This is the property of the Daily Journal Corporation and fully protected by copyright. It is made available only to Daily Journal subscribers for personal or collaborative purposes and may not be distributed, reproduced, modified, stored or transferred without written permission. Please click "Reprint" to order presentation-ready copies to distribute to clients or use in commercial marketing materials or for permission to post on a website. and copyright (showing year of publication) at the bottom.

self-study / Real Estate

Feb. 4, 2026

California enacts law to speed contractor payment disputes on private projects

Daniel F. McLennon

Attorney
Smith Currie Oles LLP

See more...

 

Addressing one of contractors' main causes of pain, in 2015, the California Legislature passed AB 626 that established a mandated process for timely resolving contractor change order requests and claims on public works projects, except for those of certain enumerated public owners, during the project. That measure resulted in Public Contracts Code section 9204. The section 9204 process has met with mixed reviews.

SB 440, known as the Private Works Change Order Fair Payment Act (SB 440, Ochoa Bogh) (codified at Civil Code section 8850) presents a private works analog to AB 626 applicable to contracts entered on or after Jan. 1, 2026. SB 440 is more protective for contractors and subcontractors on private projects than AB 626 is for public projects. SB 440 covers almost all private projects, with the exception of residential projects that are under four stories and do not include mixed uses. 

AB 626 expires at the end of 2026 if not renewed, and SB 440 will expire unless renewed before Jan. 1, 2030. Contractors would benefit if, as a condition renewal, AB 626 were required to incorporate aspects of SB 440.

Claims definition and presentation

Both laws define "claims" the same, generally as a written demand (all notices and demands in these enactments must be sent by registered or certified mail, return receipt requested) for a time extension, payment for work performed (where not otherwise owed), or disputed payment amounts. In each case, the claimant must furnish reasonable documentation to support the claim.

On the public works side, the direct contractor may present the subcontractors' claims to the public owner, but the direct contractor owes no obligation to present such claims and may simply write to the subcontractor, stating the reasons the claim is not presented. Conversely, on the private side, under SB 440, the direct contractor shall submit the subcontractor's claim to the owner, the direct contractor shall exercise good faith in fulfilling their obligations on behalf of the subcontractor, and the direct contractor shall make no settlement of any claim to which the subcontractor does not approve, in writing. If the direct contractor presents the subcontractor's claim, the subcontractor must provide documentary support and assist the contractor in the informal conference, mediation and dispute resolution processes. As under AB 626, the direct contractor under SB 440 must provide a statement to the subcontractor specifying the reasons if the direct contractor does not submit the subcontractor's claim to the owner.

Owner response obligations and interest

Both laws require the public or private owner to perform a "reasonable review" and respond in a writing identifying disputed and undisputed amounts. AB 626 allows public entities 45 days to respond to the claim, whereas SB 440 requires private owners to respond in 30 days. Both laws require payment of undisputed amounts within 60 days. Under AB 626, a public entity must pay interest of only 7% annually for undisputed amounts withheld. On the other hand, SB 440 calls for interest from the private owner at 2% per month on the unpaid, due amount. Similarly, the same interest rates apply in public and private projects on amounts found to have been disputed without legal justification.

Informal conference, mediation and dispute resolution

If the claimant disagrees with the public entity's or private owner's decision about the claim, or the owner fails to respond timely, the claimant may demand in writing an informal conference to meet and confer for settlement of the issues in dispute. This conference must take place within 30 days of the demand. As with the original demand, the public or private owner must, within 10 days, provide in writing the owner's statement identifying the portion of the claim that remains in dispute and the portion that is undisputed. Again, undisputed amounts must be paid within 60 days. Amounts remaining in dispute must be submitted to mediation, unless both sides agree to waive mediation. If mediation is waived or fails, then the contract's other dispute resolution procedures must be followed, such as arbitration or litigation. Neither AB 626 nor SB 440 provides for recovery of attorney fees by the wronged contractor or subcontractor.

Contractors granted right to stop work

Whereas AB 626 does not provide contractors the right to stop work on public projects, SB 440 provides that right on private works projects until payment is made. Before stopping work, the contractor or subcontractor must provide the owner with two notices. The first is to notify the owner that payment is due, or if the owner failed to respond timely or attend mediation, that the claim is deemed denied. After 30 days, the second notice may be issued, informing the owner that the contractor or subcontractor will stop work if the owner has not made payment within 10 days.

SB 440 cannot be waived

The new law states expressly that the rights conferred by its provisions cannot be waived, and any attempted waiver is void and against public policy. Nonetheless, SB 440 does provide that the parties may agree in writing after a claim has arisen to forego the informal conference and mediation provisions and proceed directly to a civil action or arbitration, as applicable.

Conclusion

Contractors will want to revise their prime and subcontracts to comply with the new law, and customize them as allowed by law, without violating the new provisions.

#1788

Submit your own column for publication to Diana Bosetti


Related Tests for Real estate

self-study/Real Estate

How to minimize complications when arbitrating real estate disputes

By Bernard M. Resser

self-study/Real Estate

Security deposits

By David Greene, Joseph Kellener

self-study/Real Estate

Top 5 real estate cases of 2020

By Motunrayo D. Akinmurele, Zi C. Lin, Ryan C. Squire

self-study/Real Estate

SB 1079 is a set back for both lenders and borrowers

By Robert S. McWhorter, Jarrett Osborne-Revis

self-study/Real Estate

Can you count?

By Guido I. Piotti