No contract programme

Whoops



Heres me telling people that you have to read the whole document.



Thanks Andrew.

Mike,



The first post said NEC3

Mike,



What happen is a typical case of non cooperation the contractor side.



Basically, the contractor got a contract with start and finish date. so how come the contractor program is not showing contractual finish date.



This happen because of some weakness on the part of the project management team on how to deal and resolve basic contractual issues.



Cheers,

Charlie

Hi Ian,



In all cases, you will need to maintain good records for the ongoing activities at site in order to be able to create an "As Built" program.



Good luck,



Samer

Hi Charleston



No one has yet stated that this problem is NEC3 related. Andrew used NEC3 as an example of what can happen if the Project Manager does not even commebnt on the Contractors programme.



Best regards



Mike Testro

The fundamental problem here was the not so professional action by the SPM.



A simple NO is only a sign of impending crises as the project progress.



What happened happen, so what can be done???



The first step is to agree that there is a contractual start date and finish date that each parties to the contract agreed.



The contractor may say that it can not be achieved, however, since the contractor has a contract then the contractor has an obligation to start and finish as per contractual finish dates.



This is very basic in contract law.



The submitted programm that the SPM commentec NO will be used as basis in analysing construction activities in the event that the contractor did used the said program in executing work activities.



However, the contractor is still obligated to his contract start and finish date even though the contractor notified of his intentions not to finish the work as per the contract finish date due to reason that it will be imposible for the contractor to finish the job.



In conclusion, the contractor notified his intention to default in his contractual obligation to finish the work because in the first place he already said so that the contractor find it unrealistically to finish the job as per his contract.



????????? This is very idiotic. Is the intention of NEC3 to exposed parties to the contract how idiot they are????

Dear Ian,



It seems that the level of authorities to decide on the course of action and solve the problems is not involved in the progress of the project.



The start and end dates are specified in the contract and that is good. If the Contractor needs more time, then they have to present their case and get the approval of the Owner side.



Presenting progress reports with ETO will end up causing problems to both sides unless you can aford to give the Contractor time.



Please update us with your latest case.



Best,



Samer

Ian,



And we haven’t even got to the fun bit yet - the relevance of the two different programmes, the one the PM likes and the one he doesn’t!!!!!!!

One step at a time, what happened in the beginning?



It’s unfortunately not that uncommon to find the Project Manager not accepting the programme, hence why the programme is deemed accepted by default now in NEC3 to overcome the problem.



But it is only accepted by default if the Project Manager has failed to comment on the programme as per Cl 31.1.



So Ian, what bit of the procedure below has or hasn’t your PM or Contractor carried out:



1.Contract awarded: Contractor submits programme as per Cl 31.1.

2.Within 2 weeks the PM accepts it or doesn’t make comments – Accepted programme.

3.Or within 2 weeks the PM doesn’t accept it for one of the reasons given in Cl 31.3 AND notifies Contractor.



Ironically the contract doesn’t actually state what happens if the PM doesn’t accept the programme and notifies the Contractor, the Contractor is only obliged to submit a revised programme if (Cl 32.2):



1.The PM instructs it.

2.The Contractor chooses too.

3.At the intervals stated in the Contract data, (assuming one is).



The above acceptance, or notifying the Contractor of non acceptance, or default acceptance applies to every programme submitted but lets stick with the first programme issued, (if there was one).



What actually happened?

Hi All



If there was one programme at the beginning showing the whole pipeline - why can’t that be split in two to represent the two halves in seperate contracts?



Just a thought.



Best regards

Mike Testro

Ian,



If he accepts the realistic programme as a rebaselined contract programme (inc EOT) then he would be accepting all delays between the original finish date and the probabalistic finish date.



If he forces the contractor to create a baseline to the original contract dates then he will be able to better assess the impact of any delay events against it, or even just use it to disprove what the contractor says.



I am not quite sure if the client ever needs to prove the duration of EOT to the contractor as the contractor should have the imputus to strive for the EOT?!



The reason why the contractor will be sending statements with the programme, telling you that they won’t achieve certain production rates is because it is part the NEC3 philosophy to let the client know in advance of any possible delays.

Ian,



Start by reading 11.2 (2) - is there a stated Completion Date in the Works Informatiion?



If we have a start and a finish, we can worry about the bit in the middle later!

Ian,



As this is a Linear project I would suspect that the contractor would create and issue a programme anyway. If he does not then risk needs to be reviewed from your side in respect of programme ( & contingency ) to a court of law. Make sure you at least attain production rates from him in an item of correspondence ( as Oliver stated )and get a third party to verify it - possibly the other contractor.



This would show his output rates / per every 10m including the method of installation / commissioning / crossings / commissioning / testing etc.



Please note that the only real thing to stall his output production would be the environment ( rock / water / trees / badgers ) and possibly weather, so all of these would be taken into account by the contractor at tender stage and hopefully the client.



I believe that the only way the non existent programme can be baselined is by taking a combination of what oliver Melling stated and the duration of his prelims. The prelims duration would ball point to the rate of production per day for pipeline ( on average )and he could do the following :-



1) Claim loss and expense against this as a baseline

2) Insert VO’s / Change in enactment / Rights of way as impacts during the programme.



This would then leave the client very exposed ( more so than the contractor ) due to the non existence of the programme as a " yardstick ".



A scary thought.



Cue Wig , Cloak , Hammer.



Regards



Cherie

Ian,



Is it a fixed price or target contract?



If you as the client gave the work to each contractor then what did your contracts say about the delivery dates? You may not have had a gantt charts at the kick-off but the contract will have stated a date.



If there is no contract(baseline) plan then their EOT claim can only be based upon a simplistic analysis of emails, meeting minutes etc.



The arguement i would make as the contractor is that how can i be late if you never told me when i was supposed to finish by?!

Hi Gents,



This is ineteresting. I have not heard of this before. I would be very careful. My answer is below :-



Remember that the the tender documents are the contract documents so whatever is in the preliminary H & S plan, BOQ, Premables ITT’s etc should be the contract dates as specified by the client or his her representatives. This will stand up in a court of law unless the contract signed specifies otherwise.



It sounds to me that you and you Managing QS need to read the contract very carefully to reduce and highlight risk regarding programme and timescale.



Who is the lead contractor ? Whoever it is should take the lead of planning and programming the project and then integrate the programmme with the second sub-contractor. This is what should be done in a Construction Management form of contract. Get this programme signed ( physically )off by the client. Any late variations, AI’s etc can then be logged aginst this programme. If the other contractor is late and then you are managing succeeding activities then it may be your prelims, project costs that will have to be extended / increased ( EOT ).







Regards



Cherie

Ian,



Has some form of programme not been produced as part of the tender process?