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.