(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.
We have a situation where we have been instructed to accelerate works to meet a new milestone date but the Client has specifically noted that the Key Date has not changed (the Key Date is next year and the new milestone is before Christmas this year). In addition, this has not been instructed under Cl 36 "Acceleration" but under Cl 60 "Compensation Events" . As defined under Cl 61.1 we have started the work and issued the quotation and programme to the Client. We have noted that there are a number of works which cannot be achieved (due to issues beyond our control) by the new milestone date and identified all of the necessary risk and mitigation required to achieve the milestone date for the remainder. The problem is that the Client is not accepting the programme and is insisting that we complete all works by the milestone date. In my opinion this constitutes a change under Cl 63.9 "Change to Subcontractors Works Information" and we are considering issuing a response under Cl 18.1 "Illegal & Impossible". We have demonstrated significant good faith and worked at risk for the past four weeks but are now concerned at our level of exposure. Any comments welcome.
Printer-friendly version
Send to friend
Issues out of our control include late approval of key materials by the Client, weather risk, and refusal by the asphalt supplier to guarantee the surface works if laid during the winter months. In addition, we have landscape planting which, according to the specification, must be planted at certain times which fall outside of the acceleration window. Currently we have a significant number of CE's issued by the Client which have effectively pushed out the programme. This has been recorded in updated pfa's which up until August were accepted and indicated a completion date of next March. Key reasons for the CE's were late release of areas by the Client, design change, incomplete enabling works (done by others) in handed over areas requiring re-work (outside of our original scope) thus causing more delay. Essentially we are endeavouring to achieve the deadline but have continually made the Client aware that there are certain elements of the works which are impossible to achieve and have substantiated this. Unfortunately, the Client is responding with a very simplistic approach requirng us to comply with the CE as instructed by them under Cl 60.1 and appears intransigent on the issue of the works which cannot be achieved.
Dear Neil,
I am not an NEC expert, but I can tell you that your argument must be fully supported by the Construction team technical comments on it. I assume that both you and the Engineer are at site, and that you are trying to be fair in your judgement of "Illegal and Impossible".
I am not sure what are the "Issues beyond your control" at site, but unless they are procurement issues, everything else should be within the control of the Contractor, if they are the only contractor at site.
We will try to assist you as much as possible if you give us a better description of the actual situation.
With kind regards,
Samer
Email: PPadmin@planningplanet.com
Replies