Project Commissioning and Final Acceptance

Introduction

This paper highlights the ways to handle conflict between contractors and clients. In this sample, the builder was tasked with the construction of a structure. However, during the commissioning procedure for the building, an inspection report with a construction inspector and inspector demonstrated that there were slight defects in the HVAC system. Therefore, since the broker representing my client, I’m tasked with dealing with the client and the contractor so as to think of an amicable solution with respect to the issue at hand.

Commissioning Procedure

The contractor was to deliver the building as completely operational. The identical company was to be paid a lump sum which would cater for all costs. This will involve the hiring of another electrical firm to handle all electrical installations. The HVAC system was part of the electrical system. On the other hand, the main contractor needed to be paid an additional sum to repair the HVAC system however the client refused to do so stating that those were not the terms of agreement as stipulated by their own contract. “The primary benefit of mediation is risk and cost control. Since the parties arrive at the answer, the disputants keep control of the entire process.” (Kelsey 2010: 1).
The customer was advised of the HVAC defects and also the job of the chief contractor. The customer declined to add any more money towards the project. The client claimed that the relevant clause with regards to the battle mentioned was clearly stipulated in the contract. The customer further promised that the builder had accepted all the details of the contract without any question. This was the case as all the other bidders of this contractor. The customer therefore believed that the contractor was going contrary to the conditions of agreement. It was presumed that the bid would look after any contingency compared to additional costs that the contractor would need to incur.
The contractor was informed of the position that the customer had taken with regards to the defects in the HVAC system. The contractor accepted that they had failed to raise this matter during the bid clarification meetings. This is because these implications hadn’t been noticed. However, they claimed that the flaw was not caused by them and that they had done their civil work flawlessly. They maintained that the additional costs shouldn’t be imposed on these but on the electric company that had installed on the HVAC system.
On further scrutiny of the contract agreement, it was discovered that the builder had a poor case to establish. This is due to the fact that the customer made an agreement with the civil firm rather than the electrical company. Hence any dispute was to be dealt with between the electric firm and the civil firm. Since the commissioning was recovered, the customer wasn’t to suffer the consequences of the battle. An amicable solution was devised and the HVAC system was to be mended and the conflict issues be sorted out later. This meant the final payment of the contractor wasn’t altered and that the issuance of the last certificate was completed in time.
Academic Reference Describing The Strategies In Final Stages Of Projects
The final stage of projects entails a “formal acceptance of the project and the end thereof.” Assessing the lessons learnt and file archiving are some of the administrative actions involved.

The final phase entails:

Contract close: settle and finish each contract. Each contract that is applicable to the specified project should be closed.
Project close: all the actions in each of the process groups ought to be finalized for the formality of closing the specified project.
An example related to this instance is given by means of a case analysis by Whitticks (2005) titled ‘Immediate and Consequential Costs’. In the final phase, the following statement resolves the dispute between the contractor and the client “Such punishment for delay will be recoverable from Contractor by any means available to Business under the terms of this Contract or at law.”

Conclusion

Before accepting provisions of any contact, comprehensive scrutiny ought to be done and any ambiguous announcement is brought forward for clarification. This will look after any possible scenario that might occur throughout the project implementation. “Honesty and candor between the owner and the builder is necessary for progressive construction administration.” (Levin, 1998: 7).