A “no liens” clause reads like protection. Under the statute, it isn't one.
Short answer
No. In British Columbia, any agreement that says the Builders Lien Act doesn't apply, or that its remedies aren't available to someone, is void by statute. A contract can shape administration — how notices are given, when a certificate issues — but it cannot make the underlying lien or trust right disappear.
British Columbia’s Builders Lien Act, s.42 voids “an agreement that this Act is not to apply, or that the remedies provided by it are not to be available for a person's benefit.” That's not a narrow drafting rule — it's a blanket ban on contracting out of the Act altogether, for anyone the Act was meant to protect.
The holdback obligation carries the same protection from a different angle. Section 4(1) requires a 10% retention on the value of work done, and s.4(2) confirms it applies “whether or not the contract or subcontract provides for periodic payments or payment on completion.” A payment schedule can be negotiated. The requirement to hold back 10% of it cannot.
Lien and trust legislation exists to protect the people furthest down the payment chain — subtrades, suppliers, workers — who typically have no direct contract with the owner at all. If the top of the chain could simply write the protection away, everyone below them would lose it without ever having agreed to that.
What's still genuinely negotiable is administration that doesn't conflict with the statute — how notices are delivered, project-specific reporting, or the staged release of holdback per subcontract once a certificate of completion issues under s.9(1). That's a statutory mechanism the parties are using, not a waiver of it. A performance or payment bond is a different, permitted risk-transfer tool again — a third party promising payment or performance — and using one is not the same thing as trying to contract the Act away.
Believing a “no liens” clause in a subcontract actually protects the GC or owner is the most common mistake — it doesn't; s.42 makes it unenforceable against the Act, full stop. See this case where a supplier registered a lien despite exactly that kind of clause.
The second is confusing a commercial term with a statutory override — “our contract says 30-day payment terms” is enforceable; “our contract says no one can lien this job” is not. See how a validly filed lien actually gets cleared once one lands, and how the trust obligation behind it works.
A 30-minute call is enough to tell you whether your pricing, bonding or collections process is leaking margin.
