NEC or NEC3 or ECC or EEC?

There seems to bit a bit of confusion with the NEC acryonyms looking at articles and Users' Group helpline queries!

Often we get the question...we are using NEC3 Option C or NEC Option C - well, we know it's a target cost form of contract, but which particular NEC contract?

NEC is basically now a brand name. Within the NEC family there are contracts, guidance notes and flow charts. So, NEC is a generic brand name (not to be confused with the NEC near Birmingham!); NEC3 is the third edition of the NEC suite of documents; ECC is an abbreviation of just one of the NEC contracts, likely to be the NEC3 Engineering and Construction Contract (so hopefully you can see how we NEC2 ECC and NEC3 ECC now). EEC is nothing to do with NEC at all, it's a game that member states of Europe play!

Clear as mud?!

Rob

NEC Student Research

Summer is here of course, good time to start doing some research, and here's another short survey for NEC research by a student you to complete.

Thank you,

Rob

http://dissertation.limequery.com/45922/lang-en

NEC Student Research

And another short questionnaire for you to complete please.......

http://www.surveymonkey.com/s/2BWKWZQ

Rob

NEC Student Research

Dear all,

Another online NEC student questionnaire for you to generously give no more than 10 mins to I'm assured!

http://www.kwiksurveys.com/online-survey.php?surveyID=KCLKOO_f781f3fa

Thank you,
Rob

NEC Student Research

Dear all,

Another quick survey for you to give a bit of time to please - closing date of 23rd July for this one....

Thank you,
Rob

http://dissertation.limequery.com/78457/lang-en

What are the top negotiated terms?

Funny you might ask! The International Association for Contract and Commercial Management (IACCM) suggest negotiations are out of step with business needs. Further, negotiators themselves believe they are negotiating the wrong things.

What were the top 5 issues being negotiated in 2008? Well, the IACCM found they were:

1. Limitation of liability
2. Indemnification
3. Price/Charge/Price Changes
4. Intellectual Property
5. Confidential Information/Data Protection

What do the IACCM think will be the top 5 in the future?

1. Scope and Goals
2. Change Management
3. Responsibilities of the Parties
4. Communications and Reporting
5. Service Levels and Warranties

I find this fascinating - is it just me or isn't the future the very sorts of things that NEC has strived to offer the parties for a very long time? The move away from traditional buyer/seller, master/servant relationships/contracts can only be a good thing. Imagine parties focusing on scope and goals, presumably of each other, what a difference that would finally make to outcomes!

Their report is somewhat out of date (2009, link below) representing negotiations in 2008 and the world is a different place right now, but is still very interesting. I will try and get an update and report back.

http://www.iaccm.com/contractingexcellence.php?storyid=923

The future is already here with NEC!

Rob

NEC3 contracts do not refer to CDM - so what?

A few times now I've had discussions with legal advisors asking why NEC contracts do not refer to certain UK statutes, CDM in particular. I can't really level with this apparent craving to refer to certain UK statutes in contracts. Why should a contract refer to any UK statute, it's not exactly an opt-in, opt-out set of rules? The exception that I can see are those statutes that do need complimentary provisions such as provided through Y(UK)2 or those that are a sort of opt-in, such as provided for in Y(UK)3.

I refer to an article printed in ribajournal.com linked below (to scroll down touch on the red vertical line, which took me a while to discover!!):

http://www.ribajournal.com/index.php/feature/article/why_make_life_more_complicated/

Anyway, in there it states "... the PSC does not contain specific provisions requiring the consultant to comply with the CDM Regulations. Clients therefore generally tend to insert a Z-clause to this effect (even though a consultant would be required to comply regardless of whether or not a provision had been included)..."

So, this looks like legal advice to me, you have to comply with UK statute. If anyone thinks a single sentence in a contract actually makes people design/build safer I think they are wrong. So can someone please tell me why on earth we can justify padding out contract terms with unnecessary references to UK statute that apply anyway?

Rob

NEC student research

Dear all,

Another questionnaire from a student who would appreciate your considered input. This time on the dreaded z clauses!

Many thanks,
Rob

http://www.surveymonkey.com/s/CHLNSDS