Case Study Flashcards
What does the red tick mean on the Slide for Key Issue 1?
It means that although lacking a formal tender process, Option 1 still achieved a degree of certainty for the client through:
* Measured rates
* A trusted and known contractor
* Benchmarking against industry-recognised rates e.g. BCIS, SPONS
You mention cracks in the masonry due to saturation. What else could have caused these, and how did you discount other possibilities?
- Defect mechanism = Ground movement e.g subsidence, settlement, heave. Why Discounted? - walls were plumb, cracking was the same size at both ends.
- Defect mechanism = Expansion or contraction of brickwork due to changes in temperature. Why discounted? - Not discounted completely. Clay brickwork so likely to have expanded in early stages, possibly leading to cracks. Could be contributing factor.
- Defect mechanism = Structural effects e.g. failure of lintels or openings being made. Why discounted? Not discounted. Certainly a contributary factor. Openings could have added to strain and loadings contributing to ‘creep’ in the masonry over time.
If you had pursued Option 1, how would you have worked out abortive costs?
- Pro-rata the contractor’s prelims
- Assess how Prelim costs spread across contract duration
- Look at upfront costs for scaffold hire, materials etc.
- Request expenditure evidence e.g. invoices, supplier notes.
- Works costs on a % basis
If you had pursued Option 2, what would be the implications of having 2 contractors on site under different contracts, in terms of the CDM Regulations?
- CDM Regs are clear that there should be only one Principal Contractor.
- Only time it can be considered are if there are 2 projects on site at same time and they are run independently of each other, and where one Principal Contractor can’t be in overall control.
For Option 3, who decided on the measured rates? How were they established? How did you check costs?
- I proposed measured rates in requesting costs for the additional work.
- Used where any uncertainty existed to the extent e.g. brickwork repairs. Render reinstatement.
- e.g. 0.25 m2 brickwork
What did you need to consider in re-rendering the walls in terms of compliance with Part-L of the Building REgulations?
- If more than 50% of the surface area of an individual thermal element is being renovated, then the whole of that element should be improved to the standard set (external walls are 0.30 Watts per metre square Kelvin)
- In this case, we had an approved inspector on board, who agreed that less than 50% of the wall was being renovated, and in any case the wall was not cost-effective to insulate due to detailing.
- Or, if the works constitute a ‘Major Renovation’ where more than 25% of the surface area of building envelope is being renovated, improvement is required.
- This didnt apply in this instance.
How did you quantify Prov Sums in the Schedule of Works?
These were based on a budget estimate of the likely works involved. Where possible, they were based on a known rate and scaled to the likely quantity required.
What detailing did you identify to the roof/wall-plate junction to achieve adequate thermal qualities?
Ask Mat?
How did you ensure design quality with the negotiated works?
- There was a detailed specification agreed with the contractor prior to pricing.
- Specification was written with reference to British Standards e.g. for render repairs, and Building Regs Part A for structural repairs to roof.
What is the contractual status of progress meeting minutes?
- Not a contractual document.
- Do give prima fascia evidence of progress if they are dated, signed and filed correctly.
- Same applied to Site Notes.
How did you go about formalising the additional time spent on the structural works? Was there an EOT granted? How was this agreed and formalised?
- An instruction was issued for the additional structural works. This was based on a detailed specification for the additional works to provide clarity over what was being priced.
- The contractor provided written confirmation that a delay had occured caused by a ‘relevant event’ i.e. the variation.
- This was accepted and the completion date was adjusted.
- The length of the extension was not immediately decided, as the contractor had to find lead times etc from appropriate sub-contractors.
- The variation also constituted a ‘relevant-matter’ and entitled the contractor to claim loss and expense.
What are Relevant Matters in JCT Contracts?
- A Relevant Matter is something caused by the client that affects the progress of the works.
- Relevant Matters entitle the contractor to claim loss and/or expense.
- A Relevant Matter need not always result in a delay to the Completion Date, so may not always entitle the contractor to an Extension of Time.
What are some examples of Relevant Matters?
- Failure to give a contractor access to site
- Delay in providing instructions
- Discrepancies in the contract docs
- Failure to supply goods or services
- Instructions relating to variations or expenditure of provisional sums
What is a Relevant Event?
- Events that cause a delay to the Completion date, either caused by the Client or by a neutral party. They entitle the contractor to claim an Extension of Time.
- A Relevant Event does not necessarily entitle the contractor to claim loss and expense.
What is the difference between defined and undefined provisional sums?
- Defined = Contractor will have deemed to have made allowance for these in their programme, pricing and planning prelims.
- Undefined = Contractor will not have deemed to have made an allowance for the above.
Where does the risk lie with defined and undefined provisional sums?
- Undefined - Client bears cost and scheduling risks.
- Defined - Contractor bears scheduling and other prelim risks but the sum is a clear commitment from the client to do the work with the contractor.
How was the structural engineer appointed and how did you advise the client on the terms of that appointment? Scope of services, fee basis, form of appointment? Direct appointment to client or subconsultant to PMP? What would be the risks associated with the latter?
- Direct client appointment creates direct contractual relationship and clear recourse for client in event advice given is wrong
- I would advise client of need to perform due diligence and offer to review levels of PI cover, appointent docs and insurances.
- Also Checked scope of services to avoid unnecessary expense.
- With direct client appointment - no need to novate to contractor or create a collateral warranty.
- If appointed by PMP as a sub-consultant - no direct contractual link for client. They would have to sue PMP who in turn would sue S.E.
How did you deal with any issues relating to the neighbouring properties and works that might impinge upon them?
- Good relationships established with neighbour early in process.
- Signed ‘Scaffold License’ in place with compensation for inconvenience.
- I advised client of the Access to Neighbouring Land Act 1992 which gives statutory right to use neighbouring land to preserve and maintain property.
- Installation of felt and at upstand to their building used the existing cover flashing and a self-flashing felt. If a chase had been necessary, I would have advised on need for Section 2 Notice under terms of the Party Wall Act.
- Had good relations not been in place, I would have advised on a Section 2 notice.
Wyh was the client’s maintenance contractor not used to complete opening up of the ceiling / boarding as part of the investigation stages, given the presence of roof leaks and building generally?
- Disruption to client and management of store.
- Questions over competence of retained maintenance contractor.
- Lines of communication would have been complex.
You acted as Contract Administrator and Principal Designer on the same project. What issues might this create and how might you overcome them?
- Acting as CA and PD can be a conflict of interest in the pre-contract phase. Your interests in seeking the most competitive options for your client, can conflict with your duties under as Principal Designer.
- Strategy - work with senior collegue to review risk assessments to see if they are adequate.
Which standard form of contract was administered, if not JCT? Were the procurement options and suitable form of contract advised to your client beforehand?
- It’s a JCT Minor Works with a schedule of ammendments that client adopts to carry out works to its premises.
- Administered as if a JCT Minor Works.
Can you give me an example of how the Framework Agreement differs from a standard JCT Minor Works?
- Provision for LADs. These are based on works impinging on store opening hours or reduced customer access. Has put some tendering contractor off because of the risks.
- Delay and Loss / Expense Procedures: No difference.
- Insurance provisions: No difference.
- Retention - at client’s discretion.
What design and construction improvements were considered and ultimately made to the roof and the rest of the relevant areas of building fabric in undertaking the works and why?
Widening of valley gutters - to improve drainage provision.
Widening of parapet outlets - as above.
Installation of lay-boards to increase height of upstands.
Encapsulation of parapet copings with waterproofing inc drip detail.
Replacement of waterprooinf to flat roof and additio of insulation.
Strengthening works to external walls..
How did you manage asbestos during the project, and during investigative works?
- Existing Refurbishment and Demolition Survey had ‘limitations’ and did not cover areas we needed to access.
- New R&D instructed, with specific instructions to test for samples above ceiling and within roof void above boarding prior to inspection.
