident occupiers. Such occupiers are protected by the Unfair Terms in Consumer Contracts Regulations. In a landmark ruling, a clause requiring that a residential occupier serve a withholding notice has been held unenforceable. As a result, contractors may consider entering into contracts with residential occupiers is riskier. Courts may enquire into the correctness of adjudicator rulings before enforcement against residential occupiers.