NEC3 ECC: T&S costs relative to the SCC

Under the SCC section 13 a) & b) the Contractor is now claiming just about everything and anything that appears as an “expense” within his accounting system against the contract. By this I mean charges for Wi-Fi cost in hotel rooms, breakfast expense if travelling, casual lunches again if a person on the contract is travelling to and from offices/sub-contractors workshops etc., coffee stops on route, even Burger King on the way home from a day’s travel from office to site.

Are these really allowable subsistence charges under the intent of the NEC SCC? These costs do relate to people who work on the contract and provide the Works however I would have thought the WAOH charge (which is considerable) would cover these incidentals.

1 Like

You can disallow any costs that are dis-allowable. Firstly I suggest you should raise an early warning about their unhealthy lifestyle (coffee and burger king). On a more serious point - I would ask them where in the SCC does it suggest that these costs are payable? Once thy have told you where they think they are entitled to claim it then you can make a judgement on that point.

At the end of the day, if it is at the very least questionable as to whether something is allowed or not, you ask the client here have more control than them. If you disallow these costs - how likely are they to go to adjudication on this matter?

The Contractor says he is entitled to this under SCC 13(a) & (b). My position is that those costs referred to are not used to Provide the Works - as such

I would agree with you in this situation. The opening line is that these costs are “incurred in order to provide the works”. I do not see a burger with onion rings and a chocolate shake are essential to provide the works if they are on their way home.
Guys travelling and staying away and therefore entitled to subsistence which will include a meal allowance would be different and probably would be valid…