Dear All
I am currently working on a 5 Star Hotel which is under construction.
The situation is as follows:
1. A Baseline Project submitted by the contractor was accepted some 2 yrs back.
2. Contractor submitted a number of EOT claims, which are under review.
3. They were asked to submit a revised baseline programme.
4. They submitted a revised programme with delay events but the balance of scope of works still follow the same logic as was shown in the baseline programme whereas their current sequencing of works time for diff trades has completely changed.
My question is, when the contractor has included the delay events into the programme, and shown a impacted as-built programme, then should not they include the realistic sequence of works for the balance scope? This in my opinion will give a realistic picture of the date of completion and also the revised baseline will serve the purpose of a contractual document.
The problem is under the FIDIC contract being followed, a revised programme can be only submitted when the actual duration of the works is more than the estimated duration. i am stuck with a programme which had estimated duration way too relaxed and now the contractor is in fact taking less time to do most of the trades. The delay has been mainly due to design revisions from the engineers side.
Can any seniors guide me on this issue?
Regards
Vamsi Chand
I am currently working on a 5 Star Hotel which is under construction.
The situation is as follows:
1. A Baseline Project submitted by the contractor was accepted some 2 yrs back.
2. Contractor submitted a number of EOT claims, which are under review.
3. They were asked to submit a revised baseline programme.
4. They submitted a revised programme with delay events but the balance of scope of works still follow the same logic as was shown in the baseline programme whereas their current sequencing of works time for diff trades has completely changed.
My question is, when the contractor has included the delay events into the programme, and shown a impacted as-built programme, then should not they include the realistic sequence of works for the balance scope? This in my opinion will give a realistic picture of the date of completion and also the revised baseline will serve the purpose of a contractual document.
The problem is under the FIDIC contract being followed, a revised programme can be only submitted when the actual duration of the works is more than the estimated duration. i am stuck with a programme which had estimated duration way too relaxed and now the contractor is in fact taking less time to do most of the trades. The delay has been mainly due to design revisions from the engineers side.
Can any seniors guide me on this issue?
Regards
Vamsi Chand