Website Upgrade Incoming - we're working on a new look (and speed!) standby while we finalise the project

Tips on using this forum..

(1) Explain your problem, don't simply post "This isn't working". What were you doing when you faced the problem? What have you tried to resolve - did you look for a solution using "Search" ? Has it happened just once or several times?

(2) It's also good to get feedback when a solution is found, return to the original post to explain how it was resolved so that more people can also use the results.

Accelerated Claim

9 replies [Last post]
Thu, 2003-10-02 02:10
Shahzad Munawar
User offline. Last seen 9 years 29 weeks ago. Offline
Joined: 2 Jul 2003
Posts: 551
Groups: None
Can somebody describe the parameters on which the Contractor prove and get Accelerated Claim 100 %?
Top

Replies

Thu, 2019-07-18 00:28
#1
CHANDRA SEKAR THA...
User offline. Last seen 2 years 35 weeks ago. Offline
Joined: 13 Aug 2007
Posts: 21
Groups: None

.

Top
Thu, 2009-06-25 02:12
#2
Gary Whitehead
User offline. Last seen 5 years 24 weeks ago. Offline
Joined: 24 Mar 2009
Posts: 1215
Groups: Building Information Modelling, Content Moderators, Petro-Chem / Oil & Gas, The GrapeVine
Chandra,

To reinforce Mike’s point:

-It is entirely unnecessary to post the same message more than once. We all saw the first post you made. You do not reach a larger audience by posting the same thing again on a different thread.

-As Mike says, each time you post to an existing thread, every person who has previously posted to that thread get an email about it, so by posting the same message 20 times, you could be generating 20 emails each to 20 different people all saying the same thing -Can be quite annoying.

-The other thing you do is move each of these different threads up the discussion board (which is sorted on latest post), so other people’s threads and postings are less visible and hence will get less responses than a long-dead thread from 4 years ago.

- The above are the main reasons why Forum rule 3 was created. You were requested when you joined PP to read these rules, but as a reminder Forum Rule 3 states: "No cross (double) posting. POST ONCE in the most appropriate forum. Double posts in multiple forums will be deleted. " (capitals added for emphasis)

I hope you now understand why what you did is considered bad form, and why Mike deleted your posts. Please try and obey the forum rules in future.

Cheers,

G
Top
Wed, 2009-06-24 09:28
#3
Mike Testro
User offline. Last seen 35 weeks 4 days ago. Offline
Joined: 14 Dec 2005
Posts: 4418
Groups: Building Information Modelling, Content Moderators, GPCCAR Editors
OK Chandra

I havegiven you a polite warning and you have not listened so:

STOP BEING A STUPID TIME WASTER AND STOP PUTTING MULTIPLE THREADS ON OLD SUBJECTS.

Do it once more and I will work to get you off PP.

All your idiotic threads have been deleted.

SO STOP IT NOW!

No regards and No Respect

Mike Testro
Top
Wed, 2009-06-24 14:57
#4
Mike Testro
User offline. Last seen 35 weeks 4 days ago. Offline
Joined: 14 Dec 2005
Posts: 4418
Groups: Building Information Modelling, Content Moderators, GPCCAR Editors
Hi Chandra

Listen and learn.

One thread for one topic in one forum.

If anyone on PP wants to respond they will.

You have not thought it through.

Whenever you put a new thread on an old topic then contributors get an email reminder in their inbox - from a topic that was done and dusted a long time ago.

When respected PP conributors such as Andrew - Arnold - Samer - Ken - Gary - Carmen - Rafael et al get to see your request appearing 4 or 5 times they are going to be very pissed off.

If you want respect in PP then respect the other members.

Meanwhile I will take my own decisions and with the assiance of my fellow moderators we will stop your peurile actions.

Either get with it or get out.

Thats it from me.

Mike Testro.
Top
Thu, 2019-07-18 00:29
#5
CHANDRA SEKAR THA...
User offline. Last seen 2 years 35 weeks ago. Offline
Joined: 13 Aug 2007
Posts: 21
Groups: None

.

Top
Tue, 2003-10-07 00:17
#6
Mark Lomas
User offline. Last seen 16 years 26 weeks ago. Offline
Joined: 27 Jun 2001
Posts: 177
Groups: None
Tomas,

a well set out answer !

As an advocate of collaborative working, I would take exception to the suggested involvement of a lawyer. Make your proposals (as Tomas suggests) but then present them to the Employer and explain what you would need to change / add to accelerate as he wishes. He can then consider if the consequences of instructing "acceleration" are worth it to him.

If he has issued the instruction already, without considering the consequences, then you will have to do the same negotiations to reach agreement on payment (presuming it is worded: No time implication and Cost implication subject to agreement).
Top
Fri, 2003-10-03 15:59
#7
Tomas Rivera
User offline. Last seen 5 years 34 weeks ago. Offline
Joined: 2 May 2001
Posts: 139
Groups: None
Shahzad:

Let me give you my oppinion on the basis that I am not a claims expert. Also, this kind of questions are more legal than technical.

I am going to start by restating your situation. Employer and contractor signed a contract agreement under certain conditions. Part of these conditions were the original foundation design (drawings), the type and cost of resources planned to use (cost estimate) and how the contractor planned to meet the original time requirements (schedule). Later, the foundation design was changed and the employer instructed the contractor to go ahead with the change, meeting the original dates and cost.

I would take the instruction by the employer as a change order request, and acting as the contractor, I would prepare a change order proposal. This proposal will be prepared using the original elements the contractor used in the contract. That is, same type and cost of resources and same way of doing things. For example, if I did not use overtime, I will not use it this time either; if I used an economical piece of construction equipment, I will keep using the same type; If I considered so many formwork uses, I will use the same number in my revised plan; if I am using regular strength concrete (related to the number of days for curing), I will keep using this type of concrete; etc. This will give you a proposal with a unit price cost equal to the original contract and a schedule with a later finish date.

In addition to the above, I would include in my proposal an option to execute the job on the original time frame, but with an added cost. This added cost will be based on the inceased cost of using diferent resources and measures than the original ones, in order to meet the original milestones.

Bear in mind that the contract is an agreement between two parties, and any change to the contract must also be an agreement between the same parties. The likelihood to reach a beneficial agreement for the change, will be based on several factors: how well devised the original contract is, the quality of your proposal, the quality of interpersonal communications and the quality of your strategy. The described way of approaching this situation is my recommended strategy as my first thought. I would recommend to you though, that your team evaluate this and other alternatives with the help of a lawyer.

I hope this is of some help to you,

Tomas Rivera
Altek System
Detailed scheduling for high performance projects
Top
Fri, 2003-10-03 00:38
#8
Shahzad Munawar
User offline. Last seen 9 years 29 weeks ago. Offline
Joined: 2 Jul 2003
Posts: 551
Groups: None
The project was to be completed on December, 2003. But in the initial phase of Construction, the Consultant revised the foundation design due to which the Contractor lost three months. By knowing the default of Consultant the Employer unilaterly instructed the Contractor to complete the project on milstone contractual dates without any acceleration cost and submit revised programme accordingly. So in view of this can the Contractor claim acceleration cost or not to fulfill Employers requirements?
Top
Thu, 2003-10-02 12:36
#9
Forum Guest
User offline. Last seen 17 weeks 3 days ago. Offline
Joined: 28 Jan 2009
Posts: 2
Groups: None
Please supply more specific information.
Top