(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.
Are we entitle to charge LD to Contractor based on the following :
- Natural of contract ( Infra structure work - 2.2km of main road , land scape , 2 bridges )
- Contract completion 15 August
- due to employer delay in the negotiation of the Electricity incoming line along main road( by authority) (3) months extension being granted till 15 November
- activities which will be delayed due to the late negotiation , main road , subgrade, crusherrun , binder and wearing course and some landscaping work along main road.
- on the other hand contractor also unable to complete the work by 15 august for other work not related to the above delay event.
Question :
As Employer , are we able to charge LD to the contractor for the portion of work which not affected by the employer delay event ???
Printer-friendly version
Send to friend
Hi Toh
Lets see if I have got this straight.
1. The contractor is late in preparing the foundations for the start of electic work by the employers contractor.
2. The employer is also late in getting the electric work started.
3. By the time the electric workers arrive on site the contractor had caught up and the electric work could start.
The combintion of all this caused 3 months delay to the works.
So if you just impact the late start of the electrical work in isolation of the contractors delays then you will see what the delay would be for that concurrent event.
Now compare that with the contractors delay.
If the contractors delay was longer then you can deduct LAD's for the difference.
If the contractors delay was shorter then he may claim costs for the difference.
You will have to make sure that these events did affect the whole of the works - you mention 2 bridges - these could well be on the critical path when tie ins and landscape is all linked in.
Best regards
Mike Testro
Hi Mike,
Thanks for your advise. Things become complicated in our case here .
- Contractor delay in preparing the earthwork till formation level which logicaly required for the authority to come in to start do excavation and laying of electric trunking along main road . ( Contractor delay in the 1st event )
- the Client also keep silent on the contractor earthwork delay and no letter goes to the contractor on his delay.
- Client side also delay in handling the authority to start electric conduit laying work . ( Employer delay in 2nd event )
Summary :
By the time when Employer sucessfully get the authority in for the electric work , the contractor slow progress already able to catch up with the condition to allow for the authority to work.
It would be simple if the Employer settle the authority and get them in as early as when the earthwork is not ready for authority to move in then very obvious the delay is cause by contractor.
under normal circumstances , what will be the result on whether Employer still able to pin point on this issue to the Contractor ?
Hi Toh
You have to follow the rules applying to concurrent delay and that depends on the applicable law of the contract.
But generally since it seems that the Employers delay was the first event:
If the Contractors delay does not go beyond 15th November then you cannot deduct LAD's
The Contractor may then claim costs for the period between the end of his delays and 15th Nov.
If the Contractor delays extend beyond 15th Nov then you can deduct LAD's for that period and the contractor cannot claim any costs.
It gets much more complicated if there are many claim heads all overlapping.
If however the Contractors delay was first and the Employers delay event started afterwards and then caused - say - 1 month furter delay beyond the Contractor delay then:
The 1 month furter delay is added to the original completion date giving an EoT to 15 September and relief from LAD for that period but LAD deducted for the remainder.
The proportion of claimable costs depends on the degree of overlap of the respective events.
I trust that is clear.
Best regards
Mike Testro
Email: PPadmin@planningplanet.com
Replies