Internal measured surveys - You have to draw the line somewhere!

Errors or omissions in a drawing can result in serious consequences which can manifest themselves into confusion and disagreement, delays, additional costs and ultimately disputes. These problems can be avoided by ensuring that those who undertake measured surveys are adequately trained and supervised.

Source: www.easyplanbirminghamsouth.co.uk

Drawings are arguably the most effective form of communication within a construction project and are used at all stages.  It is therefore fundamentally important that all of those who are responsible for taking measurements and preparing drawings understand the significance of what they are doing. The 'life' of a drawing will be developed throughout a project and will vary depending upon the complexity and type of project.  For example concept drawings may be required, which can then become initial design drawings, followed by detailed design drawings.  From this stage the drawings could then be developed into construction drawings and used for tendering and also contract drawings.  Eventually, the drawings will become 'as built' and will be included into a Health & Safety File, a requirement under the Construction (Design & Management) Regulations 2015. The above examples of where drawings could be used in a construction project is not exhaustive, however demonstrates their importance.

Errors or omissions in a drawing can result in serious consequences which can manifest themselves into confusion and disagreement, delays, additional costs and ultimately disputes.  These problems can be avoided by ensuring that those who undertake measured surveys are adequately trained and supervised.  It would be very unwise to assume that undertaking a measured survey is a simple process and a skill that everyone should naturally have.  This is because buildings differ significantly in size, construction and form and the amount of information needed will vary depending on the scope of the project. One thing however that is for certain is that undertaking a measured survey is far more than just obtaining dimensions! A common issues I often found with my surveyors when undertaking an internal measured survey would be that they would sometimes miss key information such as floor to ceiling heights, window cill height, joist direction, services intake of a building, diagonal check measurements and sometimes even forgetting to note wall construction. If a re-visit is necessary to collect missing information then this will be a cost to the business and can impact on profitability.

Source: www.puresurvey.co.uk

It is important that the right measuring equipment is taken and used. This will include a folding measure and 5 or 10 metre steel tape (or both) for measuring shorter distances and 25 metre tape and a trundle wheel for measuring longer distances.  Nowadays a digital measure will also be taken which can also be used to obtain, rooms sizes (sqm) as well as single dimension measurements.  When using measuring equipment the 'Surveyor' should be fully aware of the limitations of the equipment and also have an appreciation of distance to be able to discern whether digital dimension are accurate or not.  This is because inaccurate readings can be obtained from a digital measure when the laser comes into contact with reflective surfaces or glass.  If the Surveyor was to write down the measurement without asking themselves if the reading is reasonable, they will have problems when they return to the office and start to prepare their drawings.

Whilst undertaking a measured survey on site the Surveyor must appreciate that either they, or maybe somebody else like an Architectural Technologist will have to interpret the information that has been collected on site in order to prepare the drawings.  Many times I have witnessed Surveyors and Technologists look with complete dismay at a piece of paper in the office that has been given to them by someone who has undertaken a measured survey.  This is because what they are looking at is a rain drenched, smudged, excuse for a drawing that is so 'busy' with lines, dimensions and other information that it is difficult to tell the difference between each!, and they are expected to produce an accurate drawing from this!

To help minimise omissions and errors in drawings there are some simple basic techniques that can be very useful when undertaking measured surveys.  Firstly, I always advised my Surveyors to draw the building footprint (in pencil) first, before taking any dimensions, The pencil could then be overdrawn in pen later.  This would ensure that the drawing was well proportioned and avoid 'squashing' information into a small corner of a piece of paper, because there is no room left on the sheet, toward the end of the survey.  Next, use different colour pens for recording information.  It is much easier to interpret a drawing if say the building outline is in black, dimensions are in red, construction details are in green, sockets, switches and radiators are in blue etc.  Next, when using measuring tapes particularly for longer distances, ensure that there are no twists in the tape and that it is a tight as possible to avoid deflection.  Surveyors must also ensure that dimensions are taken at the same height.  For example is one Surveyor is holding the tape just above the skirting board and at the other end the Surveyor is holding the tape half way up the wall this could result in a significant inaccuracy in a single dimension.

The importance of a comprehensive and accurate measured survey cannot be understated, which can only be achieved through appropriate training and supervision.  Organisations should ignore this at their peril!

Please feel free to share this article and other articles on this site with friends, family and colleagues who you think would be interested

Information/opinions posted on this site are the personal views of the author and should not be relied upon by any person or any third party without first seeking further professional advice. Also, please scroll down and read the copyright notice at the end of the blog.

NEC Contracts – Who is Responsible for Managing Defects?

Guest article from John Peel BSc (Hons) – Assistant Lecturer at Coventry University

....when things go wrong between other people named in the Contract the natural reaction is to look in the direction of the Project Manager (PM) to resolve the issues. It could therefore be argued there is almost an implied duty on the PM under the NEC to attempt to resolve conflicts before they get to adjudication

Source: http://www.saice.org.za/

As a Project Manager (PM) under the NEC I was always glad that the role of defect management was essentially allocated to the Supervisor. Having been party to many long winded arguments over defects under other forms of contract such as the JCT it came as a breath of fresh air to pass the duty of notifying defects, carrying out tests and inspections and issuing the defects certificate etc. to the Supervisor.  Indeed simply not having to draft pages and pages of snagging was enough to make me want to embrace the new procedure under the NEC when I started working with it.

The role of the Supervisor defined by the NEC is that of essentially ensuring the works are built in accordance with the works information. The role of the PM whilst broader in overall scale than that of the Supervisor is essentially limited (when it comes to defects) to the actions of the PM under clause 40.6 and 43.4 as well as the duties when accepting defects under clause 44 and dealing with uncorrected defects under clause 45.

Why then have I recently been involved in long winded protracted arguments over defects under the NEC option A contract? Something must be amiss!

The alarm bells first started to ring when the Supervisor and Contractor could not agree if a defect actually existed. The issue related to an element of the works being designed by the Contractor. The works information contained a specific thickness of material on a drawing but an overall requirement in specification to build to a specific standard of thermal efficiency. Both drawing and specification was included in the Works Information. The Contractor had altered the thickness of material but achieved the required thermal standard. The Supervisor notified a defect when he measured the thickness of material and found it to be not the same as stated in the Works information. The Contractor pointed to the fact the standard had been achieved and that the difference in material thickness had no adverse impact on the building. The issue had not been apparent in any design the Contractor had submitted for acceptance.

Source: http://www.ty-newydd.com/

The relationship between the Supervisor and Contractor was already strained at this point and the Supervisor was adamant that the change in material thickness was not “in accordance with the Works Information” and as such it was a defect. The notification was duly issued for the Contractor to correct it. The Contractor then made the argument of “inconsistency between the documents” under clause 17.1 as the specification was a performance specification allowing the contractor a degree of flexibility and the drawing gave a specific thickness thus conflicting with the flexibility in the specification. The Contractor then sought an instruction from the PM resolving the inconsistency. One interpretation of the apparent inconsistency was that both documents are read in conjunction with each other. So the Contractor has the flexibility of the specification to select products and comply with the standards but the thickness shown in the drawn information should be adhered to as a minimum and thus there is no inconsistency. However, playing devil’s advocate one might also look at the above scenario and think that as long as the Employer is not in any way at a loss as a result of the change and the performance standards are complied with then the process of achieving the end result is the Contractor’s to manage. After all that is essentially part of the process of design and build.

As PM I could see both sides of the argument. I suspect that had relationships on the project been better, an amicable solution could have been found. However, no agreement was reached and with the defect correction period nearly up the Contractor and Supervisor were becoming more animated in their dealings with each other. Eventually, I was asked to decide who was right and who was wrong which brings me to the crux of the matter from the perspective of the PM.

Contractually there is no role in clause 40-45 for mediation by the PM in disputes over defects. The only negotiation the PM need actually carry out is that related to agreeing to accept defects. We could not reach any such agreement in this case because clause 44.2 requires both the PM and Contractor to agree to consider a change to the works Information to correct a defect. The Contractor did definitely not agree to any such change! Ultimately the process would have been to wait until the defect correction period expired and then apply clause 45 to the matter (dealing with uncorrected defects). If the Contractor is unhappy with the results he has the option of Adjudication under the Contract.

However, there is the concept of a spirit of mutual trust and co-operation to consider. In this instance should the PM acting in such a spirit mediate between the parties to find an amicable solution before the matter gets to Adjudication? This is a difficult point because you cannot “force” co-operation. However, I do believe that all parties have a duty to co-operate and also foster co-operation in others. When one can clearly see parties are not co-operating someone should probably step in to point this out. The onus on the PM to administer most aspects of the Contract also means that when things go wrong between other people named in the Contract the natural reaction is to look in the direction of the PM to resolve the issues. It could therefore be argued there is almost an implied duty on the PM under the NEC to attempt to resolve conflicts before they get to adjudication.

However, there are areas of the NEC where the duty of the PM to determine if actions are reasonable, or unnecessary are expressly stated. For example clause 40.5 require the Supervisor to carry out tests and inspections without causing “unnecessary delay” to the Work. If the Contractor believes that in doing tests and inspections the Supervisor has caused unnecessary delay then he can notify the PM of a compensation event under clause 60.1.11. It then falls on the PM to determine if the delay was necessary or unnecessary.  The PM must also decide if other failures by the Supervisor to act in accordance with the Contract are compensation events although these are far more objective (clause 60.1.6 for example is easy enough to determine simply by looking at the period for reply and the date of a communication).

In conclusion, the PM takes a backseat to the Supervisor when it comes to the process of defects management and the role is strictly speaking limited to a specific few functions. However, the PM might well become more heavily involved in defect management if the process breaks down and the parties are no longer able to co-operate or begin to act unreasonably or cause unnecessary delay. It might well therefore be wise for the PM to take an active role in overseeing defects management to be able to proactively head off issues before they deteriorate. This is certainly the lesson I have learnt the hard way.

Please feel free to share this article and other articles on this site with friends, family and colleagues who you think would be interested

Information/opinions posted on this site are the personal views of the author and should not be relied upon by any person or any third party without first seeking further professional advice. Also, please scroll down and read the copyright notice at the end of the blog.

You have to draw the line somewhere! - Internal measured surveys

Errors or omissions in a drawing can result in serious consequences which can manifest themselves into confusion and disagreement, delays, additional costs and ultimately disputes.  These problems can be avoided by ensuring that those who undertake measured surveys are adequately trained and supervised. 

Source:http://basebc.co.uk/Building-Survey-Services

Drawings are arguably the most effective form of communication within a construction project and are used at all stages.  It is therefore fundamentally important that all of those who are responsible for taking measurements and preparing drawings understand the significance of what they are doing.  The 'life' of a drawing will be developed throughout a project and will vary depending upon the complexity and type of project.  For example concept drawings may be required, which can then become initial design drawings, followed by detailed design drawings.  From this stage the drawings could then be developed into construction drawings and used for tendering and also contract drawings.  Eventually, the drawings will become 'as built' and will be included into a Health & Safety File, a requirement under the Construction (Design & Management) Regulations 2007. The above examples of where drawings could be used in a construction project is not exhaustive, however demonstrates their importance.

Errors or omissions in a drawing can result in serious consequences which can manifest themselves into confusion and disagreement, delays, additional costs and ultimately disputes.  These problems can be avoided by ensuring that those who undertake measured surveys are adequately trained and supervised.  It would be very unwise to assume that undertaking a measured survey is a simple process and a skill that everyone should naturally have.  This is because buildings differ significantly in size, construction and form and the amount of information needed will vary depending on the scope of the project. One thing however that is for certain is that undertaking a measured survey is far more than just obtaining dimensions! A common issues I often found with my surveyors when undertaking an internal measured survey would be that they would sometimes miss key information such as floor to ceiling heights, window cill height, joist direction, services intake of a building, diagonal check measurements and sometimes even forgetting to note wall construction. If a re-visit is necessary to collect missing information then this will be a cost to the business and can impact on profitability.

It is important that the right measuring equipment is taken and used. This will include a folding measure and 5 or 10 metre steel tape (or both) for measuring shorter distances and 25 metre tape and a trundle wheel for measuring longer distances.  Nowadays a digital measure will also be taken which can also be used  to obtain, rooms sizes (sqm) as well as single dimension measurements.  When using measuring equipment the 'Surveyor' should be fully aware of the limitations of the equipment and also have an appreciation of distance to be able to discern whether digital dimension are accurate or not.  This is because inaccurate readings can be obtained from a digital measure when the laser comes into contact with reflective surfaces or glass.  If the Surveyor was to write down the measurement without asking themselves if the reading is reasonable, they will have problems when they return to the office and start to prepare their drawings.

Whilst undertaking a measured survey on site the Surveyor must appreciate that either they, or maybe somebody else like an Architectural Technologist will have to interpret the information that has been collected on site in order to prepare the drawings.  Many times I have witnessed Surveyors and Technologists look with complete dismay at a piece of paper in the office that has been given to them by someone who has undertaken a measured survey.  This is because what they are looking at is a rain drenched, smudged, excuse for a drawing that is so 'busy' with lines, dimensions and other information that it is difficult to tell the difference between each!, and they are expected to produce an accurate drawing from this!

To help minimise omissions and errors in drawings there are some simple basic techniques that can be very useful when undertaking measured surveys.  Firstly, I always advised my Surveyors to draw the building footprint (in pencil) first, before taking any dimensions, The pencil could then be overdrawn in pen later.  This would ensure that the drawing was well proportioned and avoid 'squashing' information into a small corner of a piece of paper, because there is no room left on the sheet, toward the end of the survey.  Next, use different colour pens for recording information.  It is much easier to interpret a drawing if say the building outline is in black, dimensions are in red, construction details are in green, sockets, switches and radiators are in blue etc.  Next, when using measuring tapes particularly for longer distances, ensure that there are no twists in the tape and that it is a tight as possible to avoid deflection.  Surveyors must also ensure that dimensions are taken at the same height.  For example is one Surveyor is holding the tape just above the skirting board and at the other end the Surveyor is holding the tape half way up the wall this could result in a significant inaccuracy in a single dimension.

The importance of a comprehensive and accurate measured survey cannot be understated, which can only be achieved through appropriate training and supervision.  Organisations should ignore this at their peril!

Please feel free to share this article and other articles on this site with friends, family and colleagues who you think would be interested

 

Information/opinions posted on this site are the personal views of the author and should not be relied upon by any person or any third party without first seeking further professional advice. Also, please scroll down and read the copyright notice at the end of the blog.