Thursday, 15 December 2011

Greater use of project bank accounts in UK

Cash is king in the construction industry and the UK Cabinet Office recently announced £4bn to flow directly to SMEs through project bank accounts (PBAs) over the next 3 years.

http://www.cabinetoffice.gov.uk/news/%C2%A34-billion-flow-directly-smes-through-government-construction-projects-and-new-construction-pip

All good stuff of course and would be nice to have a revolutionary approach to payment. Remember that NEC already has in place a Z clause for this, link below, the clause is half way down the useful downloads page

http://www.neccontract.com/about/ContractDownloads.asp

I wonder what if there is an appetite in the UK private sector and public/private sectors in other countries for this? I hope so......

Rob

Friday, 2 December 2011

Achieving cost certainty with NEC

A few times now I have heard people suggest that cost certainty is more likely achieved by using NEC3 ECC Option A than any of the other Options. Interesting. All Option A is at the end of the day is a pricing mechanism, this one happens to be lump sum. In the highly unlikely event that no compensation events arise, the lump sum agreed is that which is paid so I suppose cost certainty has been achieved. Whether this is a lower price paid than would have been obtained using Option C is debatable however my point is these are just finer points and surely the best way for clients to achieve 'cost certainty' is to act intelligently by having a good, clear scope of works with little change thereafter (ie know what you want); sensibly avoid, reduce or mitigate as much project risk as you can; sensibly allocate the residual risk left over (of course ensuring the contract matches this); surround yourself with sensible people; make sure the 'price' is realistic; and then press the go button......

So which do you think is likely to achieve cost certainty
1. Option A?
2. Option C?
3. The intelligent client?

Rob

Thursday, 17 November 2011

NEC questionnaire

Dear all,

Two senior lecturers in civil engineering at Leeds Metropolitan University have put together this questionnaire to research your experience of using NEC compared to other forms of contract. Your input would be most gratefully received.

Rob

Thursday, 20 October 2011

NEC student dissertation

Dear all,

Another student survey if you have a few minutes to spare please. In the student's own words....

I am undertaking a Masters' Degree in Surveying (Quantity Surveying and Construction Management route) at the College of Estate Management as part of my final dissertation and the Sir Ian Dixon Award for the Chartered Institute of Building; I am researching the question of whether the NEC3 contract has met its aim in delivering client satisfaction.

I am trying to understand and describe what client satisfaction looks like to a wide selection of major clients that use the NEC3 contracts.

I would be grateful if you would kindly complete the attached questionnaire. All information given will be treated with strict confidence and I will be happy to share a copy of the summary of results.
Thanks,
Rob

Monday, 26 September 2011

The Local Democracy, Economic Development and Construction Act - NEC3 September 2011 Amendments

The UK’s Local Democracy, Economic Development and Construction Act 2009 has introduced amendments to the Housing Grants, Construction and Regeneration Act 1996 (the ‘Construction Act’), requiring a number of changes to NEC3 contracts. The changes are published on the NEC web site for free download by users on the following link.

http://www.neccontract.com/amendments.asp

The amendments to the Construction Act apply to all construction contracts in England and Wales from 1 October and those in Scotland from 1 November. They are likely to apply to contracts in Northern Ireland in the future.

The resulting NEC3 changes are in two areas: adjudication and payment. In the Engineering and Construction Contract (ECC), Engineering and Construction Subcontract (ECS), Professional Service Contract (PSC) and Term Service Contract (TSC) this is effected through revisions to clause W2 and Y(UK)2.

An additional clause is provided in the short forms, namely the Engineering and Construction Short Contract, Engineering and Construction Short Subcontract and Term Service Short Contract. The changes are summarised below.

Changes to adjudication provisions

The provision allowing for correction of slips has been revised to comply with the new statutory requirements. This has affected the timing of the correction as well as the wording of what can be corrected.

It is now no longer permissible to allocate fees and expenses of an adjudication equally between the parties through the contract. The adjudicator must be given the right to allocate them. The Act has also fixed the timing of any payment due following an adjudication decision, which has required a further change.

Changes to payment provisions

Under ECC, ECS and TSC, a payment certificate and details of how the payment was calculated must be issued together and defined as a payment notice. If the project manager fails to give a payment notice, the contractor may give the notice. Under short forms and the PSC, there is no certificate so the contractor/consultant’s submission will constitute the payment notice.

In all forms, the timing of issue of the payment notice must be fixed as not later than 5 days after the payment due date. The amount stated in the payment notice must be paid unless a notice of intention to pay less is issued. The arrangement is superficially similar to the withholding notice, but terminology and timing are different.

As the Act now requires payment to be made for suspending performance for non-payment, the short forms have also been amended to include this as a compensation event to ensure the assessment is carried out as for other events.



Tuesday, 23 August 2011

NEC & BIM

A few people have asked 'is there going to be an NEC compliant BIM contract (or amends) in time'? The answer is at the moment there are no amends being drafted, nor do we see them being required. Of course things may change as BIM develops.

NEC has representation with the UK Governments' BIM implementation group where, amongst other things, the group is discussing liability, negligence, deliverables, copyright, IPR and so on. NEC will input into this group by monitoring/reviewing/advising and looking over the protocol the group is writing.

From my perspective and in simple terms, BIM is a design process based on a common platform. It it appears that BIM is in no way intended to change the current liabilities structure that we have - in time we may have integrated project insurance (IPI) but IPI isn't BIM and vice versa.

From an NEC perspective therefore, if such a process (protocol) is required then the requirements to work to this should rightly be in the Works Information (ECC) or the Scope (PSC). The biggest issue with BIM seems to be data supply and current thinking is that this could comfortably be accommodated through a mixture of key dates and sectional completion.

Rob

Student NEC research

Dear all,

Please spare a bit of time to complete the attached survey for a masters student doing a dissertation on NEC3 ECC Option C.

Many thanks,
Rob

www.surveymonkey.co.uk/nec3

The Local Democracy, Economic Development and Construction Act

I'd like the job of naming Acts of Parliament......!

Anyway, as an update to a previous Blog, The Local Democracy, Economic Development and Construction Act 2009 contains a substantial number of provisions in the broad areas of local democracy and involvement, local authority governance and audit, boundary and electoral change, local and regional economic development and construction contracts. It received Royal Assent on 12 November 2009. Part 8 of the Act amends the Housing Grants, Construction and Regeneration Act 1996 to improve payment practices and dispute resolution in the construction industry. The new Act is apparently to be in force from 1 October this year and NEC drafters are busy finishing off necessary amendments to the applicable NEC3 Contracts and these will be available during September 2011.

Rob

Wednesday, 17 August 2011

Claimsmanship or fraud?

When I was a jobbing QS on my first contract in civils, a game appeared to be going on. This was replicated everywhere that I could see/hear about, and still seems to be going on a little bit today. Where a Contractor had a 'claim' he would eventually apply for additional time and/or money. Let's concentrate on the time bit. Word was that the independent impartial engineer would subsequently slice this by about 2/3 so guess what the Contractor did? Ramped it up accordingly of course. Client-side QS's also were issued with red pens in that era, what did we do with them? Use them of course to knock down star rate items the Contractor asked for in his application for additional works. So what, where am I rambling off to....

I read a really interesting article from a UK lawyer a while back (which I simply cannot find nor recall who, when etc) in which he suggested that asking for even 1 penny more than you knew you were due constituted fraud - how very interesting! I wonder how many surveyors (and perhaps other disciplines) have asked for more money than they knew they were entitled to? This of course would be a criminal offence and should therefore be taken extremely seriously.

So, any support or dissent to the notion that (and this might make quite an interesting dissertation) deliberately claiming even a penny more than you know you are entitled to constitutes fraud?

Answers on a postcard please......

Rob

NEC suite replaces ICE CoC

Hi,

Reported in the Construction Index just is that the Institution of Civil Engineers (ICE) has formally transferred its part ownership of the ICE Conditions of Contract that it developed 66 years ago to the Association for Consultancy and Engineering (ACE) and the Civil Engineering Contractors Association (CECA). ACE and CECA have now launched a new standard suite of forms of contract based on the former ICE Conditions of Contract, called the Infrastructure Conditions of Contract.

In an age where we seem to be thankfully and at long last to be heading away from the Dark Ages and towards the post-Latham collaboration era, it will be interesting to see how the newly badged contract fares. Good luck to them, but presumably the upkeep/investment from ACE/CECA subscribing members will be justified and someone in the industry is actually crying out for this?

Tuesday, 31 May 2011

NEC student research

Hi,

Another student questionnaire if you have 10mins to give up at lunchtime. As always, this is much appreciated.

Rob

http://www.eSurveysPro.com/Survey.aspx?id=23ad625d-4b55-488a-a839-880a21c3208c

Thursday, 26 May 2011

RICS Contracts in Use Survey 2010 - please act!!

Dear all,

Every few years the RICS conducts a survey of contracts used/trends/procurement methods etc. In this past this unfortunately seems to have been a closed survey and certainly the last survey had completely insufficient data collected, so please help them to compile a useful report by completing the survey below as best you can.

https://communities.rics.org/connect.ti/contractssurvey/groupHome

This needs to be done by Friday 30th July. There appears to be no restrictions on the sector/location, although historically this has been a report on UK contracts in use. The more statistics on whatever contract you are using, the more reliable the findings will be. Though this will just be mainly of interest only and should not influence your choice of contracts/procurement route, it should show interesting trends.

Many thanks in advance, please forward this to those you know that may also be able to contribute, it's an open community as RICS have stated.

Thanks,
Rob

Friday, 6 May 2011

Do we truly believe in risk management?

I have an opinion that most of us like the the theory of risk management but when it comes to putting it into practice, regard it on a par with QA and don't do it! On most training courses I run I just ask for a show of hands for those who can honestly say they have an up-to-date risk register on their project(s) - I reckon the yes is about 1 in 50, which is appalling!

Why? Is it the thought of going around in circles at a risk workshop with yellow sticky paper? Or facing 40+ columns to fill in on a superior risk register? Or not really knowing what the heck to do with the risk as and when it materialises and discuss that nasty aspect of liability?

I love the simplicity of the 2 column Risk Register found in most NEC3 contracts which is kept current through the early warning process - at any risk reduction meeting the participants basically determine what is the risk (called a 'matter') and what are we going to do about it? The latter has to be the most important aspect of risk management, the practical and constructive part of doing something about the problem.

Any other opinions?

Rob

NEC student research

Maybe the last bit of student assistance for the week? In the student's own words....

I am a student in my final year at the College of Estate Management, University if Reading, studying towards a BSc (Hons) in Quantity Surveying.

For my Comprehensive research project I have chosen to investigate whether Clause 10.1 of the NEC is an enforceable and effective contract term, by gauging the perception levels that the users of the NEC attribute to this clause. The questionnaire is pivotal to the success of my project, so I would be very grateful if people could spare less than 5 minutes of their time to complete the survey by accessing the questionnaire from the following hyperlink:

I will share my results of the project with yourselves and anyone who participates in the survey who wishes to know the results once completed in early August, so please forward me the contact details of where to send the research to.

http://www.esurveyspro.com/Survey.aspx?id=0a690add-d004-4b31-a75c-0707a2aba100

As always, this is much appreciated by the student/university.

Rob

Wednesday, 4 May 2011

NEC student research

Another short survey for you to help out over lunchtime......

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

Thanks,
Rob

NEC student research

Dear all,

A further questionnaire to assist an MSC student, and in the student's words.......

The NEC contract has got stimulus to good management as one of its main objective. This questionnaire is part of an investigation to ascertain if the NEC realizes this benefit, and identify the processes that make the contract more effective as a stimulus to good management. This survey is done as a partial fulfilment of the MSc Construction Management programme. The results will be used for educational purposes only and all information will be treated in the strictest of confidence with no tracking of the source. The questionnaire will take approximately 10 minutes to complete.

Click the link to access the survey.

https://www.surveymonkey.com/s/adingez

I would like to take this opportunity to thank you in anticipation of your cooperation and the valuable information that will be provided.

Thank you,
Rob

Wednesday, 30 March 2011

D&B or D&D?!

I recall 15 years or so ago when first using design and build (D&B) as a means of procurement. The Employer's Requirements we wrote were worded in a way that gave the Contractor as much flexibility as we could for his design, so he could innovate but (learning the hard way) had to make sure we duly accommodated the operational costs to ensure the solution was based on whole life principles. So, 15 or so years later, how have we progressed these early thoughts? I actually think we have gone backwards. For me, D&B should really be called D&D, which is design and dump. I see a real mess these days (can anyone tell me where this advice is coming from?) in that a client engages his design team who take the design so far then say you pick this up Mr Contractor, finish it off, making sure it all meets some really high level performance specification such as "I want a building that is just what my business needs" and if there are any errors in the original design then that is your problem. For good measure I'll dump these designers on you too. How is this D&B? How is it innovative? Just who is benefitting from this 'modern day' approach? Rob

NEC student research

More student research, where the student is in his final year at Birmingham City University for a BSc Hons in Quantity Surveying. For his Comprehensive Study Project, he has chosen to investigate whether the ‘Spirit of Mutual Trust and Co-operation’ is embraced by the Project Team under the NEC3 form of contract . In terms of research, he has prepared a survey to gather practitioners’ views on this topic. To meet this objective, he invites you to participate in the survey that he has prepared. The survey will take approximately 5 minutes to complete and can be accessed via the following hyperlink....

http://www.esurveyspro.com/Survey.aspx?id=701efd68-a7ff-400b-8120-c3bd4afd1ba0

Thank you, Rob

Friday, 18 March 2011

NEC Student Research

Dear all,

Another student survey to finish the week with, this one is about the effect of NEC on quality management in the UK construction industry. Many thanks in advance.

Rob

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

Thursday, 17 February 2011

NSCC No Retention Policy

National Specialist Contractors Council (NSCC, see www.nscc.org.uk) launched the NSCC No Retention Policy on 16 February 2011 - see press release below.

http://www.fairpaymentcampaign.co.uk/docs/press/10NSCCCelebratesLaunchof%27NoRetention%27Policy.pdf

All good stuff of course, retention is long overdue an overhaul. Maybe one day we will be defect free, rending all of this debate redundant. If not, contractors will actually do what they promised they would do in accordance with the terms of the contract in the first place (ie fix the defect in a timely manner, assuming of course it is indeed a defect!). Finally, if all else fails, in many instances the cost effective provision seems to be have a retention bond in place to call off. The old fashioned method of tying up retention monies for long periods of time often at a level that is greater than the profit to be gained in delivering the works is crazy, especially as the money is only intended to act as an 'incentive' or 'stick' for the contractor to correct and only therefore only needed towards the end of construction. If you absolutely must have retention, have a look at NEC3 ECC Option X16 which provides for a retention free amount.

My preference is the 1st 2 outcomes, anything else is waste, costs money and gets us pretty well nowhere as an industry.

Rob

Friday, 4 February 2011

Measured Term Contracts - Good Value?

For a while now I've been wondering about the merits of using measured term contracts as the basis for procuring maintenance work. As a QS, I can see the benefits of having an agreed set of rates to cover the types of work likely to be required over the contract period - the contractor's QS measures and values, the client's QS checks. As the Meer Cats say, simples!

But hang on a minute, is that the best we can do in the 21st Century? Does the process of measuring and valuing really add any value to the client or does it just keep QSs gainfully employed? Oh dear, I can almost hear the sharp intakes of breath ... have I offered up the sacred cow?

On construction projects we have become familiar with cost plus arrangements so why can't we apply this methodology to maintenance work? We have the technology these days to be able to handle the large amounts of data that would need processing - operatives using handheld devices to record on / off site times, cost clerks coding and inputting invoices, use of online CAFM systems for managing workload and payments.

I can hear someone at the back saying "but if the contractor puts down that a job took 3 hours, how do we know that it actually did take 3 hours, or if it should have taken 2 hours?". Good question. Surely we could carry out sample audits to confirm that the resources being paid for have been used. Surely we could carry out annual benchmarking exercises to confirm that value for money is being delivered? Couldn't we use KPIs to incentivise improved performance? I'm sure it isn't beyond the wit of man to devise such checks and balances.

I'm convinced that a properly set up NEC3 Term Service Contract could deliver this, now I just need to convince a client to give it a go!!!