By Bruce Jervis
The “total cost” method of pricing changed work is controversial because it attributes all costs in excess of the contractor’s bid price to the owner’s change. The method is allowed only if: (1) it is highly impracticable to itemize and document the actual increased costs; (2) the contractor’s bid price was realistic; (3) the contractor’s actual costs were reasonable; and (4) the contractor was not responsible for any of the increased costs.
These requirements present a high bar. Add judicial antipathy (“not preferred” or even “last resort”) and it is surprising the total cost method is ever used. A recent decision by a federal administrative board adds another wrinkle. ... Read more.
Featured in this Week’s Construction Claims Advisor:
- Total Cost Method Not Allowed on Unit-Priced Work in Absence of Known Quantity
- Contractor Should Have Anticipated Permitting Requirements
- Prior Employment Disqualified Architect from Design-Build Team
By Steve Rizer
Now that the European Parliament has opened the door to more widespread use of building information modeling (BIM) technology in publicly funded construction projects within its member states, will authorities in the United States follow suit anytime soon? Whether by federal prodding or by their own volition, will more U.S. states take steps to promote wider implementation of BIM across America, at least in publicly funded projects?
Answers are elusive, but perhaps a snapshot of the actions that officials across the U.S. already have taken to promote BIM could provide a signal of what is to come. In separate interviews with ConstructionPro Week (CPW), a couple of BIM experts shed some light on how far authorities in the U.S. have progressed on this front compared to their counterparts in the European Parliament, which last month approved a directive enabling all 28 European member states to encourage, specify, or mandate the use of BIM for publicly funded construction and building projects in the European Union by 2016. ... Read more.