(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.
Can anyone tell me of any case law or precedent that states which accepted programme is to be used during the assessment of a compensation event?
If it is retrospective (with agreement to be done retrospectively), should the accepted programme at the time of the CE occuring be used or, should the the accepted programme at the time the CE was notified be used?
Thanks,
Printer-friendly version
Send to friend
That's not how NEC works, Mike.
1) CE is assessed verses latest (progresed and accepeted) programme
2) If impact of CE would be to delay forecast completion, then the contractual completion date is pushed back by the same amount of time, so contractor's terminal float (difference between forecast and contractual completion) remains constant
Every progress update becomes (if accepted) the new contractual baseline
Cost & time impacts of CEs are (or at least should be) agreed at the time of instruction, and based on the current intent rather than the original intent as at contract award.
Cheers,
G
Hi Gary
If the progress update shows the contractor is ahead of programme then by impacting the updated programme he is giving away his hard earned float.
That is why the impact should be on the current accepted programme.
Best regards
Mike Testro
Hi Mike,
Not quite right. -There is only one programme, which is the latest accepted programme.
The latest accepted programme is revised for both CEs and progress. -You don't apply CEs to an unprogressed version, since contractor owns the (current) float.
Hi Oliver,
The correct process if done in a timely fashion is CE notified => contractor quotes (inc time impact) => PM accepts (CE Implemented, completion date ammended) => Contractor excecutes CE.
So if doing it retrospectively, I would suggest you should take the accepted programme at the point the CE was notified.
If any CEs with a time impact have been implemented since that point, you're into a can of worms as the time impacts agreed would all be based on the "incorrect" accepted programme and hence probably "wrong". Definitely one to be handled by agreement and not case law, I would suggest.
Don't have the relevant docs to hand and am not aware of any relevant case law or precedence, so just my $0.02
Cheers,
G
Hi Oliver
In my understanding of NEC3 there should only be one programme in use at any time.
The original or one that has been revised by a compensation event.
The accepted programme may be updated with progress between events but the non progressed programme should be used to impact compensation events.
Best regards
Mike Testro
Thanks for the response Ken.
We submitted alterations to the plan based upon the programme at the time of the event.
I think doing it on a later version would have included mitigating actions taken in the subsequent months and therefore the compensation received may not have been adequate.
There is no case law that I know of that directly answers your question.
Notwithstanding that the NEC3 contract tends to fall apart if actions are not taken promptly and all assessments are done prosepctively, I would say that it would be the accepted programme that was in force at the time that the CE occured. At clause 63.1 it notes that the assessment date would be the date when the Project Manager should have instructed the contractor to submit a quotation. This is for a different purpose but the principle might be the same.
Email: PPadmin@planningplanet.com
Replies