Potentially a quick question, we’re a subcontractor on an Opt B NEC ECS.
I failed to find anything is the search specifically similar so hoped some guidance would be possible.
We were given a CI (1) to omit a significant amount of completion works in July.
A CE (60 1) was issued and a request for a quotation, which was duly completed and returned.
Presumably the contractor believed they could get the works completed quicker, cheaper by others.
We cancelled the pre-orders we have, stopped progressing any of the works associated with the instruction and re-deployed the resources we had lined up to do the works elsewhere.
We’ve just been issued a second CI (2) adding the works originally omitted back into our scope.
And a PM assessment of the original CE at zero cost nil programme change.
Presumably on the basis they’ve been to the market and found out there would be no benefit to going elsewhere.
Its our position that the zero cost assessment is incorrect, and needs to reflect the negative changes of the CE (1). The later CE (2) assessment then needs to encompass the effects of losing our resources elsewhere and having to re-negotiate market rates with the supply chain for cancelled orders. As well as include the added duration from the dividing date of CE (1) of remobilisation.
Is this the correct methodology ?