Letters of intent - part 2!

I remember having a rant about just how rubbish/bad/useless etc letters of intent are and some of you agreed. See previous blog below.

http://www.blogger.com/blogger.g?blogID=491774513914518621#editor/target=post;postID=8930257740702719408

Then  we recently have Ampleforth Abbey Trust v Turner & Townsend Project Management Limited and that to me serves only to reinforce never ever ever using these damn things. There is absolutely no excuse not to use a standard form instead of a letter of intent if you absolutely must get on with something whilst we wait for ....for what, really what is the issue here, why can't people step up and do whatever they have to do to get the formal agreement signed? So, how about my golden rules for letter of intent:

1. Never ever ever use them
2. Bust a gut to get the formal agreement in place before proceeding
3. If it looks unlikely to get the agreement in place for whatever reason then really really bust a gut and do whatever you have to do to get the formal agreement in place
4. If this definitely cannot happen (which I just don't believe) then use something like NEC3 ECC to procure a bit of what you must have - use Option E if you need need some sort of random start now; Option A if you know what you want odering/doing now; Option C if you know what you want odering/doing now but there is an inherent amount of Contractor's risk in this
5. Once 4 occurs, as buyer you have definitely relinquished a bit of bargaining power - why would you want to do this? So dwell on 3 and make it happen.

What I would love to see is at least the professional bodies coming out and saying...."letters of intent are [choose from rubbish/negligent/bad practice/really rubbish]" and giving the Courts a helping hand. This of course won't happen. Lots of people make very nice incomes from the very chaos that letters of intent cause.

There, breath, rant over....