New SCSI Report Highlights The Current Position with Below Cost Tenders

onq

Registered User
Messages
4,388
From

http://businessetc.thejournal.ie/ha...low-cost-to-try-and-find-work-207233-Aug2011/

Over half of quantity surveyors responding to the survey said they had seen projects collapse because they were below cost. Over two-thirds of projects which failed to be completed were public projects.

SCSI president John Curtin said that below-cost tenders being accepted had already led to the collapse of a number of State construction projects, including contracts to build new schools.

“Below-cost tendering by contractors is likely to continue over the next twelve months,” Curtin said.

“This race to the bottom poses a real threat that tenders will not provide the required standard of construction quality and professional expertise needed for the long-term viability, and return on investment, of any project over its life cycle.”

========================

This article supports anecdotal reports I received last year and posted about on AAM.
Then, people without proper professional advice thinking they were getting a good deal appointed contractors who offered very low tenders - the contractors walked off the job when they ran out of money.

The problem with such below cost tenders is that there is a high likelihood that corners have been cut on radon, damp-proofing, structural or services items which will cause problems in later years.
This is exacerbated by projects that are brought to site without proper professional inspections being carried out or photographic records being kept.
Thus, other contractors may be reluctant to take over the work where they suspect substandard construction has occurred.

These comments are especially to self-builders who based on posts to AAM are more likely to accept low tenders.
Without a professional inspecting on site, they may not discover non-compliant work until too late.

ONQ.

[broken link removed]

All advice on AAM is remote from the situation and cannot be relied upon as a defence or support - in and of itself - should legal action be taken.
Competent legal and building professionals should be asked to advise in Real Life with rights to inspect and issue reports on the matters at hand.
 
"Pay Peanuts Get Monkeys" is always true based on my experience in the construction industry
 
(nods)

I heard a horror story last night about the way subcontractors quotations may be disregarded by the main contractor in putting in his bid.
This harks back to the stories we heard a year ago about builders underbidding and selecting one or two subbies to "take the hit for the big guy".
Despicable activity, and apparently being cheerleaded by government departments chasing lowest tender as opposed to MEAT (Most Economically Advantageous Tender) Tender figures.

Its certainly not the "most economically advantageous" outcome for a guy to go bust in the middle of the project.
Its even worse where no-one is willing to take over the project because they're worried that the previous work has had too many corners cut.
Given Registrar John Graby's concerns that government departments weren't even paying out what they contracted to pay out this couldn't happen to a nicer set of people.

ONQ.

[broken link removed]

All advice on AAM is remote from the situation and cannot be relied upon as a defence or support - in and of itself - should legal action be taken.
Competent legal and building professionals should be asked to advise in Real Life with rights to inspect and issue reports on the matters at hand.