All articles by Rudi Klein 鈥� Page 7
-
Comment
California, here we come
Seven years ago, a national prequalification list was proposed for contractors. Little has come of that, so now it's time to try something else
-
Comment
Rapid response force
The DETR is consulting on how to make adjudication fairer and more effective. There's still time to let it know what you think
-
Comment
Don't hold back
Rudi Klein聽- Retention is a discredited, unfair system that can tie up as much as 20% of firms' turnovers, and may prevent them doing their best work. Let's get rid of it (you can help)
-
Comment
An invitation to sue
Rudi Klein聽- Warranties are onerous, costly and dangerous. And since they're not a requirement, the least those who provide them should expect is something in return
-
Comment
I beg to differ, m'lud
Rudi Klein takes issue with Judge Anthony Thornton's recent article in 好色先生TV. Adjudicators are not a public body, and the Human Rights Act does not, therefore, apply to them
-
Comment
But you promised!
If someone wants you to do work for them free, gratis and for nothing, on the understanding that they'll give you a job later, can you get paid if they don't? A recent – and largely unnoticed – case says you can.
-
Features
Clash points
Defence Estates created prime contracting to integrate its supply chain and build strong teams. But can major contractors adjust to the culture of co-operation and equality that the new regime will rely on?
-
Features
Indecent proposals
Ann Minogue's column on the new standard form of subcontract for use on government work the GC/Works Subcontract challenged the Constructors Liaison Group to a tempered debate. It begins here.
-
Features
Getting even
Some councils charge firms a fee every time they put up a hoarding in a street. Cowboys, of course, don’t tell the council and don’t pay. Under the best value rules, this has to stop – but will councils apply them?
-
Features
Loopholes 'R' us
A thriving legal industry has arisen in the past year or so, dedicated to dreaming up contract terms that deny subcontractors their right to adjudication. Luckily, though, parliament has a simple remedy.
-
Features
It’s payback time
The payment mechanisms in most subcontracts do not meet the standards set by the Construction Act. Here’s an argument to prove that, and a warning to contractors if they don’t take it on board.
-
Features
Clash points
The benefits of involving specialists early in the design process are huge. Savings of up to 60% can be made. But clients are reluctant. Why is this? Are they being poorly advised and what are they afraid of?
-
Features
Trouble on Quality Street
The government’s quality mark scheme was meant to frustrate the cowboys and help reputable small firms. Bureaucracy and expense mean it might end up doing the opposite. Can the DETR get back on track?
-
Features
Subcontractors: risk dustbins
It appears to be a popular practice nowadays for main contractors to farm out risk along with the subcontract. The Construction Act provides some protection, but it may require further intervention.
-
Features
Clash points
True, subcontractors are still being forced to bear the same risk as main contractors, and stand-alone contracts are a fine idea. But it is clients that can really affect how liability is distributed.
-
Features
Cases In Point
Court cases challenging adjudications often focus on whether or not the adjudicator had jurisdiction. Maybe it is time to allow the adjudicator to have some say in deciding his own jurisdiction.
-
Features
All for one, and one for all?
There are rumours that the JCT plans to produce a partnering contract. A good idea, but it would mean a fundamental rethink of the way construction contracts are drafted. Is the JCT serious?
-
Features
A certifiable nuisance
The DETR’s latest consultation paper on self-certification under the 好色先生TV Regulations makes businesses vulnerable to court action, and introduces yet another time-consuming approval mechanism.
-
Features
Clash points
Subcontractors are not the only culprits when it comes to forgetting about the paperwork. And why should the supplier alone provide these bonds? The clause is hardly in keeping with the partnering ethos.