Expert advice in minutes not days. Register it's free and ask your first question now.
ReachBack is a free community help desk for construction professionals run by Built Intelligence. A library of high-quality questions from real users with answers delivered and curated by industry experts.

Do you want to update your skills in NEC3, NEC4, JCT, Procurement, CDM or Project management?

Sign up for one of our free online courses.

4,748 questions

5,043 answers


Register its Free

Download here

NEC ECC: Can a Project Manager reassess a compensation event

+1 vote
If the Project Manager has accepted a quotation for a compensation event and the Contractor has started the work associated with the CE, can the PM reassess the CE if he has realised that the Contractor has not allowed enough time and will now lose money on the CE?
asked Mar 1 in Compensation Events by mufc1966 (210 points)  

2 Answers

+2 votes
Best answer
No, clause 65.2 is clear that once implemented a CE quotation is not revised, the only exception being where a PM assumption used in the quotation has proven to be incorrect in which case a new CE is raised for the correction so, technically, the quotation is not actually revised.

Whilst it may seem unfair, doing so would mean that all quotations could be opened up because inevitably the quotation will not match the actual Defined Cost + Fee. This would undermine the whole intention of the change process.
answered Mar 1 by dave bates (11,120 points)  
selected Mar 8 by Neil Earnshaw
0 votes
If during actual implementation of the works there are deviations from the assumptions provided by the PM in how to assess the CE, then you can reassess the CE. The difference between the original assessment and the new assessment is a compensation event in accordance with 60.1(7)
answered Mar 6 by Roger Blando (1,260 points)  
Roger - just a point of clarity here whilst your sentiment is correct. You can revisit PM assumptions in an implemented compensation event but subtly that is a new compensation event under 60.1(17) rather than reopening the original implemented compensation event