Private works of improvement: retention proceeds.
Summary
Existing law generally regulates the terms and conditions of contracts for private works of improvement. Existing law requires that, within 45 days after the date of completion, as defined, retention proceeds withheld from any payment by the owner to the original contractor, or by the original contractor to any subcontractor, be released, except as specified. Existing law provides that, if a bona fide dispute exists between an original contractor and a subcontractor, the original contractor may withhold from the retention payment up to 150% of the disputed amount. This bill, applicable to contracts entered into on or after January 1, 2010, would prohibit retention proceeds withheld from any payment made by the owner to the original contractor from exceeding 5% of the amount of the payment otherwise due under the contract. The bill would prohibit the percentage of the retention proceeds withheld from any payment made by the original contractor to any subcontractor, or by a subcontractor to another subcontractor, from exceeding 5% of the amount of the payment otherwise due under the contract, or the percentage of each payment that may be withheld under the contract between the owner and the original contractor, whichever is less. This bill would require that with respect to a contract between an owner and an original contractor, between an original contractor and a subcontractor, or between 2 subcontractors, any retention proceeds withheld shall be released within 45 days after the party seeking payment serves a fully executed conditional waiver and release, as provided. The bill would provide that it does not prohibit the withholding of funds pursuant to the above provisions of law governing amounts in dispute. This bill would also provide that these provisions shall not apply if the owner or original contractor provides written notice to the original contractor or subcontractor, prior to or at the time that the bid is requested, that performance and payment bonds may be required.
Bill status
died
4 of 5 stages cleared
Introduction
Feb 2009
Committee Review
Jun 2009
Senate Passage
Jun 2009
Assembly Passage
Aug 2009
Governor
Introduced Feb 27, 2009
Last action Nov 30, 2010
Floor votes · Senate Jun 1, 2009 · Assembly Aug 20, 2009
How they voted
31–6
Passed · 2 other
Total votes 39
Jun 1, 2009
D
Democratic24
95% Yea
R
Republican15
53% Yea
Vote distribution
All Yea
All Nay
Mixed
No data
Full legislative history
Actions timeline
Total actions
22
Key actions
5
Committee
2
Amendments
1
Aug 20, 2009
Assembly · Passed
Assembly Vote: pass (49-19-5)
assembly
Jun 30, 2009
Lower · Passed
(Heard in committee on June 30.)
lower
Jun 30, 2009
Lower · Passed
From committee: Do pass. (Ayes 6. Noes 3.)
lower
Jun 1, 2009
Senate · Passed
Senate Vote: pass (31-6-2)
senate
Apr 20, 2009
Upper · Passed
From committee: Do pass as amended. (Ayes 4. Noes 1. Page 497.)
upper
Feb 27, 2009
Introduced
Introduced. To Com. on RLS. for assignment. To print.
upper
1 primary · 0 co-sponsors
Sponsors
Role
Legislator
Party
State
District
P
CL
Carol Liu
DDemocratic
Ask Maddy
·
AI policy assistant
Ask Maddy about SB 629
Scope: CA
Hi! I can help you understand SB 629. What would you like to know?
Try one of these
i
Maddy answers using official bill text and legislative records. Always verify before sharing.
Sources cited inline