About

Publications




Search Construction Advisor Today


  • constructionadvisortoday.com

Bookmark and Share

« Construction Professionals Urged to Watch Out for the Risks of Building Green | Main | New Office Expected to ‘Improve the Professional Practice of Construction Management’ »

11/23/2011

Comments

Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.

The exact opposite is also true. The contractor started very late due to its own scheduling problems and is now claiming delays and damages because they cannot finish on time.

There needs to be be some middle groung that protects Owners and contractors from each others inneptitude.

I agree that there ought to be a fair delineation but then it would be best to state what those boundaries are in clear terms. When contract language is left to imagination or interpretation must of us will see situations through our own most self-serving filters.

Dennis,
Your "exact opposite" comment makes no sense - clauses such as this are not mutually inclusive. They are spelled out in the docs usually under "rights and limitations" sections pertaining to each party as separate sections.

I do agree that there needs to be middle ground that protects owners and contractors from the other's ineptitude - We probably ought to include the protection from the architects as well. But don't rely on the AIA docs to do that - they are written by architects so guess who they protect ? (little 'a' used purposefully here)

On Publicly bid contracts owners typically do not want to be on the hook for a variety of problems even if they create them. Thus,they make contractors responsonsible in their bid documents. If contractors fairly assess their risk on these terms and conditions and bid on them, then I do think it is fair. Contractors should first of all decide if they want to bid on it and secondly price their risk. In my opinion though, Publicly bid contacts often come in much higher in cost due to such one sided terms and conditions. As I said earlier though, Public Agencies don't want to be on the hook for a worst possible case scenario. Nobody wants to explain why the Public Agency is on the hook for added costs.

working for a municipality, We have faced many delay claims for work to be performed by other entities (say a utility company, either private or public) that were not the contractor's responsibility and did delay the contractor somewhat. We added a clause that we would not accept a delay claim if the contractor was reasonably delayed (~5 work days).

If the contractor was unreasonably delayed by another party, we would generally accept and process a change order for a time extension.

As an aside, per se, we also had contact language that the contractor was responsible for coordinating with other entities to coordinate the work to be performed by the contractor and others. the contractor could then make reasonable scheduling allowances.

Verify your Comment

Previewing your Comment

This is only a preview. Your comment has not yet been posted.

Working...
Your comment could not be posted. Error type:
Your comment has been posted. Post another comment

The letters and numbers you entered did not match the image. Please try again.

As a final step before posting your comment, enter the letters and numbers you see in the image below. This prevents automated programs from posting comments.

Having trouble reading this image? View an alternate.

Working...

Post a comment