RIAI and GCCC contracts

decomcg

Does anyone know what are the main differences are between the RIAI contracts and GCCC contracts? or where you could find information on the differences and comparisons? would be very helpful!

onq

Hi decomcg

You can buy a book for under €50 explaining the new government contracts, which in general transfer a lot of the risk to the contractor.
There are various contracts and I wouldn't be surprised if these aren't available online.
Their adoption is driven by the EU guidelines on procurement.

The RIAI Contracts are available in Specimen form from the RIAI Bookshop in 8 Merrion Square.
You might find a copy of David Keane's book on them in some Architecture School's library - its out of print for a while now.
They are a more flexible form of contract and there are four varieties, including the two standards, the blue and yellow forms.

If you want to round out your education on these islands you could read up on the JCT 05 form of contracts for the UK and teh variosu Engineers Contracts.

HTH

ONQ.

may2001

decomcg wrote: »

Does anyone know what are the main differences are between the RIAI contracts and GCCC contracts? or where you could find information on the differences and comparisons? would be very helpful!

Pages 24 to 26 of the Public Works Contract Training Manual available from the Dept of Finance web site http://www.finance.gov.ie/documents/publications/constructionprocreform2/Pub.worksTraining.man.pdf

outlines the main differences between the GCCC forms and the GDLA form (which was very similar to the RIAI form)

Regards,

Martin

zelemon

Has anyone heard of someone using the GCCC contracts on a private one off house project?
I am about to go to Tender for a clients house roughly 275sq/m & am unsure what form of contract to use, they want a bill alright but dont want to hire a q/s, they'd like to be in for christmas but budget is more important than time, I know it all points to the RIAI blue form just wondering if anyone had any alternative ideas?

picorette

zelemon wrote: »

Has anyone heard of someone using the GCCC contracts on a private one off house project?
I am about to go to Tender for a clients house roughly 275sq/m & am unsure what form of contract to use, they want a bill alright but dont want to hire a q/s, they'd like to be in for christmas but budget is more important than time, I know it all points to the RIAI blue form just wondering if anyone had any alternative ideas?

GCCC for a private house? I am not sure if that is tongue in cheek? But assuming it is not... The GCCC is a contract designed by a Government Department to suit them, & transfer the risk of variables to the Contractor, and as far as I understand, the only reason the can even attempt to get away with this is because they are the Government with large contracts. How it is going to work nobody is sure. For a private house, I cannot see that you would get a Contractor to agree the terms.

If you want to control the cost, persuade the client to hire a QS, they are available at a very competitive price in this market, and worth their fee in what they will save.

zelemon

No certianly not tongue in cheek, i acknowledge the contracts are perceived to place more pressure on the contractor & that there is considerable anxiety within the industry on their use. However, if the GCC forms are perceived by private sector developers to work then they will surely replce the existing RIAI forms? Contractors may not have a choice in the current & forseenable climate of the future!

onq

Re the GCCC contracts transferring risk to the contractor I think this was done to be "seen to be doing something" move be Europe. i.e. to prevent the EU being seen by all and sundry as gravy train when seeking tenders.

The RIAI forms are a tried and tested set of documents which strive for a balance between the rights of the contracting parties - the employer and the contractor - to be administered in an impartial way by the architect as administrator.

The GDLA forms paralleled the RIAI forms for this reason. An unfair contract is unenforceable in principle, and there is an onus on the framer of a contract to make the other party aware of any special conditions attached to it which may confer special advantage.

I think the benefits of the GCCC contracts and their acceptability in use will only be seen when some case law develops.

ONQ.

may2001

zelemon wrote: »

Has anyone heard of someone using the GCCC contracts on a private one off house project?
I am about to go to Tender for a clients house roughly 275sq/m & am unsure what form of contract to use, they want a bill alright but dont want to hire a q/s, they'd like to be in for christmas but budget is more important than time, I know it all points to the RIAI blue form just wondering if anyone had any alternative ideas?

The GCCC contracts do transfer more risk to the contractor, but they also expect the design team to do a more complete job on the preparation of the tender documents and in the provision of information to allow the transfer of these risks and to enable the contractor price them. The tender documents must be sufficiently detailed so as to "allegedly" allow the contractor to build the project without further reference to the design team.

For instance, ground condition risks may be transferred but then a detailed ground investigation must be carried out and a ground investigation report must be supplied to enable the contractor price the risks involved.

Provisional and Prime Cost Sums have been removed from these conditions.

I'm curious as to why the client requires a Bill of Quantities if they want to use the GCCC as the Bill of Quantities will be of limited use in this type of situation.

Regards,

Martin

onq

I think there are some questionable provisions in the GCCC contracts, for example:

10.7.2 If a delay has more than one cause, and one or more of the causes is not a Compensation Event, there shall be no increase to the Contract Sum for delay cost for the period of concurrent delay.

I take this to mean that if the employer's representative was scheduled to issue documents but failed to do so [this would normally result in a delay and extension of time under the RIAI forms] and I assume it is a similar event occurring under the GCCC forms, then this:

(i) would give rise to a Compensation Event if it occurred by itself
(ii) would NOT give rise to a compensation event if - during the delay caused by the compensation event - another totally unrelated delay occurred which was not a compensation event.

Current case law reflects the fact that this is a concurrence where the right to make a claim is complex, with several different ways to approach assessing the causes of delay such as - the Devlin or breach approach; the dominant clause approach; the burden of proof approach; the apportionment approach. The GCCC wording above fails to reflect thislevel of complexity .

And again,

1.3 Inconsistencies
1.3.1 Except when the Contract states otherwise, the documents in the Contract are to be taken as
mutually explanatory of each other if possible. If there is an inconsistency between the
documents, they take precedence as follows:

• First, the Agreement, even if it has not been executed
• Second, the attached Schedule and the Letter of Acceptance and any post-tender
• clarifications listed in it
• Third, the Contractor’s completed form of tender (excluding other documents in the tender)
• Fourth, these Conditions
• Fifth, the Works Requirements
• Sixth, the Pricing Document
• Seventh, the Works Proposals, if there are any
• Eighth, any other documents in the Contract

This seems to suggest that a typo or omission in the written documentation, which normally might be read against, say, the B of Q and the drawings and resolved, must according to this contract take precedence. A misprint could change the direction of the course of the project. A non-executed agreement has standing over all else. For a tightening up process, there seems to be several inconsistencies.

This link highlights some more:

http://www.odse.ie/includes/downloads/new_construction_contracts.pdf

[thanks to OP on archiseek.com]

I'm no expert on law or these contracts, and I am very happy to be corrected on this, but in relation to the second query in this thread, the B of Q would have to be very carefully set up within the documents to carry its accustomed weight.

In closing then, I've tried to by example show why the GCCC contracts might not be suitable, following picorettes comments above.

HTH

ONQ.

Pete_Cavan

Im trying to find out about the GDLA contracts and if the GCCC contracts are achieving their objectives of preventing cost overruns in publicly funded projects, particularly in civil engineering. I also want to find out about the GDLA and IEI standard forms of contract and how they differ from the GCCC and public procurement in general. So far I have found lots of info on GCCC but nothing comparing it to the others. There is very little info on the net about GDLA and even less on IEI contract. Does anybody know where I might find some of the information I am looking for? Any suggestions would be greatly appreciated. Cheers.

jblack

Setting aside a number of small projects there have been 7 large contracts run under the GCCC, value is around € 1 billion. When the tender rates were benchmarked against previous tender prices they have shown a reduction of €/kilometre of between 12.5%-20%.

My personal opinion is that the risk transfer that embodies the GCCC has not yet really been effected in contracts.

As for GCCC being used for small one off private projects;

firstly there is nothing really wrong with the RIAI
Secondly, if something does go wrong and a builder gets soaked then, whilst a client may be insulated by the contract, an architect may find himself in court very quickly for negligence, and if the builder goes bust as a result that architect may find him/herself liable for all damages. If the architect can't pay they could be struck off the RIAI..
Better the devil you know....

japbyrne

Hi onq, can you tell me the name of that book which explains the new government contracts (GCCC), i am finding it hard to get information other than government sites, cif etc.
Thanks

Tefral

What do you need to know?

jblack

Martin Laing's book?

japbyrne

I am researching to answer this question,

"What risks are being transfered to sub-contractors under GCCC form of contract".

I see two books by James Howley and Martin Lang, titled Public Works Contracts for Civil Engineering Works, designed by the employer explained.

Public Works Contracts for Building Works, designed by the employer: explained.

Do you think either of these books would help.

jblack

japbyrne wrote: »

I am researching to answer this question,

"What risks are being transfered to sub-contractors under GCCC form of contract".

I see two books by James Howley and Martin Lang, titled Public Works Contracts for Civil Engineering Works, designed by the employer explained.

Public Works Contracts for Building Works, designed by the employer: explained.

Do you think either of these books would help.

Why not get your hands on as many actual sub-contract documents as possible and compare them to the main contract? That way you can provide first hand information through analysis.

If possible, interviews with various main and sub-contractors would provide useful empirical data. Your research would have many interested if you could collate enough high quality responses.

japbyrne

Thanks for that jblack.
At the moment i have one contractor willing to provide a recent project as a case study, and participate in an interview, I will need at least two more interviews and I am putting together a questionaire for both contractors and sub-contractors.

I will give a go at sourcing sub-contract agreements as you mentioned.I would think they might not be too willing to show these to me?.

jblack

japbyrne wrote: »

Thanks for that jblack.
At the moment i have one contractor willing to provide a recent project as a case study, and participate in an interview, I will need at least two more interviews and I am putting together a questionaire for both contractors and sub-contractors.

I will give a go at sourcing sub-contract agreements as you mentioned.I would think they might not be too willing to show these to me?.

If you are a student performing research, having permission from your university will usually encourage cooperation from subject companies. You will probably be well served by assuring confidentiality to them.

On the other hand, if you are researching an article, then a letter outlaying your objectives and how you propose achieve them is, believe or not, usually met with some enthusiasm. You might be well served by taking to someone in the CIF to point you in the right direction.

As for surveys - to prepare a proper one, and not a 20 question surveymonkey, you will need to spend an unbelievable amount of time cross referencing and categorising your questions so that there is distillable data.

I honestly think for this your best bet is is first hand info. Half the subbies out there are fairly clueless about these matters, which would taint any responses. For example, I often hear that "our contracts are back to back with the main contract" - whilst this may factually be the case, how can you tell if risk has legally transferred where the provisions for the sub-contract cannot be the same as the main contract.

Perhaps focusing on the obvious areas would be the general way to approach this

Delay (especially now with the new provisions shifting all concurrency risk to the contractor), unexpected conditions, variations, extra-contractual contractual changes, licences/permits, health and safety, completion, defects, value engineering, programming, personnel, insurances etc etc...
You could look at the effect of entire agreement clauses on risk shifting. How old techniques of misrepresentation, waiver, estoppel, implied terms are all now removed by such clauses.

muffler

Research, surveys etc aren't allowed on this forum.

Thread closed.