My comments are given below in red :-----Original Message----From: Tiny Thomas [mailto:Tiny@picodubai.

com]
Sent: Sunday, November 16, 2008 7:56 PM
To: [email protected]
Subject: Q&A
Dear Sir,
This is an interior fit out project based on FIDIC short form of Contract
1. The project start date was 13th July and completion date was 60 days.
As there was delay from client in issuing drawings and other
instructions (E.I's) the revised completion date was set at 5th October
2008. During last week of September (26/09/2008) E.I was issued for
landscaping and other external works which will require at least 5-6
weeks for completion. The client was notified about the same. Also
various other E.I's were issued after 5th October 08. There was also
some delays from our side. Can we classify this case as concurrent
delay Only by carrying out delay impact analyses for each partys
delay, concurrency can be established. Nevertheless, in respect of the
Client caused delays, the Contractor can get an extension of time. and
since the client has not intimated us the new completion dates can we
consider the Time at large case. No. As long as there is a clause in the
contract with provision to extend time for Clients delays, time does
not become at-large.
2. The client issues Snag list on 29th October, but has not issued
completion certificate. Can issue of snag list be considered as practical
completion date (in the absence of issue of completion certificate)
Since it is customary to issue snag lists before and/or after achieving
completion, issuance of a snag list cannot establish a date of
completion.

Regards,

Prof. Sam.
Prof. Indrawansa Samaratunga PhD, DSc
FRICS, FAIQS, FIQSSL, FCIArb, FCIOB, FCMI, FASI, FBEng
Chartered Quantity Surveyor and Registered Arbitrator / Expert
Australian Inst.of Qty.Surveyors-Middle East Representative
PO Box 23461, Dubai, UAE. T +971504588949 F +97143378668

Regards,
Tiny Thomas
-----Original Message----From: chandra hasa reddy [mailto:[email protected]]
Sent: Saturday, November 15, 2008 4:21 PM
To: [email protected]
Subject: Question

Dear professor,
Thank you very much prof.sam for giving us your
valuable comments on contractual matters.
I would like to know about "Value Engineering", why we
will do Either to obtain value for money, or to achieve a project cost
within budget, or both. and when we should do? Preferably during the
pre-contract stage, though it is not uncommon to have it during
construction as well. But the opportunities to benefit from it during
the post contract stage are less. also please explain its
procedure. Too complex to reply in this short Q&A forum. You can access
material on the internet on this subject.
so please briefly explain the above. Redesigning to achieve the above
without affecting the utility, capacity or durability of the project.

Regards,

Prof. Sam.
Prof. Indrawansa Samaratunga PhD, DSc
FRICS, FAIQS, FIQSSL, FCIArb, FCIOB, FCMI, FASI, FBEng
Chartered Quantity Surveyor and Registered Arbitrator / Expert
Australian Inst.of Qty.Surveyors-Middle East Representative
PO Box 23461, Dubai, UAE. T +971504588949 F +97143378668

Thanks and Regards

chandra
----- Original Message ----From: rajesh kumar
To: sam senior QS <[email protected]>
Date: Wed, 12 Nov 2008 21:04:15 -0800 (PST)
Subject: Material at site either 70% of Invoice or BOQ breakdown for material
Sir
thanks for your continues support
"How do we value material on site using fidic 1987 edition(red book).we have a situation in our project where
the value of material on site is more the the total amount, when a couple of item in boq are completed.
should we pay 70% of invoice rate or 70% of the the material percentage of the item in boq.
or should we compare the both a least has to be certified. 70% of the invoice rate.
If I certify the lower value of material comparing the BOQ Rate of the item and the invoice rate, which clause
should I be quoting to justify this? You cannot certify the lower value.
Secondly If the invoiced amount for materials is greater than the unit rate, it is obvious that the contractor
has made, at best, an error in his offer otherwise the material price in the market raised abruptly from the
date of tender. In both the cases its contractor risk.
suppose if the CONTRACT allows for inflation in this case, what would be the scenario especially for
material at site???? If the price fluctuation clause (70) is active, then there is no problem whatsoever in
paying 70% of the invoice value. The problem arises when someone amends the clause and forgets to
amend all the related clauses such as Clause 60, to retain consistency.

Regards,

Prof. Sam.
Prof. Indrawansa Samaratunga PhD, DSc
FRICS, FAIQS, FIQSSL, FCIArb, FCIOB, FCMI, FASI, FBEng
Chartered Quantity Surveyor and Registered Arbitrator / Expert
Australian Inst.of Qty.Surveyors-Middle East Representative
PO Box 23461, Dubai, UAE. T +971504588949 F +97143378668

Thanking you in anticipation

Rajeshkumar

From: Sharief, Usman [mailto:[email protected]]

Sent: Wednesday, November 12, 2008 3:20 PM
To: Prof. Sam
Subject: Consumables as Material on Site

Dear Prof,
I have an typical problem on the site which as follows
The Nominated sub contractor (MEP) is claiming consumables as Material on site which
are related to work for example brush, paint, blade, hammer, wire, Nuts, screws etc
There is an item in prelims for small plants and tools for which he has been paid.
Can you please advise on which type of consumables can be paid to the contractor
According to FIDIC 4th, only those material to be incorporated in the Permanent Works
qualify for payment. Also the Appendix to Tender requires a list of materials to be
attached to it which qualify for payment. If such list was not attached, then :Brush
- No
Paint for Permanent Works
- Yes
Paint for Temporary Works
- No
Blade
- No
Hammer
- No
Others for Permanent Works
- Yes
Others for Temporary Works
- No
Regards,

Prof. Sam.
Prof. Indrawansa Samaratunga PhD, DSc
FRICS, FAIQS, FIQSSL, FCIArb, FCIOB, FCMI, FASI, FBEng
Chartered Quantity Surveyor and Registered Arbitrator / Expert
Australian Inst.of Qty.Surveyors-Middle East Representative
PO Box 23461, Dubai, UAE. T +971504588949 F +97143378668

Regards
Usman sharief

-----Original Message----From: Deep Thampan [mailto:[email protected]]

Sent: Monday, November 10, 2008 9:38 PM
To: [email protected]
Subject: RE: It would, in deed, be a good deed
Dear Dr.Sam
Please note the following had successfully completed their RICS APC interview and
had become full professional members of The Royal Institution of Chartered
Surveyors (RICS)
1st Batch (2006- Sept- Oct)
1.Tojichen Joseph
2.Kishore T Ouseph
2nd Batch (2007 - Jan -Feb)
1.Renjit George
I'm sure they had definitely benefited from attending the Sound Contract
Administration Seminars Conducted by you.
That is very good news, I must try and contact them to congratulate.

Regards,

Prof. Sam.
Prof. Indrawansa Samaratunga PhD, DSc
FRICS, FAIQS, FIQSSL, FCIArb, FCIOB, FCMI, FASI, FBEng
Chartered Quantity Surveyor and Registered Arbitrator / Expert
Australian Inst.of Qty.Surveyors-Middle East Representative
PO Box 23461, Dubai, UAE. T +971504588949 F +97143378668

Thanks and regards

Deep Thampan BEngg,MRICS
----- Original Message ----From: Buddhika Nivunhella
To: [email protected]
Date: Sun, 09 Nov 2008 17:19:54 +0400 (GST)
Subject: Q & A
Dear Sir,
How to Prepare a report appraising relevant tendering methods for any construction project giving
their advantages and disadvantages? Too complex to give a short answer. Please read on the
internet. Each of the common procurement methods are designed to achieve one or more of the
elements (quality, cost or time) at the cost of one or more of them. Eg. In the traditional route time
is compromised to achieve cost and quality. In the fast track routes quality and/or cost are
compromised to achieve time etc. etc.

Regards,

Prof. Sam.
Prof. Indrawansa Samaratunga PhD, DSc
FRICS, FAIQS, FIQSSL, FCIArb, FCIOB, FCMI, FASI, FBEng
Chartered Quantity Surveyor and Registered Arbitrator / Expert
Australian Inst.of Qty.Surveyors-Middle East Representative
PO Box 23461, Dubai, UAE. T +971504588949 F +97143378668

Buddhika Priyankara Nivunhella

Quantity Surveyor
Carrara Mid-East Industrial Co.LLC
P.O.Box : 3565
Dubai
U.A.E.
----- Original Message ----From: UMMER FAROOK
To: [email protected]
Date: Sun, 09 Nov 2008 10:33:51 +0400
Subject: Q.STRIGHT SPECIAL
So many thanks in Advance
TYPE OF CONTRACT- FIDIC, CESSM3, REMEASURABLE- FIXED PRICE.
In the tender drawing & construction drawing is showing straight special but not included in BOQ
On the training you told about straight specials of pipes if it is not included in the BOQ contractor can
claim as a variation clause 52.1 Not as a variation, but as a re-measurement. and CESMM3 clause 5.1
Now project is running and some works are finished.
But General preamble is saying like below
' Pipes are measured net through their centerline as laid and notwithstanding CESMM3 clause, are to
include for all drain fittings on all types of drain pipes extra joints of all types, cutting, waste, etc. for lying
in trenches of any depth and building into sides of inspection chambers'.
But in this preamble is not saying clause 5.1 Deleted. It is not necessary to state that 5.1 is deleted. Above
notwithstanding provision in the Preamble, adequately modify the rules for measurement of fittings, rules
related to depth zones and rules for measurement of building-in.
In this scenario contractor can claim straight special and depth increase as a variation. No.

Regards,

Prof. Sam.
Prof. Indrawansa Samaratunga PhD, DSc
FRICS, FAIQS, FIQSSL, FCIArb, FCIOB, FCMI, FASI, FBEng
Chartered Quantity Surveyor and Registered Arbitrator / Expert
Australian Inst.of Qty.Surveyors-Middle East Representative
PO Box 23461, Dubai, UAE. T +971504588949 F +97143378668

I am waiting for your valuable reply.

----- Original Message ----From: Dang Bek Hin
To: [email protected]
Date: Thu, 06 Nov 2008 08:06:30 +0400
Subject: RE: Q&A

I have a question here.

A contract (Re-measure contract) signed among Employer, Contractor & Nsc. Instruction issued
to NSC to carry out certain MEP works (testing and commissioning work is part of the scope of

work). NSC has qualified in his quotation that temporary power supply for Testing &
Commissioning work is excluded. However, my understanding is since he has priced for the
preliminaries, he is therefore obliged to do it, question of included or excluded from the quotation
is not arise at all. Who shall supply the power? Please advice. If the exclusion of power supply
for T&C is part of the provisions in the subcontract, then the NSc does not appear to have an
obligation to do so. If he priced an item for power supply for T&C in the preliminaries and if that
item is subject to re-measurement ( Note: all items in prelims are not subject to re-measurement),
then he should clarify what he priced and accordingly he would have to provide power or the
amount would be deducted. If he is successful in demonstrating that he priced in that item for
anything other than power supply for T&C, then either the Employer or the Main Contractor
should (according to the provisions in their contract) supply power. Generally there are provisions
in Main Contract scopes to provide power to subcontractors. If the preliminaries item is a non-remeasurable item, then it is at NScs risk, and whether or not he has an obligation to supply power
should be established from other provisions and in that process, his exclusion may take
precedence.

Regards,

Prof. Sam.
Prof. Indrawansa Samaratunga PhD, DSc
FRICS, FAIQS, FIQSSL, FCIArb, FCIOB, FCMI, FASI, FBEng
Chartered Quantity Surveyor and Registered Arbitrator / Expert
Australian Inst.of Qty.Surveyors-Middle East Representative
PO Box 23461, Dubai, UAE. T +971504588949 F +97143378668

Regards,

Dang Bek Hin

Manager Post Contracts

Dubai Maritime City

----- Original Message ----From: Ephraim Cooper

To: [email protected]
Date: Mon, 03 Nov 2008 13:52:03 +0400
Subject: RE: More Q&A

Dear Prof Sam,

I learnt much during your course and just want to thank you.
Kind regards
Ephraim Cooper, RAIA, NZIA

Project Director, PM/CM International

KEO International Consultants
PM/CM INTERNATIONAL DIVISION

You are welcome.

Regards,

Prof. Sam.
Prof. Indrawansa Samaratunga PhD, DSc
FRICS, FAIQS, FIQSSL, FCIArb, FCIOB, FCMI, FASI, FBEng
Chartered Quantity Surveyor and Registered Arbitrator / Expert
Australian Inst.of Qty.Surveyors-Middle East Representative
PO Box 23461, Dubai, UAE. T +971504588949 F +97143378668

----- Original Message ----From: Rama Subramanian

To: "'[email protected]'" <[email protected]>
Date: Tue, 04 Nov 2008 08:53:10 +0400 (GST)
Subject: Q&A

Dear Dr.SAM,
I would like to thank you on your noble cause of imparting quality education.
Your seminars catalyses our thought process and the learning curve is steep.
Kindly advise on the below given queries.
1.

In a Lumpsum Contract, is it mandatory to provide the measurements along

with the Final Account submission? No. However measurements are required
for any variations and provisional items/quantities.

2.

The word Guaranteed Maximium Price: Is it contractually binding? . A

contract can be worded in a manner to make a party bound by a GMP.

Thank you for your kind words.

Regards,

Prof. Sam.
Prof. Indrawansa Samaratunga PhD, DSc
FRICS, FAIQS, FIQSSL, FCIArb, FCIOB, FCMI, FASI, FBEng
Chartered Quantity Surveyor and Registered Arbitrator / Expert
Australian Inst.of Qty.Surveyors-Middle East Representative
PO Box 23461, Dubai, UAE. T +971504588949 F +97143378668

Thanks and regards

Ramasubramanian A
Estimator
CRACKNELL LLC
-----Original Message----From: prem swarup [mailto:[email protected]]
Sent: Wednesday, November 12, 2008 5:52 PM
To: Prof. Sam
Subject: RE: More Q&A

Dear Sir
Yesterday there was an interesting discussion with my superiors regarding omission
of one of the shed extension due to sudden demand swing from a '4 shed
extension contract' given to the contractor on a lumpsum basis.
They opine that we can omit certain works from an original scope of work agreed
from a lumpsum contract and claim negative variation from the contractor though it
is neither a rate contract nor a re-measurable one. Yes, work can be omitted.
During tendering stage BOQs were obtained from the tenderers for reference and
comparison purpose but award of the contract was purely on lumpsum basis only.
Consulatnt has not estimated and given the BOQs in the Tender as well. Now the
clarifications requested are as under:
Q1.Can we now ask the contractor to pay back the amount of one shed extension
from the agreed lumpsum price. Yes.
Q2.In Dubai what is in vogue for such issues? A reasonable price would be estimated
for the omitted work, abortive work and other costs of the Contractor.
Q3. What is our stand as a client in case if we have to go to arbitration or to the
courts in Dubai. You do not seem to have a dispute.
They were also saying that with their 25 years of experience in Dubai this is the way
the contracts are administered even it is a lumpsum contract. They were quoting
many case studies which they had administered. I am totally flabbergasted with what
should be as per theory and standard and what is in practice internally in Dubai.
They are right, you appear to be confused. You can omit work. What cannot be done
is to omit work for the purpose of executing it through others ! They also agreed with
my knowledge gained from your esteemed self but opined that it is limited to
USA,U.K and India but not applicable in Dubai. They are wrong. It is very much
applicable to Dubai.
I told them that yes you can claim and order 'one shed extension' cancellation if you
have relationship with the contractor but definitely it will reflect in some other
contract with him as nobody will do business to loose and that too after planning and
booking of orders for materials for all the four shed extensions. You appear to have
given incorrect advice. Work can be omitted. Omission should be valued to allow for

the contractors expenses etc. Moreover out of 4-shed extension to be constructed

the contractor has completed civil works for one shed extension and steel erection
works will be started next week. For other 2 sheds he has almost completed up to
tie-beam level. Steel has been procured by the steel sub-contractor for all the 4shed extensions.
Overall at this juncture if we disturb the smooth running project and start negotiation
with the contractor will it yield any saving on capital expenditure as the subject shed
extension's built-up area is not even 1/6th of the total built-up area planned. Only a
detailed valuation could establish this.

Regards,

Prof. Sam.
Prof. Indrawansa Samaratunga PhD, DSc
FRICS, FAIQS, FIQSSL, FCIArb, FCIOB, FCMI, FASI, FBEng
Chartered Quantity Surveyor and Registered Arbitrator / Expert
Australian Inst.of Qty.Surveyors-Middle East Representative
PO Box 23461, Dubai, UAE. T +971504588949 F +97143378668

Thanks
Regards
Prem
PS: Sorry for the lengthy text.