Late agreement of contract programme.

Hi Ian

What is your form of contract.

The Contract Period is what is set down in the Contract.

The Contract Programme should - at least have the same start date - end date - duration - as the Contract.

If the progressed programme is now longer than the contract period - the contractor is in delay - provided that the progress is accurate of course.

Let me have more details please.

Best regards

Mike Testro

Hi Mike,

The contract is NEC3.

I should have explained more. The programme had Mandatory constraints on them as completion milestones because ’that’s how they have always done it’, therefore the activities did not affect them, luckily there was a good amount of float behind them at the time. This has afforded the contractor to build the delays into the activities contract programme as progressed (i doubt purposely) wihtout delaying the project, so everything looked fine for the client at the time of the agreement.

Now, the contractor is claiming delays for certain activities which occured before the data date of the contract programme.

I have stripped the progress out, but still leaves the question of which duration i use, the original or do i stick to the dates (which most of them where actual at the time), thus increasing the duration of the activity and allowing the delay claim?

Hope this is more clear.

Ian

The last part of Cl 11.2 answers most your question, (subject in part to notice provisions).

Thanks Andrew,

I have looked at what you say, and i am not sure it answers my question.

The contract programme still has two conflicting durations.

I would appreciate it if would expand please.

Cheers mate

Ian,

Under NEC the current Accepted programme is THE ONLY relevant programme.

The contractor should update the programme as per Cl32 and submit the changed programme for acceptance.

If he hasn’t given previous notice as per Cl61.3, (note eight week period) he can go and whistle for anything that happened to the left of the currently Accepted programme data date.

If he has given notice and has since updated the Accepted programme then any delays should have been shown in the new programme. (Cl32) If no delays are shown then the contractor, (the contractor writes the programme), is saying that no delays are occuring due to currently known compensation events.

Strangely this is the second conversation about retrospective analysis and the NEC3 I’ve had in as many days.

Thanks Andrew,

You have made it perfectly clear.

Ian,

NEC - proactive planning and delay notices, that’s what it’s all about and trying to achieve.

Glad I was clear enough - but if honest, that is the certainly the contracts intention, if you were a contractor their are a few possible arguments to help, but we’ll have to wait until it gets to court to find out if they would suceed, (to do with the validity of the time bar - I think a court would enforce it these days).

Andy

Ian,

Another grey area is if the contractor has given notice within time but hasn’t included the compensation event in the latest Accepted programme ie, one submitted since the notice – is he allowed to go back and insert the events in a previous programme when it happened or only entitled to the delay, (if any), demonstrated by his next submitted programme?