A programme submitted under clause 31.2 programme was rejected by the MC under clause 31.3.
In the clause 32 response to the rejected prog, should the revised prog be updated to reflect actual progress etc to the resubmission date (“data date”), along with addressing the other reasons for rejection?
Given the timescales stipulated for regular clause 32.2 programmes would the two versions not overlap. I had understood, possibly incorrectly, that rejected programmes “data date” remains as per the original submission date.
Wrong!?
2 Likes
@WilliamBrown would you be able to help with this query?
Hi Alex, a different Brown here but happy to have a go.
Richard, As you have referred to it under clause 31.2 I am assuming that it is the first programme submitted for acceptance as per 31.1.
When the Contractor notified non-acceptance of the first programme they should have stated the reason (hopefully one of those stated under 31.3) and in sufficient detail to allow the you to correct the issues and re-submit for acceptance as per clause 13.4, hopefully the detailed reasons were given.
Under 13.4 you have to resubmit within the period for reply, on this basis I would suggest that it is not a revised programme, i.e. not a clause 32 programme, and so would not include the progress you suggest.
Having said the above, if the timing under the contract is not being followed and/or progress is proceeding at pace, then if I were the Contractor I would perhaps be talking to you to get a realistic programme in place as quickly as possible and that may include progress to date.
The best thing for you to do is to meet with the Contractor before you re-submit and discuss the requirements of the contract, discuss why they think your original one was not acceptable and co-operate on getting a programme accepted.
It is in the Parties interests to get the programme accepted as quickly as possible and then to regularly revise it as per the contract.
Happy to discuss.
2 Likes
Thanks Steve.
The rejected programme was a clause 32 not clause 31, my mistake. Other sources I have found state that the resubmitted clause 32 is updated with actual progress up to the date it’s resubmitted. This could well result with an overlap with the next clause 32 submission.
We held a collaborative programme meeting with the client and worked through the issues combining the rejected programme comments and updated progress.
I think the process is open to abuse though if the Project Manager keeps changing the goal posts, not really in anyone’s interest but a more significant risk to a subcontractor.
1 Like