Re: Stadium and other issues : Wed Apr 03, 2024 2:32 pm
financialtimes wrote:
That's a reasonably pragmatic way to look at it, however being involved in the construction industry for the last 36 years I have learnt a few things and the main one to remember is that we don't need to be worried about these shortcuts, its the ones we don't know about that we need to worry about. As for ME picking up/not picking up the cost of rectification, it all depends on a number of things. The main being the initial contract and retainers (if there even was any) and where the instructions came from to cut these corners/costs 
Saying all that I do have100% faith in ME and I'm very glad that it isn't an accountant in charge anymore of making the next decisions moving forward
Saying all that I do have100% faith in ME and I'm very glad that it isn't an accountant in charge anymore of making the next decisions moving forward
What I don't understand is that with updates given by JM during the build, it definitely came across that Trinity were liable for any rise in steel price (even after contracts let) giving way to an erosion of project scope as the build went on. I've never worked on a "cost plus" contract and only ever know them to be for complex and unique projects (Nuclear Power Stations, HS2 etc).
