14th February 2006, 06:16 PM
Posted by Troll, with quotes from me:
Point 1
Well, I think you are misinterpreting here. I don't deny the curators access to the contractor, or vice versa; what I do is ensure that when they meet I, or one of my staff, is present. That way, I can make sure that the curator does not issue contractual instructions to the contractor, which they are not entitled to do as they are not a party to the contract.
This is as much to protect the contractor as the client. If a contractor does work on the curator's instructions, without having them agreed by the client first, then they are in breach of contract. The client would be entitled to refuse to pay for the work, and could potentially sue them if the work has an adverse effect on the proposed construction method. However, if the consultant is present, the work can be discussed and, if it is reasonable, agreed. The contractor then takes an instruction to do the work from the consultant, and that instruction is contractually valid.
Take note that, in the 13 years I have been doing this, no curator or contractor has ever objected to this approach. In fact, the only person ever to object is Troll.
In practice, in some counties, I often have to persuade curators to come to site, so that sites where I am the consultant often get more curator monitoring than would otherwise be the case.
Another reason to prevent direct, unmoderated contractor/curator contact over a project is to prevent unscrupulous contractor PMs (they do exist) from feathering their nest by building up the need for more work than is justified. I have seen this done so blatantly that the curator himself objected, saying that the extra work recommended by the contractor was not needed.
Point 2
Not sure what you object to in my original comment. What I was saying was that, once a developer has agreed a WSI with the curator and agreed a price for implementing it with a contractor, then they want to ensure that the work is done to the satisfaction of the curator. If the contractor skimps on the work, and in consequence the curator makes a justifiable fuss, that is just time and money down the drain for the developer. So, they try to avoid that situation. Where they negotiate hard is in agreeing the WSI in the first place.
1man1desk
to let, fully furnished
Quote:quote:Greetings all.My issue is with the following:
1."I never allow the contractor to go direct to the curator"
I don`t like this for a number of reasons.Mainly, the curator is a representative/servant (take yer pick) of the tax-paying public.His/her job is involved in the curation of a publically owned resource. Sorry consultants-I find this concept arrogant in the extreme.In my experience, consultants seem to make a habit of this.Nothing short of the curator literally handing the finite resource over to the private sector on a plate.Have a fantastic example of this very practise and the price the archaeology had to pay.
2."grief with curators is a problem for them(clients) and they prefer to avoid it"
I bet they bloody do.So, let me get this nice and clear... consultants feel that they have the right to deny contractors access to the curators? Is this standard practise?
Point 1
Well, I think you are misinterpreting here. I don't deny the curators access to the contractor, or vice versa; what I do is ensure that when they meet I, or one of my staff, is present. That way, I can make sure that the curator does not issue contractual instructions to the contractor, which they are not entitled to do as they are not a party to the contract.
This is as much to protect the contractor as the client. If a contractor does work on the curator's instructions, without having them agreed by the client first, then they are in breach of contract. The client would be entitled to refuse to pay for the work, and could potentially sue them if the work has an adverse effect on the proposed construction method. However, if the consultant is present, the work can be discussed and, if it is reasonable, agreed. The contractor then takes an instruction to do the work from the consultant, and that instruction is contractually valid.
Take note that, in the 13 years I have been doing this, no curator or contractor has ever objected to this approach. In fact, the only person ever to object is Troll.
In practice, in some counties, I often have to persuade curators to come to site, so that sites where I am the consultant often get more curator monitoring than would otherwise be the case.
Another reason to prevent direct, unmoderated contractor/curator contact over a project is to prevent unscrupulous contractor PMs (they do exist) from feathering their nest by building up the need for more work than is justified. I have seen this done so blatantly that the curator himself objected, saying that the extra work recommended by the contractor was not needed.
Point 2
Not sure what you object to in my original comment. What I was saying was that, once a developer has agreed a WSI with the curator and agreed a price for implementing it with a contractor, then they want to ensure that the work is done to the satisfaction of the curator. If the contractor skimps on the work, and in consequence the curator makes a justifiable fuss, that is just time and money down the drain for the developer. So, they try to avoid that situation. Where they negotiate hard is in agreeing the WSI in the first place.
1man1desk
to let, fully furnished