The client is upset that many communication and notifications of delays are coming in. However one assumes that this is the correct process and protect both client and contractor?
Yes, the process is there so that any problems or potential problems are flagged up and can therefore be dealt with. While some may see this as “claims mongering” by a contractor it can, and in my view should, be seen much more positively as information sharing to give the project team the best chance to find the right solution. As the notices come in everyone should try and respond in a positive way, which I appreciate can be hard, but the alternative is to ignore the problem and that is very unlikely to help the situation improve.
As Robs says, it is far better to share information on a proactive basis throughout the contract duration than to store up problems until the end.
Sharing information about what events may delay the project helps both parties (and their respective subcontractors and consultants) by ensuring:
- The programme can be updated to reflect what is going on
- Trades can be brought in according to the updated programme
- A revised completion date can be determined by the contract administrator so the project team knows what they need to achieve
- The contractor can review if it needs to apply for extensions and loss/expense
- The employer can review if there is scope to deduct LADs
- The contract administrator can ask the contractor to review its rate of progress
All these help the parties, not hinder.