Guide · Victoria · updated July 2026
Security of payment in Victoria: what changed, and what it means for your records.
Victoria's security of payment regime changed on 15 April 2026. For subcontractors the practical effect is that more of what you were already losing is now claimable. Whether you can actually recover it depends on something most subbies only discover after the fact: whether anyone wrote down the baseline.
What changed
Excluded amounts are gone.
The Building Legislation Amendment (Fairer Payments on Jobsites and Other Matters) Act amended the Building and Construction Industry Security of Payment Act 2002 (Vic) with effect from 15 April 2026. The headline change is the repeal of sections 10A and 10B, which removed two concepts unique to Victoria: excluded amounts and claimable variations.
Under the old regime, Victoria was the only state that barred whole categories of entitlement from being pursued through a payment claim. Time related costs sat outside. So did amounts arising from latent conditions, and variations that had not been agreed in writing. A subbie could be genuinely owed money and still have no route to it through the statutory process, which pushed those disputes into slower and more expensive forums where the smaller party usually gives up first.
With those provisions repealed, the categories that were previously shut out can now form part of a payment claim. Victoria moves closer to how the other states already operated.
⚠️ Whether a particular amount is claimable on your contract is a legal question that turns on the contract and the facts. This page is not legal advice and does not state entitlements or time limits. See the note at the foot of this page.
Why it matters commercially
The money was always leaving. Now there is a route to it.
Most contractors lose more on a job after they win it than they ever lose bidding it.
The verbal variation
Agreed on site, never priced, never confirmed in writing. Previously the hardest category to pursue in Victoria. Now it is not automatically shut out, which makes the question of what you can evidence far more valuable than it was.
The delay nobody claimed
Access late, a preceding trade running over, a redesign mid-job. The crew was on site and being paid regardless. Time related costs sat outside the old regime entirely.
The condition nobody expected
Ground that was not what the drawings implied, structure that was not where it was shown. Latent conditions were another excluded category.
The part that decides it
A claim is only as good as the record underneath it.
A wider set of claimable categories does not help anyone who cannot evidence the claim. This is where most subcontractors are exposed, and it is decided long before the dispute.
What was the original scope?
To show that work sits outside the contract, there has to be a measured record of what was inside it. If the only record is a lump sum price and a set of drawings nobody measured line by line, the argument becomes your recollection against theirs. That is the weakest position to claim from, and the party with the bigger commercial team usually wins it.
What were the planned hours?
A disruption or delay argument compares what was planned against what actually happened. Without a recorded planned-hours baseline there is no "planned" side of that comparison. This is precisely why a labour-hours schedule is included in every takeoff we deliver rather than sold separately: a job measured without it cannot support this argument later.
Was it captured while it was happening?
Records made contemporaneously carry weight. Records assembled months later, once the money is already in dispute, carry much less. A variation register kept as you go, with dates and drawing revisions, is worth more than a reconstruction built from memory and photos.
Which drawing revision was it measured against?
Most scope disputes are really revision disputes. Two parties looking at different issues of the same drawing will both be certain they are right. Recording the revision and date on every measured page removes that argument before it starts.
The underlying point
The takeoff is the evidentiary baseline.
Measurement is usually thought of as a pricing exercise: work out the quantities, apply rates, submit the number, move on. That undersells what it is.
The takeoff is the record of what was agreed to be built. You can only prove a variation sits outside scope if someone measured the scope at the start. You can only prove disruption against planned labour if someone recorded the planned hours. When a final account is argued twelve months from now, the original measured quantities are what it is argued against. That is what makes measurement and commercial support one discipline rather than two, and it is why the cheapest possible takeoff is rarely the cheapest outcome.
The reform widened what Victorian subcontractors can claim. It did nothing to change the fact that a claim without a baseline is an assertion. If you are pricing commercial work in Victoria now, the most useful thing you can do for a dispute you have not had yet is to make sure the job starts with a measured record.
Where we fit
Our part is the numbers and the record.
We are not lawyers and we do not give legal advice. What we do is the commercial layer underneath one: measure the package at the start so the baseline exists, record the planned hours, keep the variation register straight and priced, and put the numbers together in a form that stands up when someone tests them. Where a matter needs legal advice, that comes from a construction lawyer, and we can coordinate that around your deadline rather than leaving you to find one mid-dispute.
If you are pricing a commercial tender now, the useful conversation is about the baseline, not the claim. If you are already in one, talk to a construction lawyer first.
Common questions
Questions we get asked.
When did the changes take effect?
The amending Act was proclaimed and the amendments took effect from 15 April 2026.
Does this apply to contracts signed before then?
Some of the amendments were expressed to operate in relation to existing construction contracts as well as new ones. How that operates on any particular contract is a legal question and depends on the provision and the facts. Ask a construction lawyer about your contract rather than assuming either way.
Does this change anything outside Victoria?
No. Each state and territory has its own security of payment legislation. Victoria's excluded amounts regime was the outlier, so the effect of this reform is to bring Victoria closer to the position elsewhere rather than to change the position elsewhere.
Do you prepare payment claims?
Progress claims, variation pricing and registers, and delay claims are part of the commercial support we provide once a project is live, built on the quantities measured at the start. Start with a conversation about the job you are pricing now.
⚠️ Not legal advice. This page describes what changed and what it means for the commercial records a subcontractor keeps. It is general information only, it is not legal advice, and it must not be relied on as a statement of entitlement or of any time limit. Security of payment processes are strict and deadline-driven, and the consequences of missing a date are severe. Get advice from a construction lawyer about your specific contract and circumstances.