I am involved in a minor works Contract using the Short Form. In this Contract the Contractor was asked to quote for carrying out some work to correct drainage issues on site (under Cl 60.1.1). A quotation was provided that the QS initially thought was high. After some clarification, it was felt that the quotation was reasonable for the work proposed. However, following a site visit by myself, the PM, I have found that the amount of work originally proposed to correct the issue is significantly less than that quoted for (£3,000 original quote as opposed to about £1,000 of work carried out on site). This work was not what was originally agreed between ourselves and the Contractor although his work appears to have solved the issue.
I feel that I have a duty to revisit this CE as there is no way I can justify paying £3,000 when the cost is only about a third of the quotation. However, is the Contractor within his rights to claim that he is entitled to receive the full amount of the quotation even though the work that was originally quoted for was not carried out? Is this a case of
(1) a Contractor unilaterally changing the Works Information without agreement (does this mean that this is technically a Defect?) or
(2) is the Contractor entitled to say that his quotation included for risk and that even though he did far less work than that originally agreed he took on the risk and therefore should be able to claim the full amount?
This issue has been bugging me for a few days now and some advice would be greatly appreciated.
Clause 63.10 does allow the assessment of a CE to be revised if a forecast upon which it is based is shown to be wrong.
The Contractor doesn’t have the authority to change the Works Information, the Employer does under clause 14.2. Maybe you mean the Contractor isn’t working the Works Information? The Contractor is obliged provide the works in accordance with the Works Information. Yes Clause 11.2(3) defines a Defects part of the works which is not in accordance with the Works Information.
Yes Contractor is entitled to include risk in his quotation under clause 63.6 and as per previous comment it isn’t reassessed if its later found to be wrong.
Many thanks for the response Chris. Could you clarify your 1st response for me? Clause 63.10 in the Short Form states:
‘The assessment of a compensation event is not revised if a forecast upon which it is based is shown by later recorded information to have been wrong’
The Guidance notes also states that this clause ‘emphasises the finality of the assessment of compensation events. If the forecast of the effect on Defined Cost or delay included in the accepted or notified assessment proves to be wrong when the work is done, the assessment is not changed. The only circumstances in which a review is possible (by means of a further compensation event) are those stated in clause 61.4.’
Does this mean that the CE cannot be revised? or is it a case of issuing another CE to omit the cost of the work not done?
Generally CE aren’t revised, Clause 61.4 is the exception if the Client states an “assumption” about the event when instructing the quote because its uncertain to price, if this assumption is wrong, the assumption is corrected and this then triggered a new CE under Clause 60.1(11).
The contract is silent on the removal of scope but i think you wouldn’t be allowed to remove the scope that is included in an implemented CE because of the wording 63.10.