Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Hello all,


Not really a family room issue, but lots of people in here have experience with building works, so maybe one of you can help...


So we have had a whole load of works done on a building I'm associated with.


This particular chunk of work has cost around ?30K - there is another chunk coming which will cost around ?150K.


We have a surveyor managing the project - he put together specification and put it out to tender. 4 companies tendered for the work.


We have now been billed an amount greater than the amount specified in the tender.


Certain issues have come up which may have involved more work than they expected, however no contingency was made for these items. Contingency was made for other possibilities which did not arise.


I have 2 questions

1. Is it allowable for the contractor to bill a higher amount than was tendered?

2. Is it standard practice to be flexible with the part of the budget allowed for contingency? That is, say ?1000 contingency was made for floors; and when the work was done, no extra work was required on the floors, but it turned out that extra work was required on the windows. Is it standard practice to allow the contingency to be used for a different item?


Any help appreciated


thank you

Claire

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Latest Discussions

    • Morally they should, but we don't actually vote for parties in our electoral system. We vote for a parliamentary (or council) representative. That candidates group together under party unbrellas is irrelevant. We have a 'representative' democracy, not a party political one (if that makes sense). That's where I am on things at the moment. Reform are knocking on the door of the BNP, and using wedge issues to bait emotional rage. The Greens are knocking on the door of the hard left, sweeping up the Corbynista idealists. But it's worth saying that both are only ascending because of the failures of the two main parties and the successive governments they have led. Large parts of the country have been left in economic decline for decades, while city fat cats became uber wealthy. Young people have been screwed over by student loans. Housing is 40 years of commoditisation, removing affordabilty beyond the reach of too many. Decently paid, secure jobs, seem to be a thing of the past. Which of the main parties can people turn to, to fix any of these things, when the main parties are the reason for the mess that has been allowed to evolve? Reform certainly aren't the answer to those things. The Greens may aspire to do something meaningful about some of them, but where will they find the money to pay for it? None of it's easy.
    • Yes, but the context is important and the reason.
    • That messes up Wales, Scotland and Northern Ireland - democracy being based on citizenship not literacy. There's intentionally no one language that campaign materials have to be in. 
    • TBH if people don't see what is sectarian in the materials linked to above when they read about them, then I don't think me going on about it will help. They speak for themselves.  I don't know how the Greens can justify promising to be a strong voice for one particular religion. Will that pledge hold when it comes to campaigning in East Dulwich (which is majority atheist)? https://censusdata.uk/e02000836-east-dulwich/ts030-religion
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

Search
×
    Search In
×
×
  • Create New...