The possibility to rise a claim based on an approved schedule even though its a future event

Hi Mamoon

Rectification of a flawed programme is not grounds for an extension of time.

Approval does not represent acceptance of errors.

Best regards

Mike Testro

Reminds me of a case were such claim was not due to a flawed schedule but to a flawed contractual requirement.

Long ago an a Sewer Plant Job we submitted a baseline schedule not meeting the requirement for a Milestone Date. We used the specified equipment manufacturer and it came out that delivery made it impossible to meet required Milestone Date.

The Owner protested but we clarified it was the specified equipment supplier, it was unknown at bid time it was unattainable and that we assumed the Owner by means of his required milestone date implied it was possible.

They reluctantly had to accept the submitted baseline schedule that did not meet their milestone date and accept the implied change in milestone date. It had no significant cost impact so no additional cost was claimed, it was not critical for job completion date other than the milestone so no claim for job EOT was issued.

Our baseline was by its own merits a claim for changing the contractual date at no cost to the contractor.

It was fun to watch the inspector face, who worked for a well known Massachusetts based company when I opposed to change my schedule [to display something that was impossible].

Best regards,

Rafael

Hi Rafael

Beware a contractual stated milestone with no LAD's attached.

Failure to achieve the milestone could attract general damages.

Best regards

Mike Testro

Mike,

I agree with your statement to the point instead of "could" I would use "will".

• Failure to achieve the milestone [could] will attract general damages.

Bet Regards,

Rafael

Hi Rafael

Failure to achieve a Milestone may not cause any general loss or expense at all - therefore "could" is correct.

I have known cases where a delay actually created a financial benefit.

Best regards

Mike Testro

Hi Rafael

I thought we were discussing financial impact.

Best regards

Mike Testro

Could is correct if you are unaware of what is going on, will is correct if you are awake. The fact that the milestone was missed shall attract you, shall not pass unnoticed. Any good manager would be attracted to investigate, no matter if in a matter of seconds his mind will figure it out. Here contractual milestone are not used capriciously, when unneeded, when it has no impact.

"attract applies to any degree or kind of ability to exert influence over another"

It is not the same to say, "will cause", than "will attract", at least not when you translate your original statement into the Spanish language. I had no idea cause and attract were synonyms in the English language.