"Supervision" and interim cert forms

sydthebeat

Has anyone here ever questioned the wording on some interim certifcates for stage payments???

EBS and BOI use the phrase "supervise"... others use the phrase "inspect"... while others include no phrase to describe the engagement, other then ensuring certification in compliance with planning permisson and building control.

As we know theres a huge difference between a 'supervision' engagement and an 'inspection' engagement.....

so the question is, do you feel safe to sign a form that states you supervise construction if you are simply enaged to carry out periodic inspections???
Has anyone ever challanged the wording of these forms??

smashey

Good point Syd. It isn't anything I have thought about but now that you mention it, I must say to the boss. After all, it's his PI.

muffler

Regardless of whats on the forms I give both the lending agency's and the client's solicitors an advance certificate of inspection. I state that the works will be supervised by the carrying out periodic inspections at different stages.

The final cert is worded the same.

Poor Uncle Tom

Good point.

But, if a Bank or Building Society wanted to know who the PSDP or PSCS were, they would have to ask specifically as each have to be nominated and agree to accept the nomination in writing. I think in the context of the forms you mention the word supervise has been used for the past 15 years and as such can mean only inspected in stage visits.

Or should we insist on this being clarified. I know the BOI have a letter of clarification where they describe the supervision as I have said above. This was the same in the old Irish Permanent forms, clarification of the others I have not seen.

sydthebeat

Poor Uncle Tom wrote: »

Good point.

But, if a Bank or Building Society wanted to know who the PSDP or PSCS were, they would have to ask specifically as each have to be nominated and agree to accept the nomination in writing. I think in the context of the forms you mention the word supervise has been used for the past 15 years and as such can mean only inspected in stage visits.

Or should we insist on this being clarified. I know the BOI have a letter of clarification where they describe the supervision as I have said above. This was the same in the old Irish Permanent forms, clarification of the others I have not seen.

Tom, would you have a copy of this.. or link etc...

i can pm you my email if you have.... thanks

RKQ

I agree Uncle Tom but a High Court Judge can easily make a ruling on this tomorrow and if there was an informal agreement it won't stand up.

Ideally, we need clarification or at the least written confirmation that our inspection is periodic only and any reference to supervision in no way means that we Project Managed the contract or were present on site on a daily basic.

Our inspections are based on visual inspection on a perodic basis only. Muffler might be on the right track.

Poor Uncle Tom

sydthebeat wrote: »

Tom, would you have a copy of this.....

i can pm you my email if you have....

I will find it for you in the morning, please PM your email. I remember reading it with interest myself not too long ago.

muffler

Wonder if you certified that you inspected the works 8 times more than the BC inspectors what would be the reaction?

sydthebeat

muffler wrote: »

Wonder if you certified that you inspected the works 8 times more than the BC inspectors what would be the reaction?

nice one...

an issue has arisen where the build is in compliance with pp and building regs... but not 'as the client wanted'....

their solicitor is trying to claim, because we signed interim certs which stated the phrase 'supervision' that we were, de facto, supervising the build and we should have delivered the build the clients wanted (the arguments is over heights)....

all our documentation, 6 point letter, interim letters, cert of comp etc all state that we 'inspected' the build to offer an opinion on compliance with PP and BR....

RKQ

sydthebeat wrote: »

an issue has arisen where the build is in compliance with pp and building regs... but not 'as the client wanted'....

their solicitor is trying to claim, because we signed interim certs which stated the phrase 'supervision' that we were, de facto, supervising the build and we should have delivered the build the clients wanted (the arguments is over heights)....

Sounds like a talanted Solicitor even if IMO he / she is clutching at straws.:)

Unfortunately it shows how simple words can cause problems... as above, such a phrase may receive its "true meaning" if / when it is defined by a High Court Judge.:(

sinnerboy

sydthebeat wrote: »

Has anyone here ever questioned the wording on some interim certifcates for stage payments???

EBS and BOI use the phrase "supervise"... others use the phrase "inspect"... while others include no phrase to describe the engagement, other then ensuring certification in compliance with planning permisson and building control.

As we know theres a huge difference between a 'supervision' engagement and an 'inspection' engagement.....

so the question is, do you feel safe to sign a form that states you supervise construction if you are simply enaged to carry out periodic inspections???
Has anyone ever challanged the wording of these forms??

I routinely cross out the word supervise and write in "periodically inspect"

Where a form asks for a site value - I enter " not known "

Worked recently when it was going out of fashion .....

DOCARCH

sinnerboy wrote: »

I routinely cross out the word supervise and write in "periodically inspect"

Where a form asks for a site value - I enter " not known "

Ditto - my PI insurers have told me this is how to complete these forms.

My PI insurers also told me that they intended to meet with the lending institutions basically to inform them that these forms are not worth the paper they are written on and do not give them the comfort they think they are getting by getting construction professionals to sign off on.

sinnerboy

DOCARCH wrote: »

Ditto - my PI insurers have told me this is how to complete these forms.

My PI insurers also told me that they intended to meet with the lending institutions basically to inform them that these forms are not worth the paper they are written on and do not give them the comfort they think they are getting by getting construction professionals to sign off on.

Gets the legals excited though . Better to alter them as ( thee and me ) do

No6

sydthebeat wrote: »

an issue has arisen where the build is in compliance with pp and building regs... but not 'as the client wanted'...

I suspect theres a lot of projects which end up not" as the client wanted" but more of a case of "what the planning authority will permit the client!!" tell the nice solicitor thats why its called planning permission!!!:D

DvB

sinnerboy wrote: »

I routinely cross out the word supervise and write in "periodically inspect"

Where a form asks for a site value - I enter " not known "

We do the same here based on advice received from our PI insurance provider, hasnt created any issues to date with any of the lending institutions.

pseudo-tech

To supervise a project suggests constant monitoring and can expose the person certifying the project to be sued if problems develop on the project that should have been picked up by someone undertaking that level of service. I believe the RIAI suggested that the supervising agent should clarify this position by stating that they are only inspecting the project periodically. Good advice by the RIAI. Not a clever move to do otherwise.

sydthebeat

pseudo-tech wrote: »

To supervise a project suggests constant monitoring and can expose the person certifying the project to be sued if problems develop on the project that should have been picked up by someone undertaking that level of service. I believe the RIAI suggested that the supervising agent should clarify this position by stating that they are only inspecting the project periodically. Good advice by the RIAI. Not a clever move to do otherwise.

absolutely....

its a standard in our 6 point letter, our own stage payment letters and in our opinion on compliance......