DEMITONResearch / Disputes statistics / No published New Zealand figure for the value of close-out, defects, final account or retention disputes
No published New Zealand figure for the value of close-out, defects, final account or retention disputes
This figure is outside your filter. Clear the filter.
No published New Zealand figure for the value of close-out, defects, final account or retention disputes: no defensible figure has been published (Building Disputes Tribunal (Te Taraipiunara Tautohe Hanga Whare), 2023; New Zealand; low confidence).
What it is. None - New Zealand sources state a typical retention rate and count final-payment cases, but none measures the value of close-out disputes.
Sample. Searched: MBIE Construction Contracts Act review adjudication statistics retentions regulatory impact statement; New Zealand retention money regime review KPMG MBIE retentions held estimated value subcontractors; KPMG 2019 implementation review retention money regime survey percentage released late; Weathertight Homes Resolution Service claims statistics average claim value building defects; New Zealand construction disputes causes survey; New Zealand Building Disputes Tribunal AMINZ statistics. Frequencies exist: 28% of Russell McVeagh's 2026 respondents (95, late 2025) expect defective or incomplete work to cause disputes; 25% of the 40 High Court payment cases in Ramachandra and Rotimi 2011 were about final payments; retention is commonly 2% to 10% of contract value (MBIE 2020 and 2021, a stated practice range with no sample) or up to 10% on a sliding scale (KPMG 2019, 71 firms). Neither is a dispute cost or a share of contract value that was disputed. KPMG's review was readable at building.govt.nz and the Weathertight Homes statistics through the Internet Archive copy; neither holds a value for close-out disputes. Not opened: the Arcadis and HKA disputes reports (their published figures are global or North American; no New Zealand split was found); Jelodar et al. 2016 (ASCE, paywalled, read only as summarised in Silva et al. 2023).
What it is not. Recorded as none on purpose. A retention rate is how much is held as routine security, so multiplying it by a contract value would overstate what is disputed at close-out. The UK retention figure in the corpus (entitlement_retention_held) is not New Zealand evidence.
Where it came from
- Building Disputes Tribunal (Te Taraipiunara Tautohe Hanga Whare) (2023), Tracking the Trends: A report on statutory adjudication in Aotearoa New Zealand 2003-2023'Types of issues', p.29 (the tribunal says it has not collected detailed statistics on the types of issues referred; defective or incomplete work claims are listed as common) · source record
Considered and set aside
- Ramachandra and Rotimi: 40 High Court payment cases, 2008-2010: 10 (25%) concerned final payments and 1 retention, with claimed amounts per case but no close-out total or recovery rate for them.
- Ministry of Business, Innovation and Employment: MBIE 2020 impact summary states retention is held at between 2 and 10 per cent of the contract price and paid after 12 months; a stated practice range with no sample, and not the amount disputed or overdue.
- Ministry of Business, Innovation and Employment: MBIE 2021 disclosure statement repeats the 2% to 10% range and the 12 month release; no count or value of retention withheld or disputed.
- Ministry of Business, Innovation and Employment (Building Performance): MBIE retention complaints page: fine ceilings of $50,000 (individual) and $200,000 (company) for breaches; no complaint counts or outcomes.
- Standards New Zealand: Draft contract wording for practical completion, final account, defects liability and retention (clauses 9.11, 10.4, 11; p.57); mechanisms, not data.
- Russell McVeagh: 2020 survey: 19% expect quality or inexperience issues to cause disputes; no close-out item and no amounts.
- Hesketh Henry: Practitioner paper that divides disputes into payment and defect claims and notes defects surface long after completion; no figures.
- Silva, Domingo and Ameer Ali (Massey University): 35 court cases: quality of works is the area of 4 cases and testing and inspection of 1; no final account, retention or practical completion category, no amounts.
- Russell McVeagh: 2026 survey of 95 New Zealand professionals (late 2025): 28% expect defective or incomplete work to cause disputes, and 92% say their contracts typically provide for retentions, 80% of those in cash (pp.17-19); shares of respondents, no dollars and no retention amount or rate.
- KPMG (for the Ministry of Business, Innovation and Employment): MBIE-commissioned review of the retention regime (survey of 223 firms, 71 responses, plus interviews): retention up to 10% of contract value, released half at practical completion and half at the end of the defects liability period; interviewees knew of no retention disputes before adjudicators. Its dollar figures are four insolvencies (about $8.35m held), not disputes, and it measures no value of retentions held or disputed.
- Ministry of Business, Innovation and Employment: MBIE monthly counts of weathertightness claims (7,377 claims for 12,810 properties at 31 January 2019): counts only, no claim value, and homeowners' defect claims rather than contractor close-out disputes.
- Ramachandra and Rotimi: Survey in which disputes over quality of work score 3.53 out of 5 as a cause of payment problems (a perception score, not money); retention appears only in its literature review.