NEC3 - ECS - Option B - Clause 60.7

We are a subcontractor working on an NEC3 - Engineering and Construction Subcontract Option B. We have recently come across an omission in the bill of quantities which is for laying a specific type of material, ‘X’, on top of structures. The structures also require us to lay another material, ‘Y’ @ 100mm thick. There was an item for laying ‘Y’ @ 60mm thick included in the bill of quantities at tender stage because we have to lay this material in places other than the structures; no other items were included for laying at different thicknesses.

The scope of works and programme provided by the main contractor at tender stage did show a requirement for ‘X’ and ‘Y’ (Y @ a thickness between 50mm-100mm) to be laid to structures. However, because there was no item in the bill of quantities for laying ‘X’ and only an item for specifically laying ‘Y’ @ 60mm thick, it was assumed that we had not been asked to price the works to lay ‘X’ and ‘Y’ to the structures. As a result, we made no allowance for laying ‘X’ and ‘Y’ within these areas and the small outputs required make it impossible to recover our costs.

Under clause 60.7 In assessing a compensation event which results from a correction of an
inconsistency between the Bill of Quantities and another document, the Subcontractor is assumed to have taken the Bill of Quantities as correct. Our argument is that there was no item in the bill of quantities for ‘X’ and no item for laying ‘Y’ at any thickness other than 60mm, therefore, we assumed we had not been asked to price works to the structures and thus all costs associated with carrying them out, i.e. labour, plant and material, should be a compensation event.

The main contractor is of the opinion that as the works to structures were included in the scope of works and tender programme, the only compensation event (i.e. additional cost) is the material cost for ‘X’ due to its omission from the BOQ and the additional material used for ‘Y’ due to the increased thickness. Our offer stated that it was based on the main contractor’s programme and as a result the main contractor believes that we should of allowed for carrying out these works (and that the plant and labour costs associated should be included in our price). They believe the only change is the material itself.

Please can I have someone else’s opinion on the above?

Many thanks

1 Like

@Neil_Earnshaw can you help with this question please?

1 Like