I read with interest the report by Stephen Cousins and Kristina Smith on problems faced by contractors due to inadequate designs (CM May).

There appears to be many more instances of professional failures occurring: contracts entered into where disciplines are unaware of their roles and responsibilities, myriad contractor design packages (due to professionals’ inabilities to deliver the most sensible upfront design solutions), incomplete and uncoordinated drawings, specifications done by suppliers, critical information missing at tender stage and so on.

If it is a client who’s trying to save money by getting the least amount of service then they are at fault, but if they are paying good money for sound advice and are getting the opposite I imagine they would be a very disgruntled party.

As Mike Smith of Corniche Builders says, it comes to a head as money is being lost and the claim looms. The fights begin and everyone is battling their corner and still it’s the client who at the end of the day will have to resolve it, with a job costing more and delivery in turmoil.

It looks like traditional contracting routes are dead and the bespoke lump sum contract is here to stay, so what is the solution to an industry lacking in resource and skilled professionals?

A third-party checking mechanism may be the way forward to force the bar back up to an acceptable professional standard. At least the client will know what they are up against from the documentation and can be enlightened as to any potential holes and have them resolved before putting pen to paper.

Craig Tedford

Source

Construction Manager