How do you deal with a contractor who shouts, slams the table in meetings, persistently over-claims interim valuations, erroneously threatens to pull off site, and even asked me to ‘bung him £100k’ to aid his cash flow?!

Simple: Walk out of the meeting, value the works carefully, follow the Contract, keep records and say, NO!

A quantum expert acting as a PQS is in a potentially dangerous position for a rogue contractor who ignores many commercial and contractual rules.

I was brought onto a project by an employer’s agent who was struggling to explain to and ‘deal’ with a difficult contractor. The issues I was dealing with surrounded loss and expense entitlement, following an EOT award. I was later instructed as the PQS under a JCT Contract.

The argument surrounding Loss and Expense was constant. And it was often based upon poor knowledge or skill, or even ill-informed judgment. It was seemingly seen as an opportunity for the contractor to make money.

What should be recoverable in a loss and expense claim? We very often refer to the Society for Construction Law “SCL” and its Pre-Action Protocol (2nd edition). The entitlement to recovery is simple; If an extension of time has been awarded, there is no concurrency and the extension falls under the category of a ‘Relevant Matter’ (in the case of the JCT), the injured party is entitled to recover ‘those expenses necessarily incurred to put it back in the position as if the delay had not occurred’.

I’ve prepared a Loss and Expense case study series that looks at the battle, protecting the Client, the lies told, Adjudication preparation and result, and lessons learnt on one very challenging project.

This is the first a number of articles – look out for further posts from The Diaries of a Quantum Expert acting as a PQS over the coming months.

Categories: Case Study