{
  "query": "NEC contract quotation assessment no schedule impact typical reasons UK construction",
  "raw_results": [
    {
      "url": "https://www.neccontract.com/news/when-and-why-nec-project-managers-have-to-assess-compensation-events?srsltid=AfmBOorxDfHK4nTmagC9tKt6hsm5r_7oizVXMr-qmaVp3EE8fYYfXGsj",
      "title": "When and why NEC project managers have to assess compensation events | News | NEC Contracts",
      "content": "The second reason requires the project manager to make a reasoned judgement as to whether or not the contractor’s assessment has been done ‘correctly’. The rules governing how the assessment should be made are stated in clause 63 and extensive. Particular attention needs to be given to sub-clauses 63.1 and 63.5, which describe the means by which any change to the prices and the completion date are assessed.  \n  \nIt seems, from the strict wording of the contract, that the project manager is only required to give reasons when instructing a revised quotation (clause 62.4). However, in the event that an instruction is not given and the project manager intends to do the assessment, it may be beneficial to advise the contractor of the reasons. [...] A quotation submitted within the time required by the contract but without details of the assessment would require the project manager to carry out the assessment. The level of detail required is not described but some general guidance on this could be gleaned from clause 13.4. This describes a reason for withholding acceptance of a communication is, ‘that more information is needed in order to assess the contractor’s submission fully.’ If the project manager decided more detail was required, one option could be not to accept the quotation and instruct the contractor to submit a revised quotation (clause 62.3). However, the project manager should avoid introducing unnecessary delays to the process by repeatedly instructing revised quotations. [...] The four reasons why an NEC project manager should make their own assessment of a compensation event are stated in ECC clause 64.1. Each reason describes a failure by the contractor to comply with its obligations and relates to programme and the compensation event process (see Table 1).  \n  \nNEC contracts use the word ‘may’ to indicate that an action is discretionary. However, this word is not used in clause 64.1 so the project manager’s obligation is mandatory when one or more of the stated reasons apply. The approach taken by the contract to assessing compensation events is generally a prospective one. It requires the effects of change to be dealt with as soon as they arise so as to reduce uncertainty for the parties at the end of the contract.",
      "score": 0.6609831,
      "raw_content": null
    },
    {
      "url": "https://www.neccontract.com/news/when-and-why-nec-project-managers-have-to-assess-compensation-events?srsltid=AfmBOoqcDYnhvJo9G8-cW15poQheoDkhOK-iDH-mPeghYbN23DRVXe8Z",
      "title": "When and why NEC project managers have to assess compensation events | News | NEC Contracts",
      "content": "The second reason requires the project manager to make a reasoned judgement as to whether or not the contractor’s assessment has been done ‘correctly’. The rules governing how the assessment should be made are stated in clause 63 and extensive. Particular attention needs to be given to sub-clauses 63.1 and 63.5, which describe the means by which any change to the prices and the completion date are assessed.  \n  \nIt seems, from the strict wording of the contract, that the project manager is only required to give reasons when instructing a revised quotation (clause 62.4). However, in the event that an instruction is not given and the project manager intends to do the assessment, it may be beneficial to advise the contractor of the reasons. [...] A quotation submitted within the time required by the contract but without details of the assessment would require the project manager to carry out the assessment. The level of detail required is not described but some general guidance on this could be gleaned from clause 13.4. This describes a reason for withholding acceptance of a communication is, ‘that more information is needed in order to assess the contractor’s submission fully.’ If the project manager decided more detail was required, one option could be not to accept the quotation and instruct the contractor to submit a revised quotation (clause 62.3). However, the project manager should avoid introducing unnecessary delays to the process by repeatedly instructing revised quotations. [...] The four reasons why an NEC project manager should make their own assessment of a compensation event are stated in ECC clause 64.1. Each reason describes a failure by the contractor to comply with its obligations and relates to programme and the compensation event process (see Table 1).  \n  \nNEC contracts use the word ‘may’ to indicate that an action is discretionary. However, this word is not used in clause 64.1 so the project manager’s obligation is mandatory when one or more of the stated reasons apply. The approach taken by the contract to assessing compensation events is generally a prospective one. It requires the effects of change to be dealt with as soon as they arise so as to reduce uncertainty for the parties at the end of the contract.",
      "score": 0.6609831,
      "raw_content": null
    },
    {
      "url": "https://reachback.builtintelligence.com/t/nec-ecc-timescales-for-contractors-ce-quotations-and-project-manager-assessments/5316",
      "title": "NEC ECC - Timescales for Contractors CE quotations and Project Manager assessments - Compensation Events - ReachBack",
      "content": "As you say the contract is clear that the Project Manager assesses if the Contractor has not submitted a quotation within the timescales. However, if they haven’t, there is no harm in the Contractor submitting a quote and they are certainly not restricted to do so. What the Project Manager chooses to do with that quotation is another question - although they would be pretty foolish not to look at it and consider it. I always say it is much easier for the PM to start with a Contractors quote and cross out what they don’t agree with, rather than starting from scratch from first principles. [...] If either party know they will be late in producing a quote or assessing it then they can notify a request for an extension, and as long as it is for good reason likely to be accepted by the other party. This is much better than just letting the timescales lapse.",
      "score": 0.48630774,
      "raw_content": null
    },
    {
      "url": "https://www.necplanningsolutions.co.uk/post/nec4-compensation-events-how-to-get-quotations-agreed",
      "title": "NEC4 Compensation Events: How to Get Quotations Agreed",
      "content": "Why NEC4 Compensation Events drift\n\nFirst, time bars are real. Under clause 61.3, many contractor-notified compensation events can be time-barred if they are not notified within 8 weeks of the contractor becoming aware that the event has happened.\n\nSecond, people use the wrong programme reference. The accepted programme “current at the dividing date” is the anchor for assessment (clause 63.5), and a later revised programme can be irrelevant if it was issued after the dividing date.\n\nThird, quotations are often submitted as cost spreadsheets plus a narrative. That makes it hard for the PM to test time impact and assumptions quickly, so the response becomes “revise and resubmit”.\n\nThe simplified NEC4 Compensation Events Guide [...] top of page\n\ninfo@necplanningsolutions.co.uk\n\n0330 223 7709\n\nSearch\n\n# NEC4 Compensation Events: How to Get Quotations Agreed\n\n Feb 10\n 4 min read\n\nA graph showing the impact of a CE on programme performance.\n\nNEC4 Compensation Events are meant to keep time and money discussions current, not turn into end-of-project arguments. In practice, they stall for one reason: the contractor cannot present a clear, auditable story that a Project Manager can accept quickly.\n\nOn live jobs, the test is simple. Can you show what changed, what it drove on the programme, what you did to mitigate, and what decision is needed, by when?\n\nIf you can, quotations get agreed faster. If you can’t, everything drifts and you end up relying on retrospective narrative.\n\nWhy NEC4 Compensation Events drift",
      "score": 0.4845514,
      "raw_content": null
    },
    {
      "url": "https://coniston-associates.co.uk/take-notice-a-brief-guide-to-nec-contract-notices/",
      "title": "Take Notice! - A Brief Guide to NEC Contract Notices - Coniston Construction Associates Ltd - Construction Lawyers, Commercial & Contract Specialists",
      "content": "Clause 61.5: Notification of Contractor’s failure to give an early warning. If the Project Manager considers that the Contractor did not give an early warning which an experienced Contractor could have given, then the Project Manager states this at the point of requesting a quotation. The significance of this is that the Project Manager can then assess the subsequent compensation event as though the Contractor had given the early warning, which might mean the assessment has a lower value (refer to clause 63.7). [...] (See further below for detail regarding clause 61.3).\n\nClause 61.4: If the Project Manager fails to not notify a decision in respect of a compensation event notified by the Contractor, the Contractor may notify the Project Manager of his failure.\n\nClause 62.6: If the Project Manager does not reply to a quotation within the time allowed, the Contractor may notify the Project Manager of his failure.\n\nClause 64.4: If the Project Manager does not assess a compensation event within the time allowed, the Contractor may notify the Project Manager of his failure. [...] The Project Manager is motivated to give an early warning, to maximise the opportunity of involving the Contractor and finding the best solution to the problem and therefore keep the Client happy. It might be said that the Contractor’s motivation is similar – but he also has the potent incentive of protecting himself from the Project Manager imposing the sanction at NEC4 clause 63.7 (clause 63.5 in the NEC3) of the compensation event process, which provides:\n\n“If the Project Manager has stated in the instruction to submit quotations that the Contractor did not give an early warning of the event which an experienced contractor could have given, the compensation event is assessed as if the Contractor had given early warning”.",
      "score": 0.45536873,
      "raw_content": null
    }
  ],
  "formatted": "Source: When and why NEC project managers have to assess compensation events | News | NEC Contracts\nURL: https://www.neccontract.com/news/when-and-why-nec-project-managers-have-to-assess-compensation-events?srsltid=AfmBOorxDfHK4nTmagC9tKt6hsm5r_7oizVXMr-qmaVp3EE8fYYfXGsj\nThe second reason requires the project manager to make a reasoned judgement as to whether or not the contractor’s assessment has been done ‘correctly’. The rules governing how the assessment should be made are stated in clause 63 and extensive. Particular attention needs to be given to sub-clauses 63.1 and 63.5, which describe the means by which any change to the prices and the completion date are assessed. It seems, from the strict wording of the contract, that the project manager is only required to give reasons when instructing a revised quotation (clause 62.4). However, in the event that an instruction is not given and the project manager intends to do the assessment, it may be beneficial to advise the contractor of the reasons. [...] A quotation submitted within the time required by the contract but without details of the assessment would require the project manager to carry out the assessment. The level of detail required is not described but some general guidance on this could be gleaned from clause 13.4. This describes a reason for withholding acceptance of a communication is, ‘that more information is needed in order to assess the contractor’s submission fully.’ If the project manager decided more detail was required, one option could be not to accept the quotation and instruct the contractor to submit a revised quotation (clause 62.3). However, the project manager should avoid introducing unnecessary delays to the process by repeatedly instructing revised quotations. [...] The four reasons why an NEC project manager should make their own assessment of a compensation event are stated in ECC clause 64.1. Each reason describes a failure by the contractor to comply with its obligations and relates to programme and the compensation event process (see Table 1). NEC \n\n---\n\nSource: When and why NEC project managers have to assess compensation events | News | NEC Contracts\nURL: https://www.neccontract.com/news/when-and-why-nec-project-managers-have-to-assess-compensation-events?srsltid=AfmBOoqcDYnhvJo9G8-cW15poQheoDkhOK-iDH-mPeghYbN23DRVXe8Z\nThe second reason requires the project manager to make a reasoned judgement as to whether or not the contractor’s assessment has been done ‘correctly’. The rules governing how the assessment should be made are stated in clause 63 and extensive. Particular attention needs to be given to sub-clauses 63.1 and 63.5, which describe the means by which any change to the prices and the completion date are assessed. It seems, from the strict wording of the contract, that the project manager is only required to give reasons when instructing a revised quotation (clause 62.4). However, in the event that an instruction is not given and the project manager intends to do the assessment, it may be beneficial to advise the contractor of the reasons. [...] A quotation submitted within the time required by the contract but without details of the assessment would require the project manager to carry out the assessment. The level of detail required is not described but some general guidance on this could be gleaned from clause 13.4. This describes a reason for withholding acceptance of a communication is, ‘that more information is needed in order to assess the contractor’s submission fully.’ If the project manager decided more detail was required, one option could be not to accept the quotation and instruct the contractor to submit a revised quotation (clause 62.3). However, the project manager should avoid introducing unnecessary delays to the process by repeatedly instructing revised quotations. [...] The four reasons why an NEC project manager should make their own assessment of a compensation event are stated in ECC clause 64.1. Each reason describes a failure by the contractor to comply with its obligations and relates to programme and the compensation event process (see Table 1). NEC \n\n---\n\nSource: NEC ECC - Timescales for Contractors CE quotations and Project Manager assessments - Compensation Events - ReachBack\nURL: https://reachback.builtintelligence.com/t/nec-ecc-timescales-for-contractors-ce-quotations-and-project-manager-assessments/5316\nAs you say the contract is clear that the Project Manager assesses if the Contractor has not submitted a quotation within the timescales. However, if they haven’t, there is no harm in the Contractor submitting a quote and they are certainly not restricted to do so. What the Project Manager chooses to do with that quotation is another question - although they would be pretty foolish not to look at it and consider it. I always say it is much easier for the PM to start with a Contractors quote and cross out what they don’t agree with, rather than starting from scratch from first principles. [...] If either party know they will be late in producing a quote or assessing it then they can notify a request for an extension, and as long as it is for good reason likely to be accepted by the other party. This is much better than just letting the timescales lapse.\n\n---\n\nSource: NEC4 Compensation Events: How to Get Quotations Agreed\nURL: https://www.necplanningsolutions.co.uk/post/nec4-compensation-events-how-to-get-quotations-agreed\nWhy NEC4 Compensation Events drift First, time bars are real. Under clause 61.3, many contractor-notified compensation events can be time-barred if they are not notified within 8 weeks of the contractor becoming aware that the event has happened. Second, people use the wrong programme reference. The accepted programme “current at the dividing date” is the anchor for assessment (clause 63.5), and a later revised programme can be irrelevant if it was issued after the dividing date. Third, quotations are often submitted as cost spreadsheets plus a narrative. That makes it hard for the PM to test time impact and assumptions quickly, so the response becomes “revise and resubmit”. The simplified NEC4 Compensation Events Guide [...] top of page info@necplanningsolutions.co.uk 0330 223 7709 Search # NEC4 Compensation Events: How to Get Quotations Agreed Feb 10 4 min read A graph showing the impact of a CE on programme performance. NEC4 Compensation Events are meant to keep time and money discussions current, not turn into end-of-project arguments. In practice, they stall for one reason: the contractor cannot present a clear, auditable story that a Project Manager can accept quickly. On live jobs, the test is simple. Can you show what changed, what it drove on the programme, what you did to mitigate, and what decision is needed, by when? If you can, quotations get agreed faster. If you can’t, everything drifts and you end up relying on retrospective narrative. Why NEC4 Compensation Events drift\n\n---\n\nSource: Take Notice! - A Brief Guide to NEC Contract Notices - Coniston Construction Associates Ltd - Construction Lawyers, Commercial & Contract Specialists\nURL: https://coniston-associates.co.uk/take-notice-a-brief-guide-to-nec-contract-notices/\nClause 61.5: Notification of Contractor’s failure to give an early warning. If the Project Manager considers that the Contractor did not give an early warning which an experienced Contractor could have given, then the Project Manager states this at the point of requesting a quotation. The significance of this is that the Project Manager can then assess the subsequent compensation event as though the Contractor had given the early warning, which might mean the assessment has a lower value (refer to clause 63.7). [...] (See further below for detail regarding clause 61.3). Clause 61.4: If the Project Manager fails to not notify a decision in respect of a compensation event notified by the Contractor, the Contractor may notify the Project Manager of his failure. Clause 62.6: If the Project Manager does not reply to a quotation within the time allowed, the Contractor may notify the Project Manager of his failure. Clause 64.4: If the Project Manager does not assess a compensation event within the time allowed, the Contractor may notify the Project Manager of his failure. [...] The Project Manager is motivated to give an early warning, to maximise the opportunity of involving the Contractor and finding the best solution to the problem and therefore keep the Client happy. It might be said that the Contractor’s motivation is similar – but he also has the potent incentive of protecting himself from the Project Manager imposing the sanction at NEC4 clause 63.7 (clause 63.5 in the NEC3) of the compensation event process, which provides: “If the Project Manager has stated in the instruction to submit quotations that the Contractor did not give an early warning of the event which an experienced contractor could have given, the compensation event is assessed as if the Contractor had g"
}