TSC3 Contract dispute


I currently have a TSC3 with a company and we have conflicting views regarding some of the contract requirements. I have 3 people working for me and the contract price list is for 3 people per month for services and assistance during the month. The contract only states that the contractor needs to be on site for the normal working hours of the Employer and does not mention anywhere that all the people needs to be on site at all times. Our work is 75% processes and 25% assistance to other maintenance departments on site. This function can be done by 1 person.
My view point is that not all personnel needs to be on site all the time and the employer argues that they pay hourly rates for 3 people. no where in the contract is there any mention of hourly rates except for call outs after hours.
I am only doing what the contract says I am allowed but they say they will take actions against me if I continue with it.

Any ideas as to resolve this issue?

1 Like

It depends on the option and who drew up the price list.

If it’s option A and you drew up the price list for a defined scope, you can keep the money.

Henry, welcome to the community.

Due to the criticality of your situation (you mention that actions are pending against you), I strongly suggest you engage a professional to review your contract and provide you with proper advice.

It is option A but they drew up the price list and I filled in the amounts for each item. The price list uses monthly as the time period and not hourly. I saw other contracts using hourly rates to indicate how much time each person needs to be spend on site.

Peter, I am just trying to get some clarity about this type of situation before I start spending money. But you are right and I am looking for someone to help me. At the current moment they are not moving forward and actually asked me to start the adjudication process. Is it better to be the first to start it or wait for the other party to start it?

Henry, as I said it sounds you have now entered a dangerous territory as regards liability, costs etc.

Adjudication is an adversarial and costly process (of lower cost though compared to arbitration or litigation) and the fact that it has been mentioned by your client is not comforting; you should try to resolve this before you reach that stage or at least find out where you’re standing.

One thing for “next time”, Henry, is that the Activity Schedule provided by the Employer is the minumum level of detail he wishes to see. You, as the Consultant, are perfect;y entitled to provide an Activity Schedule that breaks the Employer’s Activities or Scope down into more detail. If the Employer put “monthly” as a minimum you could have substituted weekly, daily, shifts or even hours as you saw fit to deliver the Scope (although hours might have been one step too far.)

This looks like an advert to me – I was rebuked for inadvertently including my company logo on a posting when I replied to an email. I trust the same will happen in this instance.

I’m sure there are many subscribers to this service who have companies that assist with disputes and adjudications, but if we all start advertising our services it will reduce the value of the service provided by BI.