NEC ECC: TQs not part of contract

NEC3 and NEC4 Contracts Compensation Events
1

If the TQs were not part of the contract would this mean that the Works Information had not changed/ been updated?

Also how would TQ replies form part of the contract?

1 Like
2

TQ’s (technical queries) or indeed RFI’s (requests for information) generally are run on every project alongside the other other NEC processes. You might have a technical query about an aspect of the Works Information - for example what colour do you want something or where do you want it installed. These are not changes to WI but mere clarification of what the WI is stating.

Equally these sit along side the early warning process - as not all of these could be an issue unless they are not responded to in time. You might raise a TQ and then sometime later notify an early warning that the element needs responding to as it COULD have an effect on time or cost in the near future.

TQ responses should be in writing like any form of communication and from someone who is authorised to answer it. Only if the TQ response is an instruction that changes the Works Information would this then give rise to a parallel compensation event.

1 Like
3

Thank you Glenn, very informative.

1 Like
4

Glenn, would you consider that a late reply to a TQ would bring about a CE pursuant to CL 60.1(6)?

1 Like
5

In this scenario TQ’s are not part of the contract, so response to them isn’t work under the contract. There therefore can’t be a CE under that clause.

2 Likes
6

Sorry I’m not following. When we say not part of the contract what is meant by that? Are RFIs not just treated as communications, therefore a late response to an RFI could lead to a CE for failing to respond within period for reply?

1 Like
7

An RFI or TQ or whatever you might call it is not a process under the Contract. There is no section about them, and there is no process for them.

As such they are communications, but per 13.3 the PM is not obligated to reply because the Contract doesn’t require it. There therefore can’t be a CE for failure to do so.

Do remember that this is a strict Contract position, and if you find yourself having this debate for real I would suggest your project is not in a healthy place, but that doesn’t change the Contractual position.

1 Like