I am letting a contract for a design consultants to provide us with several resources, who will be under our control, and they have asked for the following to be limited to nil (as opposed to the total of their order):
‘The Consultant’s liability to the Employer for Defects that are not found until
after the defects date is limited to nil’.
If a design consultant is procured on a resource provision only basis, would their limit of liability be nil for the above and also for anything else?
Hi, everyone would like to limit their liability to ‘nil’ but that is not realistic. I think for a designer it is normal for them to be liable but it depends on why you are stressing ‘resource only basis’, if you mean that they are not deciding what to do but are working under your direction then they probably do have a reduced liability. I think you need to consider what it is they are doing and producing and decide what you believe is the appropriate level of liability, if they are not willing to accept it then find someone who will.
They are intended to be fully under our direction and everything will be signed off by us.
Their main issue was liability for latent defects, and I can kind off see where they are coming from, given that a defect by definition is something that is not done in accordance with the Works Information, and in this case the Works Information is for the supply of resource.
You say that the Works Information is for the supply of resource, but surely that resource is required to be sufficiently qualified and experienced to provide the required work within the required timeframe.
Regards,
Neil Watson BSc MRICS MCIArb MCInstCES MIAT
Director
Infrastructure Commercial Services Ltd
Tel. 07401 411 614