(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.
Greetings to all,
Is it possible to rise a claim against the clinet or his representative for actions, events or any thing related based on an approved submitted schedule ( Under the assumption that the representative missed to notice them), knowing that these events will give the contractor the right to claim for when their time comes.
Printer-friendly version
Send to friend
Hi Rafael
I thought we were discussing financial impact.
Best regards
Mike Testro
Could is correct if you are unaware of what is going on, will is correct if you are awake. The fact that the milestone was missed shall attract you, shall not pass unnoticed. Any good manager would be attracted to investigate, no matter if in a matter of seconds his mind will figure it out. Here contractual milestone are not used capriciously, when unneeded, when it has no impact.
"attract applies to any degree or kind of ability to exert influence over another"
It is not the same to say, "will cause", than "will attract", at least not when you translate your original statement into the Spanish language. I had no idea cause and attract were synonyms in the English language.
Hi Rafael
Failure to achieve a Milestone may not cause any general loss or expense at all - therefore "could" is correct.
I have known cases where a delay actually created a financial benefit.
Best regards
Mike Testro
Mike,
I agree with your statement to the point instead of "could" I would use "will".
Bet Regards,
Rafael
Hi Rafael
Beware a contractual stated milestone with no LAD's attached.
Failure to achieve the milestone could attract general damages.
Best regards
Mike Testro
Reminds me of a case were such claim was not due to a flawed schedule but to a flawed contractual requirement.
Long ago an a Sewer Plant Job we submitted a baseline schedule not meeting the requirement for a Milestone Date. We used the specified equipment manufacturer and it came out that delivery made it impossible to meet required Milestone Date.
The Owner protested but we clarified it was the specified equipment supplier, it was unknown at bid time it was unattainable and that we assumed the Owner by means of his required milestone date implied it was possible.
They reluctantly had to accept the submitted baseline schedule that did not meet their milestone date and accept the implied change in milestone date. It had no significant cost impact so no additional cost was claimed, it was not critical for job completion date other than the milestone so no claim for job EOT was issued.
Our baseline was by its own merits a claim for changing the contractual date at no cost to the contractor.
It was fun to watch the inspector face, who worked for a well known Massachusetts based company when I opposed to change my schedule [to display something that was impossible].
Best regards,
Rafael
Hi Mamoon
Rectification of a flawed programme is not grounds for an extension of time.
Approval does not represent acceptance of errors.
Best regards
Mike Testro
Email: PPadmin@planningplanet.com
Replies