Archive

Archive for 05/08/2015

A small commercial conundrum

In my quest to get works in thermal plant rooms underway I’m still chasing down builderswork interconnections that have been missed. In order to get the works underway a simple instruction is requied, which is easy to get from the blockwork-package QS. It’s him that who makes the decision as to who will cover the costs for the remedial work, but I had to provide the background information as to what has happened. In this instance the requirement was for 3 no holes to be formed in a blockwork wall which were missed at the time of construction due to the blockwork contractor (Swift) not having the information at the time of construction. The issue is complicated slightly by the fact that the BWIC details have subsequently been revised. The timeline of events is as follows:

03 March 15 – SRW issues BWIC information to CCL, drawing revision is C01.
02 June 15 – Swift start constructing blockwork in thermal plant room 12.
05 June 15 – CCL issue CO1 revision BWIC information to Swift (our informaiotn management isn’t exactly great, but that could be a completely seperate blog).
09 June 15 –Swift complete blockwork in this area, BWIC formed on one wall, but 3 missing on another wall.
02 Jul 15 – SRW issue CO2 version of BWIC information to CCL. Hole location does not change, but size does (increases).
05 Jul 15 –CCL issue CO2 BWIC information to Swift

I ran this by an MEP QS prior to submitting it who was unable to shed any light on who would pay. I’ve had the instruction issued and the work has been carried out, but I’ve not had the opportunity yet to discuss the matter with the blockwork QS for my education. In my mind the CO2 revision would have caused Swift to have to carry out the work anyway and the differenct between knocking out 2 blocks and blocks is minimal so SRW should bear the cost (which will be trivial). Thoughts?

Categories: Uncategorized