August 2013 Q&A

My Comments are given below in red fonts :-

----- Original ----- Original Message ----From: From: Glennie To: To: "Prof. Sam" Date: Date: Mon !9 Se #!$% $%:$9:#$ &!'!! Subject: Subject: ()estion *ear Professor +,ans for yo) nowledge s,aring and g)idane. / ,ave a small iss)e to larify wit, yo). Say t,e Contrator ,as been instr)ted to arry o)t a ertain 0ob w,i, soe is not similar to any of t,e Contrat items and ,ene we need to go for a new rate1 2owever w,en ,e s)bmits ,is invoies it seems to be very ,ig, omare to t,e rie revailed at t,e time of e3e)tion. /n t,is senario )nder 4/*/C $956 form of Contrat w,at are t,e ossibilities to give a fare assessment. Can we onsider t,e maret rie instead of t,e invoied rie saying t,at ,e failed to abide t,e la)se 5.$ 7Contrator ,as to arry o)t t,e wor in d)e are and diligene8 and ,ene ,e is not entitled for t,e amo)nt ,e is laiming. nder 4/*/C $956 val)ation of variations is governed by Cla)se # aording to w,i, t,e ;ngineer an fi3 rates  ries w,i, in ,is oinion are aroriate 7i.e. t,e roerorret ratesries8 if t,e two arties annot agree on t,em. +,erefore ating reasonably t,e ;ngineer an establis, t,e orret ries t,at revailed at t,e time of e3e)tion 7by maing in=)iries from s)liers by investigating s)ly ries in ot,er ro0ets et.8 to fi3 aroriate ratesries.

Regards,

Prof.. Sam. Prof Prof. Indrawansa Samaratunga PhD, DSc 4/CS 4?/(S 4/(SS 4C/?rb 4C/AB 4CM/ 4?S/ 4?S/ 4B;ng Chartered Surveyor, Chartered QS, Chartered Manager, Chartered Builder

?rbitrator  Mediator Mediator - ondon Co)rt of of /nternational ?rbitration ?rbitrator  ;3ert ;3ert - *)bai /nternational /nternational ?rbitration ?rbitration Centre ?; Middle East Representative - Australian Inst. o !t". Surve"ors PA Bo3 #%'$ *)bai ?;. + &96$ ! '559'9 4 &96$ ' %%655

+,aning yo) in advane +,ans and egards Glennie

----- Original ----- Original Message ----From: From: Saman D) To: To: "Prof. Sam" Date: Date: Eed $$ Se #!$% !%:#':!% -!6!! 7P*+8 Subject: Subject: ()estion

Dear Prof. Sam

I'm one of Students from your Qatar class. I have a following question pls give your valuable comments when you have time. This is regarding woring hours of !onsultancy !ontract. The followings is e"act wording in the !ontract regarding woring #our s.

$The Consultant shall provide all required staff as per the Contract during all working hours of the Construction Contractor. The Consultant shall take in to account the 'time for completion" and the nature of the construction works in that it may be necessary for the Contractor to work outside normal hours and on weekends and the Consultant shall therefore allow within the Consultant bid costs for providing site staff to work regular, evening and / or night shift , or weekends in addition to normal working hours as necessary.

ll payroll shall be in accordance with laws of the !tate of atar. " %ne !lient in Qatar is asing to wor &hr per day (normal woring hr) and * days per wee since the !ontractor's timing is +am to ,.pm. -nd they intend to deduct if any body has delay (less than &hr per day) in daily attendance as per records taen from time machine. -s per the !ontract /iometric time machine is required for recording attendance of all !onsultancy staff and monthly payment shall be based on attendance 0 service deliverable. 1y opinion is that only required staff if necessary shall be wor during the !ontractor's woring hours otherwise all staff shall wor 23hr per wee as per the 4abour 4aw. Can t,e Client insist all ons)ltany staff to wor $!,r er day and mae t,e ded)tion t,e ayment if any staff w,o wor more t,an '5,r b)t less t,an !,r er wee F

-ccording to the wording it is not 5Supervision6 that is required to be provided but 5staff as per the !ontract6 and therefore if the !ontract (or consultancy agreement) clearly stipulates the number and categories of the !onsultant7s staff required for the pro8ect then the !lient appears to have a valid argument that all of them should be present for the full period that the !ontractor is e"ecuting the wor and to deduct payments if they are not. If however the categories and numbers are not stipulated then the !onsultant would be in a position to argue that his obligation is to provide only adequate staff for supervision purposes (however such adequate staff should still be present for the full period as aforementioned).

Regards,

Prof. Sam. Prof. Indrawansa Samaratunga PhD, DSc 4/CS 4?/(S 4/(SS 4C/?rb 4C/AB 4CM/ 4?S/ 4B;ng Chartered Surveyor, Chartered QS, Chartered Manager, Chartered Builder

?rbitrator  Mediator - ondon Co)rt of /nternational ?rbitration ?rbitrator  ;3ert - *)bai /nternational ?rbitration Centre ?; Middle East Representative - Australian Inst. o !t". Surve"ors PA Bo3 #%'$ *)bai ?;. + &96$ ! '559'9 4 &96$ ' %%655

+,an yo) ind egards Saman

----- Original Message ----From: saleel m)nail To: "[email protected]" Date: +,) $# Se #!$% $:!:! &!5!! 7SG+8 Subject: e: atest (H? l)s imortant message

Dear Dr. Sam

Good Day to you. I take this opportunity to convey you my sincere thanks for sharing your valuable time to respond to our queries. I ould be really thankful if you could provide your comments on the folloing!

Subject: Clarication Regarding Depth ored. !C"S##

%$ "his has reference to the above sub#ect, please correct me if I$m rong, the Depth %ored for Piles as per the Preamble &'s shon belo( is from )ommencing Surface to the "oe *evel and )utting of Surplus *ength is from )ommencing Surface to the Pile )ut+o level. Since the Preamble clearly states that - the commencing surface of the depth bored shall be taken as the cut o level”, Depth %ored should be measured from the cut o level. Regarding the )utting of Surplus *ength, your understanding is correct &as there is no stipulation similar to that for the Depth %ored, in this instance(. Regards,



Best Regards Saleel.Bhaskaran Sr. Quantity Surveyor Bridge Works Preamble Piling and Piling Ancillaries The rates for bored cast-in-place shall include for boring in any material and all necessary

operations for working below the water table for the support of the bore. Irrespective of the method of casting the commencing surface of the depth bored shall be taken as the cut o level, expressly reuired! Any additional depth bored shall be considered to be attributable to the "ontractor#s $orking method and shall not be payable. Also the rate of depth bores shall be deemed to include the cost of formwork and any other work associated with casting a part of the pile as freestanding column.

The rates shall include for the use of temporary casings for the pile and the oversi!ed hole according to the approved method statement

The rates for boring shall unless otherwise stated include for disposal of water and bentonite suspension as displaced by concrete.

The commencing surface level to be agreed with "ngineer on site for each location.

The rates for cutting o# surplus length also includes disposal of material arising to tip.

The concreted length of pile shall be measured from the cut o# level e$pressly re%uired to the toe level e$pressly re%uired along the a$es.

The rates for vertical pile load test for non-working piles shall include for the cost of pile and related works.

----- Original ----- Original Message ----From: From: Diro0an Sa,ayaratnara0a, To: To: "[email protected]" Date: Date: S)n !$ Se #!$% #$:$:9 -!6!! 7P*+8 Subject: Subject: ()estion 7(atar8

*ear Prof. Sam Good Morning. Please see below my =)estion and wis, to reeive yo)r omments. Under FIDIC 1987 • Defined PS was included in the contract and it is not specialized work and C is also capa!le to do that work" • #fter co$pletion of desi%n& specification specificati on and drawin%s were %i'en to C to price the Defined PS su$" • C priced it and their price was () * $ore than the allocated PS" • +ow e$plo,er wants to %o for no$ination !ecause to %et co$petiti'e price throu%h tenderin%" • In this tender e$plo,er wants to include C also to participate" , -uer, is" • #fter %et the proposal fro$ C can we %o for no$ination !ecause of c.s price is $ore than the allocated PS/ YES. 0ill C o!ect the no$ination as C alread, su!$itted his price accordin% to the contract/ C has no such ri%ht" • Can we re-uest the C to participate in tender YES. and can C o!ect to participate/ participate/ YES. • Should we in'ite the C to participate in tender/ 2ptional& !ut !etter to in'ite as C $a, now wish to $ake its offer co$petiti'e" 0ill C o!ect the no$ination !ecause of the !elow $entioned reasons/ C has no such ri%ht" C has alread, su!$itted his price" 3$plo,er hasn4t in'ited the C to participate in tender"

Regards,

Prof.. Sam. Prof Prof. Indrawansa Samaratunga PhD, DSc 4/CS 4?/(S 4/(SS 4C/?rb 4C/AB 4CM/ 4?S/ 4?S/ 4B;ng Chartered Surveyor, Chartered QS, Chartered Manager, Chartered Builder

?rbitrator  Mediator Mediator - ondon Co)rt of of /nternational ?rbitration ?rbitrator  ;3ert ;3ert - *)bai /nternational /nternational ?rbitration ?rbitration Centre ?; Middle East Representative - Australian Inst. o !t". Surve"ors PA Bo3 #%'$ *)bai ?;. + &96$ ! '559'9 4 &96$ ' %%655

ind regards Diro0an S ()antity S)rveyor

----- Original ----- Original Message ----From: From: S)g)mar Dandagoal To: To: [email protected] Date: Date: +)e #6 ?)g #!$% $$:!#:#! $$:!#:#! &!'!! Subject: Subject: Profit al)lation

Dr.Sam, ave a good day,

/ wo)ld lie to t,an yo) for yo)r servie

/hile calculating overheads and pro0t on each item, e are folloing the procedure as mentioned belo! &'erheads calculation on top of material and labour cost and prot calculation on top of material, labour and overhead cost &If client1consultant is saying pro0t can be claimed on material and labour cost only not on overheads cost hat e shall do, since nothing mentioned in contract about this calculation method(. Please con0rm as per 2IDI) Standard, is there any ritten rule says that ho to calculate overheads and pro0t. "here is nothing mentioned in 2IDI) in this regard. "hese matters should ideally be agreed prior to signing the contract and included in it. Generally in the industry 3 4 P are claimed as a combined element calculated as a percentage on the basic costs. If your method is dierent, try to analyse and sho in the breakdon of a series of rates &if possible all rates( in the contract, that you have used your method, and try to obtain the agreement of )lient1)onsultant. If the matter ends up in a dispute, the court or an arbitrator ould &in the absence of an agreement to the contrary( is likely to adopt the standard practice in the industry hich is to consider 34P as a combined element calculated on the basic costs. Regards,



5indly clarify about this orking system. egards S)g)mar Dandagoal +)rney 4ito)t ()antity S)rveyor !! $#!!$5 ----- Original Message ----From: Didal 2asson To: "*r. Sam" #c: nidal,asson@egro).ae Date: +)e #6 ?)g #!$% !5::#9 &!'!! Subject: Aenings for M;P wors

Good morning Dr. Sam, I hope this email find you and your family very well.

In refurbishment projects, we found out that there are some new openings (missed from contract drawings) of various sies are re!uired to accommodate "#$ re!uirements. #ngineer have assumed that such openings are considered to be under builders wor% which is within contractor&s scope, while our position is that such openings re!uire demolition and some of them re!uire strengthening and considered this to be a variation. 'an you please let me %now your opinion about the same and what is the minimum opening sie in an eisting slab could be considered as builders wor% If any specific method of measurement which describes in detail how to measure uilder*s +or% is not mentioned in the contract, then holes of any dimension re!uired (to accommodate "#$ wor%), which an eperienced contractor could have foreseen when studying the tender documents, are deemed to form part of uilder*s +or%. nly if the 'ontractor can demonstrate that they could not be foreseen, they can be claimed as variations. If there is no design responsibility mentioned in the contract for uilder*s +or%, then any specific permanent structural supports would be variations and temporary supports are deemed to be uilder*s +or%. nly openings made for other purposes (other than accommodating "#$ wor%) could be considered as Demolitions and -lterations (especially when the "ethod of "easurement is $"I)

Regards,



egards, 6idal assoun Sr. )ontracts 7anager

----- Original Message ----From: Dayana Seneviratne To: "[email protected]" Date: Eed $5 Se #!$% !#:!:%! -!6!! 7P*+8 Subject: ;ngineerIs Avertime and Dig,t s,ift s)ervision fee.

. *ear Professor 2oe yo) and family ee well. A)r ontrat does not ,ave rovision to reover t,e ;ngineerIs over time and nig,t s,ift s)ervision fee. Contrator is re0eting to ay engineerIs s)ervision fee for nig,t s,ift and overtime. Dig,t s,ift woring

rogramme was roosed by t,e ontrator in addition to t,e general ontrat woring rogramme. Can t,e ;ngineer aly ded)tion for t,e above s)ervision fee on t,e /nterim Payment CertifiationF /f it o)ld be demonstrated t,at t,e originally agreed +ime for Comletion was ade=)ate for an e3eriened Contrator to omlete t,e Eors by woring d)ring t,e normal woring ,o)rs and if t,e ;mloyer is not resonsible for any delays t,en t,e ContratorJs roosal to wor nig,t s,ifts o)ld only be onstr)ed as a mitigation meas)re to reover t,e ContratorJs )lable delays. +,erefore t,e Contrator is in brea, of its obligation to roeed wit, t,e Eors in a timely manner and t,e ;mloyer ,as in)rred losses 7i.e. additional fees for s)ervision8 w,i, t,e ;mloyer is entitled to reover as damages. Regards,



Dandana

----- Original Message ----From: Palanivel To: "[email protected]" Date: Mon #% Se #!$% $::# &!'!! Subject: ?s-lanned and Collasible met,od

Dear Sir, "he 8mployer hile determining the 89tension of "ime used (s)planned and Collapsible method collectively to entitle the )ontractor:s 89tended Duration. Is this contractually and professionally correct to use to methods for one pro#ect. "oo detailed a topic to discuss in this short ;4' forum. "his is an area for e9perts. "he )ontractor:s burden is to demonstrate cause and eect. If he discharged this burden adequately by using an appropriate delay analysis technique, and if an 89pert can testify that the combined method has been used by the 8mployer to deny a #ust and fair entitlement of the )ontractor, then an 'rbitrator is very likely to 0nd in the )ontractor:s favour. It is not uncommon to use more than one method in a delay analysis e9ercise, here appropriate, but only an 89pert Delay 'nalyst ould be able to say hether, in this instance it is inappropriate, after studying all the circumstances.

Regards,



"hanks 4 Regards, Palanivel .< ;uantity Surveyor

----- Original Message ----From: +are= +aye, To: "[email protected]" Date: 4ri $$ At #!$% !$:$6:!9 -!6!! 7P*+8 Subject: ()estion for t,e SC? Co)rse

Dear Prof.Sam,

Greetings!!!

First of all  ould li"e to e#tend my great $leasure for the great SC% &ourse given 'y your goodself in the last (une.  am e#tremely sorry for 'eing late to raise my )uestions 'ut i as mu&h 'usy in $re$aring for my PMP e#am,and then i ent for a long va&ation. *. +ormaly e have furnished *- 'ond for the advan&e $ayment and *- 'ond for the $erforman&e, as the $ro(e&t $rogresses &an e redu&e these 'an" 'onds /es if 'oth $arties agree. n any event %dvan&e Payment Guarantees generally state that the guaranteed amount de&reases $rogressively as and hen the advan&e is re&overed 'y the 0m$loyer through interim Payment Certifi&ates. 12Can e &onsider the minutes of the meetings held, $hotos, video re&ordings as an offi&ial &ontem$orary re&ord that e &an refer through any future &laim or dis$ute 3hey are &ontem$orary re&ords and &an 'e used to su'stantiate &laims and as eviden&e in ar'itrations4litigations. 52a26hat is the e#a&t differen&e 'eteen 7D 8 Penalty. 3oo vast a to$i& for this short Q8% forum. n 'rief, 7i)uidated Damages are a reasona'le $re2estimate of the losses 9due to the late &om$letion: &onverted to money. 6hen the amount stated as 7D in a &ontra&t is mu&h higher than su&h reasona'le estimate, it amounts to a $enalty. '2ho &an e &al&ulate them 9total and daily: Daily amount &ould 'e the loss of revenue $er day from a hotel not &om$leted on time. % limit &ould 'e ;- or *- of the Contra&t Pri&e, hi&h is s et 'y

the Client at the time of going to 3ender. Sin&e 3enderers usually $ri&e this as a ris", higher the 7imit, higher ould 'e the 3ender Pri&e. <2f there is a variation order to dou'le the si=e of an underground RCC ater tan", shall e dou'le the B>Q rate for the original or shall e delete the old rate and esta'lish a ne $ri&e +either >ld rate should 'e used as a 'asis. t should 'e 'ro"en don into a mini B>Q &onsisting of all the items in the original tan" 9&on&rete, reinfor&ement, formor" et&.: ith )uantities and rates against ea&h item. 3he total of this mini B>Q should 'e e)ual to the >l d rate. 3o value the variation, the )uantities in the mini B>Q ould 'e &hanged to the )uantities of the larger tan", 'ut the rates ould remain un&hanged. 3hus a ne rate for the larger tan" ould 'e derived from the old rate. .

;26here &an e find the time given to the 0ngineer to a$$rove draing4su'mittal, re$ly a l etter, variation and eot &laim, and hat &an e do if he e#&eed the time Generally in the S$e&ifi&ations or in Part  ? Conditions of Parti&ular %$$li&ation 9here the do&uments have 'een $re$ared in a $rofessional manner:, or if a Pro(e&t Management Consultant is involved, then in his Pro(e&t Re)uirements Manual hi&h usually forms $art of the Contra&t Do&uments. f the 0ngineer does not &om$ly ith them, then remedies are availa'le $ursuant to Su'2Clauses @.5 and @.< 9of FDC *A ty$e of &ontra&ts:. Regarding 0>3 determinations it is 1 days 96e dis&uss during the < th Session of the SC% ho e &an inter$ret the $rovisions of Su'2Clause <<.5 to arrive at this 1 day &on&lusion. SC% %lumni are entitled to a ;- dis&ount if they ish t o re$eat any Session of the last SC% Class this year starting on 1;th >&to'er 1*5.: @2%s e understand that e &ould $erform the &ontra&t under 7>% only even the &ontra&t is not signed, for the 7> it is not offi&ial unless some $arty sho an a&tion, if though &an e $erform the &ontra&t under it Please &larify. 3ender is the >ffer and 7>% is the %&&e$tan&e, and su'(e&t to &ertain &onditions 9that e dis&uss in detail during the SC%  th Session: they form a &ontra&t. nder an 7> though there is no &ontra&t, a )uasi &ontra&t is im$lied and therefore the &ontra&tor &an still get $aid. 3oo vast a su'(e&t. Refer to your voi&e re&ordings4notes of SC%  th Session: 2nder hi&h &lause &an the engineer o'(e&t to a &ontra&torEs em$loyee 'eing on the $ro(e&t site if he is not ha$$y ith 9$erforman&e, attitude,..et&:, Clause *@.1 of FDC *A 2Contra&t signed 'eteen the &lient and the &ontra&tor ithout the $resen&e of engineer 9D8B &ontra&t: and e#e&ution starts. %t the middle of the $ro(e&t the &lient a$$ointed a $ro(e&t manager4engineer from his side, no he had not 'een a $arty in the &ontra&t, &ould this ne a$$ointed $arty has a legal $oer on the &ontra&tor n the a'sen&e of an 0ngineer, the 0m$loyer has to $erform the 0ngineerEs duties. f t he 0m$loyer has no a$$ointed an 0ngineer to $erform those duties, and the &ontra&tor has not o'(e&ted to that a$$ointment, then su&h 0ngineer has the authority to $erform those duties. A23he $ro(e&t original time as $er the &ontra&t finished and the $ro(e&t is not &om$leted, the &ontra&tor &om$leted ; months after the &ontra&tual date 'ut until the &om$letion no letter as sent from the em$loyer4engineer notifying that the delay $enalty start, &an the &lient im$ose delay $enalty on the &ontra&tor in the final $ayment, /es, if the Contra&tor as &ul$a'le for the delay and the 0m$loyer in&urred losses. and &an he delay the signing of the su'stantial 3>C until a&&e$ting the $enalty +o. *2&an e su'mit missed variation &laim after su'stantial 3>C is signed /es

**2f there is no des&ri$tion for an item in the s$e&s &an e ta"e the B>Q item des&ri$tion as our &riteria S&o$e of or" is not stated in the B>Q. t is shon in the draings and des&ri'ed in the S$e&ifi&ation. f one of them is silent a'out any details, then it amounts to an am'iguity. Clarifi&ation should 'e sought $ursuant to Su'2Clause ;.1 9FDC *A ty$e &ontra&ts: *12do e have to send the &ontra&tual letter to 'oth of &lient and engineer t should 'e sent to the 0ngineer 9and only here stated in the Contra&t, a &o$y to the 0m$loyer as ell: *52nder hi&h &ir&umstan&es &ould the &ontra&tor re(e&t the a$$ointment of a nominated su'&ontra&tor 3hese &ir&umstan&es are listed in Su'2Clause ;A.1 9FDC *A ty$e &ontra&ts: *<2Can e &onsider the vendor list atta&hed to the s$e&s as a nominated su$$lier4su'&onsin&e e are o'liged to use them and e &annot &hange them. % $arty 'e&omes a +ominated Su'&ontra&tor, only hen the 0m$loyer40ngineer nominates it for a s$e&ifi& s&o$e of or" for hi&h there is a Provisional Sum in&luded in the Contra&t 9FDC *A ty$e &ontra&ts:

Questions should 'e "e$t 'rief and not more than 5 at a ti me !

Regards,

Prof. Sam. Prof. Indrawansa Samaratunga PhD, DSc 4/CS 4?/(S 4/(SS 4C/?rb 4C/AB 4CM/ 4?S/ 4B;ng

Chartered Surveyor, Chartered QS, Chartered Manager, Chartered Builder


By no, the %lumni may have reali=ed that, 'y gaining all essential "noledge in Contra&t %dministration, though they may have a&&om$lished most of their needs, still the entitlements of the Com$any &annot 'e on if the other $arty to your Contra&t is ignorant a'out those entitlements. 3herefore edu&ating them is also an essential $art of inning your entitlements. f you ish to re&ommend to them the SC% &ourse, ne#t &lass starts on * th anuary 1*<. Regards,


?rbitrator  Mediator - ondon Co)rt of /nternational ?rbitration ?rbitrator  ;3ert - *)bai /nternational ?rbitration Centre ?; Middle East Representative - Australian Inst. o !t". Surve"ors

PA Bo3 #%'$ *)bai ?;. + &96$ ! '559'9 4 &96$ ' %%655

August 2013 Q&A

Recommend Documents